The whole con comes down to inconsistent burdens of proof. Tested PCR positive within 28 days of death? It’s a Covid death. Died after vaccination with a heart full of spike protein and history of adverse events following jabs, with no positive PCR test or history of Covid symptoms? Also a Covid death.
There is literally no conceivable amount of evidence that could get people like Ms. Oliver to believe Covid vaccines killed anyone. For no reason other than “we all know the Covid jabs are safe and effective.” This is a cult.
I still don't understand why people don't bring up the mechanical differences between SARS-COV-2 infection vs direct injection of mRNA. All these comparisons of internal tissue samples with spike protein end up in this same fight over whether or not the vaccine or the virus did the damage. Every single additional dose of vaccine makes this a more ridiculous argument since that is the only vector by which the spike protein has direct access to internal tissues. The viral spike MUST get past the outer defense and be reproducing enough to get significant amounts of spike into internal tissues. The vaccine has no such barriers to deal with, and can begin replicating in internal tissues immediately (indeed that is it's function).
ADDITIONALLY.... the virus has a known and predictable replication progression. We can graph how much viral material a virus infection creates. We have ZERO knowledge of exactly how much spike protein any individual human makes after vaccination. No one has done those studies. the mRNA vector amounts to a pharmaceutical that generates an uncontrolled dosage INSIDE THE BODY.
So, if I am to presume viral infection caused all this internal damage, I have to believe that all these cases are people who had very severe covid and likely barely survived it.
If, on the other hand, I am to presume that vaccines caused all this internal damage, all I have to believe is that that person got too much mRNA in the bloodstream and their body's cellular metabolic rate was high enough to make waaaaay more spike protein than their body could deal with.
From the outsider's perspective I understand some of the criticisms with the case report, which at the time of the autopsy may have seemed like a sound assumption- check nasal samples for nucleocapsid. The possibility of a SARS-COV2 test during time of admittance would also provide additional support, as well as the fact that someone in his 70s with a comorbidity may present with symptoms, but that may not have been included in the reports.
However, since no histological assessment appeared to have been done with lung tissues, which would certainly show evidence of both spike and nucleocapsid if it was an infection, then that leaves a gap in the preponderance of evidence which leaves open that window of criticism. I think given that vaccine injuries are an inherent uphill battle an assertion of a vaccine injury should be more tight to prevent these openings for criticisms.
Now, when comparing the videos I tend to go towards the MedCram video being a video of hesitancy and providing additional context, whereas Oliver's approach seems to rely on a reactionary, bad-faith and rather envious position. She seems to have several videos criticizing Campbell, which on the surface wouldn't be an issue if the studies weren't being looked at properly, but I think her approach of focusing on Campbell rather than the articles gives off a bad impression.
Thank YOU! . . . several months ago a close friend whom I go back and forth with on the COVID policies and the therapies sent me that Susan Oliver video.......call me non-scientific but her condescending tone and body language creeped me out whereas John's tone and and body language is one of someone who does not know but is trying to learn and understand . . . your article connects my 'feelings' to the 'facts'.....keep it up....oh, and BTW, whenever I forward something of yours my friend has a hard time picking it apart and has actually complimented and/or agreed on some points....he has a PhD in O-Chem, is brilliant in that realm and is the Lab Director for California DTSC but has trusted the science policy to be at the level he holds to himself even though he states he distrusts Pharma......point is he is no slouch so his lack inability to take down your work and compliment it at times speaks volumes......again, thank you.
So Campbell doesn’t know what he’s talking about and was duped by a shoddy study- but she, after claiming to know how to properly read the data (provided by the organizations and manufacturers profiting off of the products)- still claims these pokes are completely safe and aren’t causing bodily harm. Even though a layman can read those same “studies” and see there was a lack of proper testing done. We can also see the stories of thousands posted online, or those we personally know, sharing about their health decline since their pokes, but I guess that doesn’t count as the information isn’t coming from a peer reviewed paper?
At this point, any “expert” claiming these shots are perfectly fine has lost all credibility in my eyes as they clearly don’t know what they’re talking about, and it makes me question what else they promote that isn’t safe.
Oliver is screechy and preachy like nails on a blackboard. Campbell has a record of being careful (too careful) about claims of vaccine efficacy and harm. He has left the cult of vax-worship. Oliver is still genuflecting.
I think Susan Oliver is just really biased. While she dives into the methodology of some studies (John Campbell doesn't do this level of review), her goal is not to openly assess the field of evidence like a scientist should. She only talks about the science that confirms her pro-vaccine injection, denial of vaccine injury stance. I don't watch many of her videos because I find her quite immature. She can't be taken seriously as a scientist with her level of bias and the insulting language she throws around.
I appreciate your post, you have a very clear way of communicating this complex subject. I enjoyed the panel with you, JJ, Jessica and Matthew. 👍🏽💕
Oliver's giant fake smiles remind me more of Meghan Markle than of a "scientist". Poor thing must be very unhappy in her personal life.
(Since she personally attacks Campbell, I'll assume she thinks that to be a proper way to comport oneself. Turnabout is fair play. Besides, whilst Pfizer et al. made immense fortunes, what does Campbell make on a video? Thirty quid each?)
I've looked briefly though her Twitter. She puts her childish, irrational, bigoted politics throughout. What a surprise. Is she unbiased? Not in the slightest.
I have to add, after checking out her channel, all she does is “debunk” anything that comes against the pokes. I’d be interested in knowing if she’s financially invested at all, to be fangirling so hard.
Oliver is projecting her off-the-wall speculation that S-protein presence was due to covid. There is no evidence that covid contributed spike from anywhere except Oliver's speculation.
We know that the deceased had recently been jabbed. No speculation required as to a potential source of spike--the jab was a known causative agent.
So, while it cannot be conclusively stated that the patient's death was due to jab, that is probable.
The whole con comes down to inconsistent burdens of proof. Tested PCR positive within 28 days of death? It’s a Covid death. Died after vaccination with a heart full of spike protein and history of adverse events following jabs, with no positive PCR test or history of Covid symptoms? Also a Covid death.
There is literally no conceivable amount of evidence that could get people like Ms. Oliver to believe Covid vaccines killed anyone. For no reason other than “we all know the Covid jabs are safe and effective.” This is a cult.
I still don't understand why people don't bring up the mechanical differences between SARS-COV-2 infection vs direct injection of mRNA. All these comparisons of internal tissue samples with spike protein end up in this same fight over whether or not the vaccine or the virus did the damage. Every single additional dose of vaccine makes this a more ridiculous argument since that is the only vector by which the spike protein has direct access to internal tissues. The viral spike MUST get past the outer defense and be reproducing enough to get significant amounts of spike into internal tissues. The vaccine has no such barriers to deal with, and can begin replicating in internal tissues immediately (indeed that is it's function).
ADDITIONALLY.... the virus has a known and predictable replication progression. We can graph how much viral material a virus infection creates. We have ZERO knowledge of exactly how much spike protein any individual human makes after vaccination. No one has done those studies. the mRNA vector amounts to a pharmaceutical that generates an uncontrolled dosage INSIDE THE BODY.
So, if I am to presume viral infection caused all this internal damage, I have to believe that all these cases are people who had very severe covid and likely barely survived it.
If, on the other hand, I am to presume that vaccines caused all this internal damage, all I have to believe is that that person got too much mRNA in the bloodstream and their body's cellular metabolic rate was high enough to make waaaaay more spike protein than their body could deal with.
I've never seen so much (literal) hand waving. Susan Oliver really stands out.
Ah! I love her, she looks and acts like Dolores Umbridge (or Dolores Dumbbitch, as my doughter likes to call her) form Harry Potter.
You can not think of her as of evil.
From the outsider's perspective I understand some of the criticisms with the case report, which at the time of the autopsy may have seemed like a sound assumption- check nasal samples for nucleocapsid. The possibility of a SARS-COV2 test during time of admittance would also provide additional support, as well as the fact that someone in his 70s with a comorbidity may present with symptoms, but that may not have been included in the reports.
However, since no histological assessment appeared to have been done with lung tissues, which would certainly show evidence of both spike and nucleocapsid if it was an infection, then that leaves a gap in the preponderance of evidence which leaves open that window of criticism. I think given that vaccine injuries are an inherent uphill battle an assertion of a vaccine injury should be more tight to prevent these openings for criticisms.
Now, when comparing the videos I tend to go towards the MedCram video being a video of hesitancy and providing additional context, whereas Oliver's approach seems to rely on a reactionary, bad-faith and rather envious position. She seems to have several videos criticizing Campbell, which on the surface wouldn't be an issue if the studies weren't being looked at properly, but I think her approach of focusing on Campbell rather than the articles gives off a bad impression.
Thank YOU! . . . several months ago a close friend whom I go back and forth with on the COVID policies and the therapies sent me that Susan Oliver video.......call me non-scientific but her condescending tone and body language creeped me out whereas John's tone and and body language is one of someone who does not know but is trying to learn and understand . . . your article connects my 'feelings' to the 'facts'.....keep it up....oh, and BTW, whenever I forward something of yours my friend has a hard time picking it apart and has actually complimented and/or agreed on some points....he has a PhD in O-Chem, is brilliant in that realm and is the Lab Director for California DTSC but has trusted the science policy to be at the level he holds to himself even though he states he distrusts Pharma......point is he is no slouch so his lack inability to take down your work and compliment it at times speaks volumes......again, thank you.
Great article. Just wondering why this person would keep getting the shots since he suffered reactions to each one?
She is so sarcastic and that comes across as ugly. I have a hard time listening to her. I trust Dr. Campbell!
So Campbell doesn’t know what he’s talking about and was duped by a shoddy study- but she, after claiming to know how to properly read the data (provided by the organizations and manufacturers profiting off of the products)- still claims these pokes are completely safe and aren’t causing bodily harm. Even though a layman can read those same “studies” and see there was a lack of proper testing done. We can also see the stories of thousands posted online, or those we personally know, sharing about their health decline since their pokes, but I guess that doesn’t count as the information isn’t coming from a peer reviewed paper?
At this point, any “expert” claiming these shots are perfectly fine has lost all credibility in my eyes as they clearly don’t know what they’re talking about, and it makes me question what else they promote that isn’t safe.
Oliver is screechy and preachy like nails on a blackboard. Campbell has a record of being careful (too careful) about claims of vaccine efficacy and harm. He has left the cult of vax-worship. Oliver is still genuflecting.
I think Susan Oliver is just really biased. While she dives into the methodology of some studies (John Campbell doesn't do this level of review), her goal is not to openly assess the field of evidence like a scientist should. She only talks about the science that confirms her pro-vaccine injection, denial of vaccine injury stance. I don't watch many of her videos because I find her quite immature. She can't be taken seriously as a scientist with her level of bias and the insulting language she throws around.
I appreciate your post, you have a very clear way of communicating this complex subject. I enjoyed the panel with you, JJ, Jessica and Matthew. 👍🏽💕
Oliver's giant fake smiles remind me more of Meghan Markle than of a "scientist". Poor thing must be very unhappy in her personal life.
(Since she personally attacks Campbell, I'll assume she thinks that to be a proper way to comport oneself. Turnabout is fair play. Besides, whilst Pfizer et al. made immense fortunes, what does Campbell make on a video? Thirty quid each?)
I've looked briefly though her Twitter. She puts her childish, irrational, bigoted politics throughout. What a surprise. Is she unbiased? Not in the slightest.
Who funds Susan? This will explain a lot...
I have to add, after checking out her channel, all she does is “debunk” anything that comes against the pokes. I’d be interested in knowing if she’s financially invested at all, to be fangirling so hard.
Oliver is projecting her off-the-wall speculation that S-protein presence was due to covid. There is no evidence that covid contributed spike from anywhere except Oliver's speculation.
We know that the deceased had recently been jabbed. No speculation required as to a potential source of spike--the jab was a known causative agent.
So, while it cannot be conclusively stated that the patient's death was due to jab, that is probable.