Did COVID Vaccine Injuries Influence FAA’s Revision of EKG Test Limits for Pilots?

[Scott]

First of all, I made an entire thread on the subject of whether viruses exist, complete with a statement from a group of doctors who no longer believe they exist, as well as a methodology wherein anyone can try to prove that they do. It's a thread I see that you only just started posting in after over the thread had been going on for over 250 posts. For anyone interested, it's here:

Settling the Biological Virus Debate | justplainpolitics.com

Second of all, the unsubstantiated assertion I'd been referring to was your claim that "no rational person is going to give any credibility to the Epoch Times", a claim you have yet to substantiate in any way.

You don't know the difference between an opinion and an assertion. Buy a dictionary.

Apparently, you're unaware of the fact that dictionaries are available online. I wouldn't be surprised if I actually quote dictionary definitions more than anyone else in this forum. Anyway, if you have any evidence that I "don't know the difference between an opinion and an assertion", by all means present it. Otherwise, all you have is an unsubstantiated assertion.

Anyone who believes viruses don't exist is hopelessly ignorant.

Yet another unsubstantiated assertion, combined with an ad hominem attack -.-

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

That's right.



You really have to pay attention to what you're talking about. Quoting your own post material back to you:

**
Truth : FAA Did Not Admit Pilot EKGs Are Abnormal From Vaccines!

This is yet another example of MISINFORMATION created and/or propagated by anti-vaccination activists, and here are the reasons why…

https://www.techarp.com/facts/faa-admit-pilot-ekgs-vaccines/?amp=1
**

The strawman argument here is your claim that my article claimed that the FAA admitted pilot EKGs are abnormal from vaccines. My article made no such claim.

Are you arguing that the mere suggestion is evidence?

Without evidence any suggestion that something occurred is mere speculation. Your article is misinformation since it is using a lack of evidence to suggest something.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

-You- have certainly claimed that I "appear" to be a Russian troll. You haven't actually provided any solid evidence for your claim though. In essence, you're engaging in an ad hominem attack. From Wikipedia:

**
Typically, this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. The most common form of ad hominem is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem



Suspecting something is true is not the same thing as believing that something is true. From Merriam Webster:

**
suspect: [snip] to imagine to exist or be true, likely, or probable
**

Source:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suspecting

**
believe: [snip] to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something
**

Source:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/believe

So why are you posting articles from people that "suspect" something is true? Are you not requiring the same standards for yourself?

Clearly if we use the standards you have used for starting this thread then we can claim you are a Russian troll since some people suspect it.

 

[Concart]

Apparently, you're unaware of the fact that dictionaries are available online. I wouldn't be surprised if I actually quote dictionary definitions more than anyone else in this forum. Anyway, if you have any evidence that I "don't know the difference between an opinion and an assertion", by all means present it. Otherwise, all you have is an unsubstantiated assertion.




Yet another unsubstantiated assertion, combined with an ad hominem attack -.-

Dude, we are done. You are here to argue. Have fun. You are one dumb fuck. Have a nice day.

 

[LurchAddams]

Of course you are. You have claimed that viruses don't exist. There cannot possibly be a more unsubstantiated claim. Your claim here has also been proven false.

I expressed an opinion. My opinion is well informed. Epoch Times is a far right website catering to conspiracy theories, and unabashedly pro Russia and pro Trump. It lacks credibility. You can choose to quote it as much or as little as you like. You will not get any traction doing so. When you start using objectively reliable sources (peer reviewed journal articles) to back your assertions, you will get somewhere. The problem you have is that no support exists for your position in the scientific community. That is a fact, not an assertion.

These guys rely on rumors they hear on Fox News and on FB.

 

[LurchAddams]

First of all, I made an entire thread on the subject of whether viruses exist, complete with a statement from a group of doctors who no longer believe they exist, as well as a methodology wherein anyone can try to prove that they do. It's a thread I see that you only just started posting in after over the thread had been going on for over 250 posts. For anyone interested, it's here:

Settling the Biological Virus Debate | justplainpolitics.com

Second of all, the unsubstantiated assertion I'd been referring to was your claim that "no rational person is going to give any credibility to the Epoch Times", a claim you have yet to substantiate in any way.

So, your theory is that my doctor and most others, and everyone in the CDC will all soon be in jail for knowingly making us get injected with poison? This is really what you think? OMG.

 

[Concart]

These guys rely on rumors they hear on Fox News and on FB.

The guy got to be too much for me. He'll argue about anything. I know the type. I should have ignored him after 'no viruses exist'. I'm tripping up in my old age. He's like McRocket, only WAAAYYYYYY dumber. There is no there there.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

U.S. Sen. Johnson: Is agency aware of COVID-19 vaccine adverse events in aviation industry?


https://www.wispolitics.com/2023/u-...9-vaccine-adverse-events-in-aviation-industry

It would appear the problem is not an increase in reported injuries but data corruption showing too few injuries for 2016-2019.
It does raise the question of why Johnson didn't include the numbers from prior to 2016.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-militarydatabase-error-idUSL1N2UY1S2

The calculations, based on figures from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED), are incorrect. Last year’s apparent sharp increases were caused by underreporting for the years 2016-2020. A spokesperson for the Department of Defense (DoD) told Reuters that due to “data corruption,” the platform showed only a “fraction” of the actual medical diagnoses registered in that period.

 

[LurchAddams]

The guy got to be too much for me. He'll argue about anything. I know the type. I should have ignored him after 'no viruses exist'. I'm tripping up in my old age. He's like McRocket, only WAAAYYYYYY dumber. There is no there there.

I'm trying to be more tolerant. I'm even being nicer to the trolls here. NYear's resolution. Let's see how long I can keep it up I already tried it with ExcessPain and it just didn't work out. Reason does not work with trolls.

But on the subject, you are correct - these wing nuts believe idiotic stuff from idiotic sources. I think because they're so easily confused by fascists, like twump. I don't know what makes them so susceptible to total horseshit. It's a real phenomenon.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

The guy got to be too much for me. He'll argue about anything. I know the type. I should have ignored him after 'no viruses exist'. I'm tripping up in my old age. He's like McRocket, only WAAAYYYYYY dumber. There is no there there.

Some suspect he is a Russian troll. He only starts threads that post disinformation or are conspiracy theories.
He whined about how a "Russian friend" wasn't able to log on JPP and wanted help.

He has never posted one thing about US sports and doesn't appear to be versed in US culture.

 

[Concart]

Some suspect he is a Russian troll. He only starts threads that post disinformation or are conspiracy theories.
He whined about how a "Russian friend" wasn't able to log on JPP and wanted help.

He has never posted one thing about US sports and doesn't appear to be versed in US culture.

Ohhhh, he was that guy. Yeah, that sort of validates my decision.

 

[Scott]

That's right.

You really have to pay attention to what you're talking about. Quoting your own post material back to you:

**
Truth : FAA Did Not Admit Pilot EKGs Are Abnormal From Vaccines!

This is yet another example of MISINFORMATION created and/or propagated by anti-vaccination activists, and here are the reasons why…

https://www.techarp.com/facts/faa-admit-pilot-ekgs-vaccines/?amp=1
**

The strawman argument here is your claim that my article claimed that the FAA admitted pilot EKGs are abnormal from vaccines. My article made no such claim.

Are you arguing that the mere suggestion is evidence?

No, neither I nor the author of the article I quoted in the opening post ever claimed that the FAA had admitted pilot EKGs are abnormal from vaccines.

 

[Scott]

-You- have certainly claimed that I "appear" to be a Russian troll. You haven't actually provided any solid evidence for your claim though. In essence, you're engaging in an ad hominem attack. From Wikipedia:

**
Typically, this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than addressing the substance of the argument itself. The most common form of ad hominem is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".
**

Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem



Suspecting something is true is not the same thing as believing that something is true. From Merriam Webster:

**
suspect: [snip] to imagine to exist or be true, likely, or probable
**

Source:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/suspecting

**
believe: [snip] to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something
**

Source:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/believe

So why are you posting articles from people that "suspect" something is true?

Are you suggesting there's something wrong with posting articles from people who suspect something is true?

Are you not requiring the same standards for yourself?

What standards are you referring to?

Clearly if we use the standards you have used for starting this thread then we can claim you are a Russian troll since some people suspect it.

For starters, suspecting that something is true is not the same thing as claiming that something is true. Furthermore, when it comes to suspecting that someone here is working on behalf of a government to spread disinformation, I'd want solid evidence before voicing my suspicion out loud. Apparently you don't seem to mind the possibility that you're simply casting aspersions my way.

 

[Scott]

Apparently, you're unaware of the fact that dictionaries are available online. I wouldn't be surprised if I actually quote dictionary definitions more than anyone else in this forum. Anyway, if you have any evidence that I "don't know the difference between an opinion and an assertion", by all means present it. Otherwise, all you have is an unsubstantiated assertion.

Yet another unsubstantiated assertion, combined with an ad hominem attack -.-

Dude, we are done. You are here to argue.

No, I'm here to try to persuade people that some things they've been taught to believe aren't actually true. Also to learn- debating with people has pushed me to learn more on the subjects I talk about. One thing you'll notice is that unlike you, I refrain from using ad hominem attacks as I think their effect in online discussions is generally fairly negative.

 

[Scott]

First of all, I made an entire thread on the subject of whether viruses exist, complete with a statement from a group of doctors who no longer believe they exist, as well as a methodology wherein anyone can try to prove that they do. It's a thread I see that you only just started posting in after over the thread had been going on for over 250 posts. For anyone interested, it's here:

Settling the Biological Virus Debate | justplainpolitics.com

Second of all, the unsubstantiated assertion I'd been referring to was your claim that "no rational person is going to give any credibility to the Epoch Times", a claim you have yet to substantiate in any way.

So, your theory is that my doctor and most others, and everyone in the CDC will all soon be in jail for knowingly making us get injected with poison?

Not sure how you got to that conclusion. I do believe that all vaccines contain substances that are poisonous to human beings, but that's a long way from your assertion that I think that most doctors and everyone at the CDC believes this. You apparently haven't noticed that I tend to shy away from even trying to -speculate- on people who know the vaccines are poisonous but give them out anyway. I tend to simply stick to the evidence that vaccines contain toxins in them and then point out the evidence that this is the case.

 

[Nordberg]

Vaccines have toxins in them if you are a virus. That is the point after all.

 

[Scott]

It would appear the problem is not an increase in reported injuries but data corruption showing too few injuries for 2016-2019.
It does raise the question of why Johnson didn't include the numbers from prior to 2016.

https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-militarydatabase-error-idUSL1N2UY1S2

There's actually evidence that the DMED data itself was corrupted. It's a long story though. Mathew Crawford, publisher of the Rouding the Earth substack gets into it in a series of articles:

The DMED Saga | https://www.campfire.wiki/

In regards to your reuters article, that references fact checking last February, Mathew Crawford has an article for it:

**
Defining Away Vaccine Safety Signals 7: Fact Checkers Miss the Point

The Vaccine Wars Part XXIX

Apr 3, 2022

How much clearer does it have to get that "fact checkers" are mouthpieces for whoever has money to pay them, and nothing like "journalists"? Here is where we were with "fact checking" at the start of February:

Defining Away Vaccine Safety Signals 4: The DoD/DMED Story | Rounding the Earth

Controlled incompetence has been raised another level. A "charity" fact checking organization (I guess that's how payments to an org can be made to look less like direct payments for propaganda) called Full Fact published a brief "fact check" on the DMED story about a week ago. Please follow the smoke and mirrors to see how the sausage gets made…



First, I just want to mention that I don't even know what the claim is that's being fact checked. There is no document and no quote, and nothing the fact check links to makes the claim. Is this a giant straw man? The article links to Senator Johnson's hearing from January 24, but I've listened to the portion around 4:55:00 where Thomas Renz speaks, and I don't hear the claim of that level of death increase. Did I miss it?

Or was the false claim in a Daniel Horowitz article that seems to have been removed from Blaze Media? If I recall correctly, I read Daniel's article, and I don't recall a mortality claim like this, but it's possible that I'm not remembering correctly. That said, I've found Daniel to be generally reliable, and in this case, there is a notice where the article used to reside:



So, what did Daniel remove? And why is it important?

Fortunately, the wayback machine had stashed archives of Daniel's article. Unless I missed something, there is no claim either in the testimony at the Johnson hearing, nor in Daniel's article at The Blaze of an 1100% increase in deaths. So the fact check does appear to be entirely a straw man. I suspect that Daniel took his article down due to my investigation into the MSMR (linked at the start of this article), and the revelations that the initially queried data probably was not correct (I feel almost certain that it wasn't, but that it opened the right can of worms). However, that doesn't mean that the post-glitch data is correct. I am also almost certain that the current DMED data is the result of unlawful manipulation of the DMSS/DMED. And that should be of greater concern to an honest fact checker.

That said, it would be nice to see military death numbers! The VAERS reports do suggest that non-combat deaths may be up sharply, and the stories I'm seeing and hearing about suggest that enough soldiers are dying to raise alarm bells (Fort Bragg). Don't the fact checkers want the whole story? Or is their job to make it appear that there is no story worth investigating, and that the other "side" of the discussion is making incorrect claims?
**

Full article:

Defining Away Vaccine Safety Signals 7: Fact Checkers Miss the Point | Rounding the Earth Newsletter

Incidentally, I think I found where the fact checker site got the 1,100% from, albeit mangled as it wasn't deaths, but neurological conditions. From another Mathew Crawford article:

**

Defining Away Vaccine Safety Signals 4: The DoD/DMED Story

The Vaccine Wars Part XVII

Feb 10, 2022

[snip]

The DoD/DMED Story Timeline

January 24

On Monday, January 24, the day after the March to End the Mandates in Washington, D.C., attorney Thomas Renz was among numerous speakers during a five-hour hearing held by Senator Ron Johnson on COVID-19 issues. I was shocked listening to Renz in real time because I hadn't yet heard about the DoD whistleblowers (Drs. Samuel Sigoloff, Peter Chambers, and Theresa Long) or the startling findings from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED):

Miscarriages up ~300%

Cancer rates up ~300%

Neurological conditions up ~1000%
**

Source:
Defining Away Vaccine Safety Signals 4: The DoD/DMED Story | Rounding the Earth Newsletter

 

[Scott]

Vaccines have toxins in them if you are a virus. That is the point after all.

Setting aside the fact that I no longer believe biological viruses exist, there's plenty of evidence that vaccines are toxic to people. A good book on the subject, from someone who still believed in viruses at the time he published his book:

How Vaccines Wreck Human Immunity: A Forbidden Doctor Publication | Amazon.com

 

[Hawkeye10]

Setting aside the fact that I no longer believe biological viruses exist, there's plenty of evidence that vaccines are toxic to people. A good book on the subject, from someone who still believed in viruses at the time he published his book:

How Vaccines Wreck Human Immunity: A Forbidden Doctor Publication | Amazon.com

I have been tracking recent claims that the HPV vax was improperly tested and is likely dangerous. Then there is the story that Bret Weinstein tells about how he discovered that the mice used in vax studies are defective (telomeres) in a way that would make vaxxes in studies appear safe when they are not.....then spent well over a decade trying to get people to care......eventually giving up because almost no one cares. So far as he knows the problem was never fixed...certainly no one who matters has admitted the problem....likely because several decades of vax safety work would have to be ruled invalid.

This experience certainly helped Bret get COVID more right than anyone or almost anyone else....he knows how corrupt the experts are.

 

[Scott]

Setting aside the fact that I no longer believe biological viruses exist, there's plenty of evidence that vaccines are toxic to people. A good book on the subject, from someone who still believed in viruses at the time he published his book:

How Vaccines Wreck Human Immunity: A Forbidden Doctor Publication | Amazon.com

I have been tracking recent claims that the HPV vax was improperly tested and is likely dangerous. Then there is the story that Bret Weinstein tells about how he discovered that the mice used in vax studies are defective (telomeres) in a way that would make vaxxes in studies appear safe when they are not.....then spent well over a decade trying to get people to care......eventually giving up because almost no one cares. So far as he knows the problem was never fixed...certainly no one who matters has admitted the problem....likely because several decades of vax safety work would have to be ruled invalid.

This experience certainly helped Bret get COVID more right than anyone or almost anyone else....he knows how corrupt the experts are.

Definitely agree on the so called "experts". In relation to the HPV vaccine, Children's Health Defense has been publishing articles on issues with it since 2017. Long list of articles on it here:

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/?s=hpv+vaccine

They frequently get their information from other sources, such as this article they just published a few days ago on Merck's Gardasil HPV vaccine:

**

January 31, 2023

Gardasil Side Effects Caused Neuropathic Injuries, Skin Reactions, HPV Vaccine Lawsuit Claims

AboutLawsuits.com reported:

While most Gardasil HPV vaccine lawsuits have been filed by teens and young adults, a recently filed claim alleges that a 42-year-old woman developed severe skin reactions and neuropathic injuries from Gardasil side effects.

The complaint was filed by Michele Damiano in the Supreme Court of New York on January 13, claiming that Merck & Co. failed to disclose information to users and the medical community about the potential risks associated with the widely marketed vaccine for the prevention of HPV infections.

Following a growing number of reports linking Gardasil side effects to serious and disabling injuries, including postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS), premature ovarian failure, premature menopause, neuropathic injuries and other autoimmune disorders, hundreds of lawsuits are now being filed against Merck throughout the U.S.

The lawsuit claims Merck knew or should have known about the health risks and purposefully deceived the public about the safety and effectiveness of the Gardasil vaccine.
**

Source:
Gardasil Side Effects Caused Neuropathic Injuries, Skin Reactions, HPV Vaccine Lawsuit Claims | Children's Health Defense

There's even been a wrongful death lawsuit filed against Gardasil:

First Gardasil Wrongful Death Lawsuit Filed Alleging HPV Vaccine Caused 13-Year-Old’s Death | Children's Health Defense