RT @JoshFL321: @JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Google isn’t going to help you with that… Censorship. This is the study referenced in the…
RT @JoshFL321: @JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Google isn’t going to help you with that… Censorship. This is the study referenced in the…
“The association of increased risk of COVID-19 with higher numbers of prior vaccine doses in our study, was unexpected.”
@JimFergusonUK The study doesn't even mention life expectancy, it's about the efficacy of the vaccine. Full study is linked here for you to read, found from the garbage opinion article that he links to. https://t.co/yTWdwZXDc2
RT @JoshFL321: @JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Google isn’t going to help you with that… Censorship. This is the study referenced in the…
@JimFergusonUK I don't think you know how to read or you just didn't even read the study https://t.co/3HBiJZlZ4L nowhere in this study linked in the article does it once mention reduced life expectancy. This is pure disinformation.
@pchandlerIII @JimFergusonUK The study linked in the article, does not pertain to the claims. https://t.co/rUcrWMGEmF
@ranchette1 @JimFergusonUK Cleveland Clinic. Not CDC https://t.co/MZ8nkpwFw1
@JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK This is linked in the article: https://t.co/rUcrWMGEmF
How does this statement, "the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine booster was 30% effective in preventing infection", square with this figure from the same study? https://t.co/qWZDiScNuZ https://t.co/BKzLUKeYlM
@JimFergusonUK @Citizen817 Here's the study (published Dec 2022): https://t.co/qWZDiScNuZ I don't see where it says that.
@strategicscope Not sure but this was the link in the article. https://t.co/oLLJyAJpLr
For those technically inclined: Study shows the more vaxxinated the sicker. https://t.co/p1ES3zFwl1
@JimFergusonUK This is the study they are referring to. https://t.co/nDcAsieZcm
@JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Here it is : chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://t.co/nHdgjV5BMD
RT @JoshFL321: @JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Google isn’t going to help you with that… Censorship. This is the study referenced in the…
RT @JoshFL321: @JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Google isn’t going to help you with that… Censorship. This is the study referenced in the…
RT @JoshFL321: @JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Google isn’t going to help you with that… Censorship. This is the study referenced in the…
@JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK The study being referenced in their article. https://t.co/juRKbbmj42
@JimFergusonUK Link to the study being being referenced. https://t.co/juRKbbmj42
@JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK Google isn’t going to help you with that… Censorship. This is the study referenced in the article. https://t.co/Dje3s1MThi
@TarotKat Another post with faulty sourcing. I only ask that people click through and track down the source of the claim. In this case, it's a study that has nothing to do with life expectancy. I'll save you a step. This is the study the above article lead
@real3eyedLion @JimFergusonUK The linked study doesn’t even look at mortality whatsoever https://t.co/NOOxFVF6J9
@JimFergusonUK @ProfTimNoakes Here is the linked study: https://t.co/NOOxFVF6J9 It actually doesn’t look at excess mortality at all, it looks at incidence of covid vs vaccination
@JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK The article posted has a link to the study. No idea if it says what is claimed. https://t.co/MlXV4VMQbq
@JohnEme58655489 @JimFergusonUK The article cited the study in a link… https://t.co/xJUJvjVpHj
@TimConradB623 @ScottAdamsSays Already exists; the more jabs the more likely to get it multiple times. As it's an employee observation study; the "control" group only had the 2 shots required to keep their jobs so there's no unvaccinated entirely however..
@real3eyedLion @JimFergusonUK In the link above. https://t.co/mv3lmwztda
@JimFergusonUK https://t.co/j3eYudJRO2 This is the study the site refers to but its not the topic proposed? Did it get switched or are the authors if this essay lying?
@_aussie17 ✅Study topic & link. https://t.co/FsEk3QQ0GJ https://t.co/ps8miAupBs
@Quirinale https://t.co/aPfy06pfgp riducendo di oltre 20 anni l'aspettativa di vita dopo la vaccinazione inutile come dimostra il lavoro di Cleveland, passate con nonchalance sulle balle climatiche senza alcun ragionamento sul perché dopo le punture i giov
@dttpeople @SolarisIV @TheOmniLiberal Here is the link to the actual study that was referenced in the video: https://t.co/r5G5FX5qLI
@Weedram5 @thehealthb0t The link is right at the beginning. Did you read the article? https://t.co/poeAfYB874
@Njorgensen92 @thehealthb0t The link is right there. https://t.co/poeAfYB874
Men Who Receive The Covid Vaccine Will Tragically Suffer A 24 Year Loss In Their Life https://t.co/3tbnKH5y6Y https://t.co/i3qXnP9tls
@abbyobenchain @sciqst @sciam And you bring ignorance. https://t.co/6XwlglYaUP https://t.co/5zJciHMpT8 https://t.co/EWDZHWZ2mI https://t.co/IjwOXl9Kye Keep up.
@elisaperego78 2/2 link to study https://t.co/WdLsn5Pf2f
@Twiligh21059926 @sjs856 And if you actually have valid data he just refuses to respond; I've been dropping the Cleveland Clinic employee conducted "increase in reinfections in the vaccinated" study because he can't refute it... https://t.co/ezvfc4fi9E
@StanziAck @unhealthytruth @taheen74 A favorite right wing talking point. But the study does not support the conclusion that the vaccine increases COVID illness. https://t.co/kDQRWHPzxD https://t.co/6o0w5VtHer
@DrPaulOffit 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in preventing infection dependi
@AntonioCunha79 @ruireisbarros "Bateu as botas pq as pessoas batem as botas." Principalmente quem confiou no governo e tomou varias doses dum produto sem estudos a longo prazo. As pessoas que tomaram a injecção são as mais susceptíveis de morrer de covid.
@beccyjanehealey 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in preventing infection dep
@jonathanstea https://t.co/ezvfc4fi9E So then the staff of the Cleveland Clinic doesn't count? I was already under orders not to get it from Epileptology, increased risk of reinfection definitely isn't going to change my mind about it (had it late Delta-ea
RT @SenseReceptor: @KanekoaTheGreat @elonmusk Yes, essentially zero risk. Ioannidis IFR study: https://t.co/bd8N5NxZHh The injections also…
@WearAFeckinMask @timspector Only 30%!! "Summary: Among 51011 working-aged Cleveland Clinic employees, the bivalent COVID-19 vaccine booster was 30% effective in preventing infection, during the time when the virus strains dominant in the community were
@Meghanduggan1 @DrEricDing 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in preventing inf
@DrEricDing 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in preventing infection dependin
@KristalPooler @LuckyLuna07 @DrEricDing 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in p
@LuckyLuna07 @DrEricDing 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in preventing infec
@So76971019 @Philou13 @xazalbert @IHU_Marseille @raoult_didier Et pour vous , va falloir plus simple : cette étude est publiée [ Now published in Open Forum Infectious Diseases doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofad209 ]https://t.co/rx8XlCbLCl
@catlawfin @BorgesZahir @pmonroe79 @AP Compromised like "more susceptible to reinfection?"
RT @eliebre83: @SudRadio @SabrinaRoubache @raoult_didier Et revoir cette étude du plus grand complexe de soins des USA faite sur 50000 emp…
@SudRadio @SabrinaRoubache @raoult_didier Et revoir cette étude du plus grand complexe de soins des USA faite sur 50000 employés de leurs structures https://t.co/rx8XlCbLCl
@era1521 @NicotineLozeng @JohntheLyricist @RMarsh991 @Simon106229076 @HeidiPa22668162 A triumph for medical science at the cost of the human immune system? Rule 1: Do no harm
@DrJBhattacharya @CDCDirector 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in preventing
@CDCDirector 12-19-2022 The Cleveland Clinic studied 51,011 employees🚨 “The higher the number of vaccines previously received, the higher the risk of contracting COVID-19” bivalent COVID-19 vaccine was 29% 20% 4% effective in preventing infection dependi
@ManifestWestony @ScholerinED @CDCgov Wes, this guy is a clown don't waste your time. But if you need some sources for other people who pose as academics grab any of these links https://t.co/kAAd1Ztmao
@jfrketich @GrantRants @TheSpec Thank you for interesting article. You may want to update re covid vaccine efficacy https://t.co/QG5DXHPzCv
@DanielBenincas2 @MannelloStephen @MurielBlaivePhD my argument is that if you have an equal viral load (re: Fauci) https://t.co/ht0bJrxvWW and a vax that *increases infection risk https://t.co/NcriN4VBGp How in the hell can you presume mRNA helps the l
@KLVeritas https://t.co/eKYwGf4aiV More doses = more infections... They know this. They know WE know. https://t.co/XxIEXtsR72
RT @statonomic: @AnnaSova17 @HeyNurseKat @jonathanstea Anna - ive taken the time to read the other replies which thoroughly addressed all y…
@AnnaSova17 @HeyNurseKat @jonathanstea Anna - ive taken the time to read the other replies which thoroughly addressed all your questions. None of which you replied to in a serious manner as you said you would. This is called 'bad faith' That said -
@AnnaSova17 @digitaldraco @Noellenarwhal @redherringdraws Anna - ive taken the time to read the other replies which thoroughly addressed all your questions. None of which you replied to in a serious manner as you said you would. This is called 'bad faith