Vaccine Disaster: Shifting Language to Acknowledge Reality
Subtle changes in terminology across medical studies show that the tide is turning on long-term vaccine safety studies (none of which have been fairly and accurately conducted. Yet.)
As if the disability research data published by Ed Dowd alone is not enough to raise eyebrows..
Two previous pieces on earlier indications this phenomenon would become much more widespread — and what some of the likely outcomes may be over a longer period of time — including dives into plausible ‘official’ responses to the shifting ‘reality’:
Below you’ll find several PubMed links (and the associated full-spectrum published studies) from different countries: Germany, India, Pakistan, and the UK.
Each study below identifies some side effect profile of the vaccines. Some local, but some systemic and acute. Distinction being in severity and broadness of scope.
Interestingly — compared to older studies, in the conclusion sections of these pieces, the language used to describe the side effect profile is beginning to shift in a notable way. Now, there seems to be less mention made of the positive “risk-reward” profile. The language previously broadly indicated that “the benefits outweigh the risks” and that any potential side effects present post-injection were worth the risk as compared to COVID-19 infection.
Now, that language has suspiciously started to disappear. It is now clear that more studies are needed — at least in these very recently published pieces — on the long-term safety data of the injections.
Simply put, this was not admitted as an upfront issue.
But now it’s starting to come out.
What took so long?
Germany: December 25th, 2022
Pakistan: January 18th, 2023
India: January 19th, 2023
England: January 28th, 2023
As an example of a study published in July of 2022 with more favorable use of language — while still admitting there are serious side effects with the injections:
Severe AEFIs, AESIs, and AEFIs by SOC can occur after any dose, but most often occur after a booster dose; however, these are extremely uncommon across studies.
Looks like a carrot to me. By the time "long term" studies are done, you will be dead. If sHot injured don't stand up, they will get what they have asked for. Which is NOTHING. We screamed NO, you must scream NO MORE!!!!!!!!
The injections are causing the deaths, NOT a virus. It is proven, this is how we know:
First, lets look at the death numbers. Look at the excess deaths by age cohort and time. There was a jump in working age deaths 25 to 44 when the mandates rolled out. Not older people, not younger people, just the working group. So unless a virus knows to target a certain age of people, 25 to 44 years old, and knows exactly WHEN to target them (exactly when the mandates roll out), It can't be a virus.
See this information by Ed Dowd:
https://twitter.com/DowdEdward/status/1614018706383966210
But wait, there's more!!
Dr Ryan Cole (Mayo clinic trained pathologist) explains in the following video how tissue samples can be stained and analyzed to determine if the spike proteins in the tissue are a result of infection or injection. From this, one can determine the sudden deaths are a result of the INJECTIONS. Injection caused spikes (not virus caused) are overwhelming the tissues in organs.
See the 26 minute mark in this video:
https://rumble.com/v1y4u78-foot-long-blood-clots-from-mrna-says-pathologist-dr.-ryan-cole-w-dr-kelly-v.html
So by putting these pieces of information together now we have a population wide impact and can measure it by age group and time. We also know the specific mechanism of action via tissue samples and can differentiate mechanism between virus cause and injection cause.
It is conclusive the injections ARE causing the deaths. Maybe not all of them but clearly a huge number.