The highest quality level of evidence came very recently, published in the Journal of

Vaccine Peer Reviewed, carried out by very eminent scientists in their fields.

These are people who are not getting funded by farmer.

These people who are independent of vested interests, right?

Robert Kaplan from Stanford, Joseph Freeman, Peter Doshy, associate at the BMJ.

What they were able to do, Dell, was to go back to the very original trials done by Moderna

and Pfizer, with those mRNA technologies, to look at the raw data to some degree, to

see what were the absolute harms from the trials that led to the approval by the FDA of

the vaccine, and then subsequently, mandates and, or coercion and mandates.

They found that in those trials, when everything's corrected for age groups and risk factors,

one was more likely to suffer a serious adverse event from taking the vaccine, disability,

life-changing event, hospitalisation, then one was to be hospitalized with COVID, and

remember that's during the ancestral Wuhan strain when it was more lethal.

It was still going to cause more harm than good, and that rate was at least one in 800,

right?

And that's over the first couple of months.

We know now, certainly in my dad's case, and many other patients, by the way, I've managed

many patients now with vaccine injuries.

We know now that the events rates are probably much, much higher.

For two reasons, one is the original trials were designed in people that were generally

healthier.

If you're healthier, that's likely to get a side effect.

...