The establishment is attacking those who oppose vaccines. Where’s the truth?

 November 6, 2021 By Terry Paulding

A reader objected to my last post in which I questioned “vaccinating” children. I’d cited Steve Kirsch in the article, linking his slide deck of facts, which is rich with documentation and live links to sources. The reader counted with a rebuttal from Jeffrey Morris, a Ph.D. from Penn specializing in biostatistics and cancer. From the expansive Kirsch deck, he picked certain statistics to refute, relying on this statistical information to discredit the whole.

Does Morris make cogent points? Who is he? Is he qualified to speak on the subject? His CV shows focused accomplishment within his field. Interestingly, he published a Philadelphia Inquirer article in April 2020, questioning the effects of the lock-down and testing regimen then in use, as being counter-productive and dangerous to society. He had a point; in fact, testing is currently being employed as punishment for the unvaccinated, yet all but ignored for the vaccinated cohort.

Here’s what Morris says about Kirsch’s killed vs. saved claim:

They claim to independently validate these results with another dozen or so alternative “methods”, but these consist of a series of largely unscientific arguments including anecdotal reports (some unverified), opinions elicited from select clinicians who believe the vaccines are inherently dangerous and/or treatment strategies like Ivermectin are the answer, public polls on whether people “know” more people who have died of COVID-19 or vaccines, and extrapolation of select data with very small sample sizes, often blatantly imputing assumptions that seem directly motivated by their chosen hypothesis.

Hmmm…you mean like the deliberately small sample size of cherry-picked test subjects for the study determining whether the vaccine is safe for children? No, I don’t think that’s what Morris was referring to. He probably also wasn’t referring to the fact that they vaccinated the control group in all the vaccine trials as soon as possible afterward, either. That is NOT the way you conduct a trial, as it obviously eliminates all meaningful follow-up............To Read More...