They are now saying my tweets are misleading. It's another lie. They are the ones who are misleading, and I will now prove it in this thread. They are lying about the safety of the vaccines:

"Why was vaccination with the COVID-19 vaccine AstraZeneca suspended?" Paul-Erlich Federal Institute for Vaccines & Biomedicines, Germany.
https://t.co/eAmtY241ug
"A specific form of severe cerebral venous thrombosis associated with platelet deficiency (thrombocytopenia) and bleeding has been identified in seven cases (as of 15 March 2021) in temporal association with vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca."
"1. It is a very serious disease that is also difficult to treat. Of the seven affected individuals, three individuals had died."
"2. The affected individuals had ages ranging from about 20 to 50 years."
"3.1. Six of the affected persons had a particular form of cerebral venous thrombosis, called sinus vein thrombosis. All six individuals were younger to middle-aged women.."
"3.2. All cases occurred between four and 16 days after vaccination with COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca. This presented as a comparable pattern."
"4. The number of these cases after vaccination with COVID-19 AstraZeneca is ⚠️statistically significantly higher than the number of cerebral venous thromboses that normally occur in the unvaccinated population⚠️"
"comparing the number of cases expected without vaccination in a 14-day time window with the number of cases reported after approximately 1.6 million AstraZeneca vaccinations in Germany. About one case would have been expected, and seven cases had been reported."⚠️
"5. ⚠️The younger to middle-aged population affected by the severe cerebral venous thrombosis with platelet deficiency is not the population at high risk for a severe or even fatal COVID-19 course.⚠️"
"6. In addition to the experts from the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut, other experts in thrombosis, haematology, and an adenovirus specialist were consulted with the details of the reported cases. All experts agreed unanimously that a pattern could be discerned here"

More from Robin Monotti MA FRSA ⭐

The problem with meta-analysis like this is that it obfuscates the most important issue of treatment, which is timing.


This meta-analysis of controlled trials only looks at hospitalized patients. How long were the patients ill for before being hospitalized? One week? Two? Three? Too late for zinc ionophores (HCQ) (+ZINC? No zinc no point..) to work. Severe illness becomes bacterial in nature.

Was azythromycin administered when the bacterial infections were also too advanced? I have seen Azythromycin work with my very own eyes but that's not to say that if administered too late it may not save the patient. How many patients were given AZT & ventilated? It's all timing.

All the meta-analysis is telling us is if you leave it too late you may have missed the early window for antiviral zinc treatment (Zn+HCQ) & that if you are given AZT when you are ventilated or very severe it may too late for it to save you & corticosteroids may be last resort.

And of course antibiotics need also probiotics, or they may harm the bacterial flora which is part of the immune response. Difficult to tell from a meta-analysis how this problem was managed.
I have now re-examined this document:


It clearly does indicate both the risks of bacterial infection & to prescribe broad spectrum antibiotics as part of treatment:
"Collect blood cultures for bacteria that cause pneumonia and sepsis, ideally before antimicrobial therapy. DO NOT
delay antimicrobial therapy"

"6. Management of severe COVID-19: treatment of co-infections
Give empiric antimicrobials [broad spectrum antibiotics] to treat all likely pathogens causing SARI and sepsis as soon as possible, within 1 hour
of initial assessment for patients with sepsis."

"Empiric antibiotic treatment should be based on the clinical diagnosis (community-acquired
pneumonia, health care-associated pneumonia [if infection was acquired in health care setting] or sepsis), local epidemiology &
susceptibility data, and national treatment guidelines"

"When there is ongoing local circulation of seasonal influenza, empiric therapy with a neuraminidase inhibitor [anti-viral influenza drugs] should
be considered for the treatment for patients with influenza or at risk for severe disease."

More from Category c19

@welt published an article today on the “panic paper”-scandal in Germany.

Title is "Maximum collaboration”, showing @BMI_Bund / Horst Seehofer had a secret paper drafted in the 1st COVID-19 wave that dramatically depicted the threat.

A scandal of gigantic proportions. Thread⬇️


2/: @welt released 2 versions: long version as print, short-edit, online.

This thread focuses on the long version. It's of crucial importance-people around the globe understand this earthshaking scandal. Share.

English:
https://t.co/qAbU6D8c0P

German: https://t.co/W2i1FtVrCg


3/: Mid-March 2020: Federal Minister of the Interior-Horst Seehofer (@BMI_Bund, @cducsubt) was on the edge: Christian Drosten (@c_drosten) & Lothar Wieler (@RKI) urgently warned: Germany was threatened w/ dramatic consequences if the country returned to everyday life too quickly.


4/: Horst Seehofer sent his Secretary of State Markus Kerber into the lane. The plan was to bring together leading scientists: they should produce a paper that would then serve as legitimation for further tough political measures, beyond Easter - now known as the “panic paper”.


5/: Markus Kerber launched a corresponding call to researchers via e-mail, 4 days later, the request was fulfilled: A classified paper, which presented the danger posed by the virus as dramatically as possible, and which quickly spread through the media.

You May Also Like