As a clinician in Philadelphia having swiftly administered the mRNA vaccines, Dr. Anish Koka came to realize the lack of safety and efficacy data. Few doctors openly express such epistemic humility.
Question: If The USA government health agencies are working to protect the citizens and the USA Corporate Media is working to inform the citizens, then WHY DID THE CDC REDACT THEIR OWN ENTIRE 148 PAGE STUDY (after they were forced to release it due to a FOIA lawsuit) and WHY IS THE CORPORATE MEDIA NOT INVESTIGATING THIS OBVIOUS COVER-UP?
Answer: What else could it be other than both government officials and corporate media have been bought and paid for.
THE PROOF?: The trail of lies from the outset of the government reaction to Covid and the Hundreds of Millions $$$s of advertising money given to corporate media by Big Pharma.
Bravo! I understand how difficult it is for doctors to speak out but I think it's getting to a breaking point. How much more do we all need to hear before ppl start accepting we have all been duped. Very difficult when you can lose your license and standing in the medical community. I get it. We need to figure out HOW to get more ppl to come forward. Your podcast is a great step in the right direction. Also check out jabinjuriesglobal.com. The fact you have to use the word jab tells you a lot of what you need to know. Sabrinalabow.substack.com
Has anyone debunked the study from heart.bmj.com “The role of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing post-COVID-19 thromboembolic and cardiovascular complications “?
Good talk, but I feel that the myocarditis talk dwarfed the issue of risk/benefit. Myocarditis is listed in the vaccine insert as a side effect. The benefit to children and teens is close to zero and the risk is clearly much higher than any other vaccine. Herd immunity is not even possible with the vaccine. A lesser case is also doubtful (an unfalsifiable statement).
Wasn't there a study in The Lancet that showed the absolute risk of the shots to be in the 1-3% range? They were claiming the RRR was 95% effective at the time. Quite the gap there.
Question: If The USA government health agencies are working to protect the citizens and the USA Corporate Media is working to inform the citizens, then WHY DID THE CDC REDACT THEIR OWN ENTIRE 148 PAGE STUDY (after they were forced to release it due to a FOIA lawsuit) and WHY IS THE CORPORATE MEDIA NOT INVESTIGATING THIS OBVIOUS COVER-UP?
https://slaynews.com/news/cdc-forced-release-report-study-linking-heart-failure-covid-shots-every-single-page-redacted/
Answer: What else could it be other than both government officials and corporate media have been bought and paid for.
THE PROOF?: The trail of lies from the outset of the government reaction to Covid and the Hundreds of Millions $$$s of advertising money given to corporate media by Big Pharma.
Bravo! I understand how difficult it is for doctors to speak out but I think it's getting to a breaking point. How much more do we all need to hear before ppl start accepting we have all been duped. Very difficult when you can lose your license and standing in the medical community. I get it. We need to figure out HOW to get more ppl to come forward. Your podcast is a great step in the right direction. Also check out jabinjuriesglobal.com. The fact you have to use the word jab tells you a lot of what you need to know. Sabrinalabow.substack.com
Dr. Koka is fantastic. Zero ideology.
Has anyone debunked the study from heart.bmj.com “The role of COVID-19 vaccines in preventing post-COVID-19 thromboembolic and cardiovascular complications “?
Good talk, but I feel that the myocarditis talk dwarfed the issue of risk/benefit. Myocarditis is listed in the vaccine insert as a side effect. The benefit to children and teens is close to zero and the risk is clearly much higher than any other vaccine. Herd immunity is not even possible with the vaccine. A lesser case is also doubtful (an unfalsifiable statement).
What is the troponin test and how does it differ from the d-dimer?
dr koka needs to think harder about what informed consent means before he claims he didn't violate it because he was unknowingly repeating lies.
Wasn't there a study in The Lancet that showed the absolute risk of the shots to be in the 1-3% range? They were claiming the RRR was 95% effective at the time. Quite the gap there.
Thank you for this great interview and reporting.