Pleasure. Yeah there's a lot of different things that could be done. If I had the skills to make these, I'd be making them in a way to get accross the main point of several related articles, with qr codes/urls for people to see the papers / memoryholed msm clips / buried news articles themselves.
For example, stories like these:
https://amp.9news.com.au/article/04697462-e53f-4587-8aa3-a793af9a38fb
might go well with stuff like:
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00648-4 (same transmission indoors between jab/unjab with same initial viral loads, the jabbed just return to baseline a little quicker)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/ (pop % jabbed is not correlated with number of cases as we'd expect if the jabs were effective)
So in that concept, we're sticking to showing examples of jabs meaning nothing for the spread. Then say, in another one we could go for something along the lines of 'Does Pfizer really have your kids best interests at heart?' or 'Can we really trust Pfizer?'
then hit em with stuff like
https://archive.jsonline.com/business/39719447.html/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8437699/
https://www.corpwatch.org/article/pfizer-admits-bribery-eight-countries
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2635 (whistleblower on data integrity issues in Pfizer trial - yuge)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33113270/
the key bits of info from the above should shatter the 'Pfizer just wants whats best for our health'
etc etc. Sorry for the formatting but yeah I hope that gets the idea accross.
Pleasure. Yeah there's a lot of different things that could be done. If I had the skills to make these, I'd be making them in a way to get accross the main point of several related articles, with qr codes/urls for people to see the papers / memoryholed msm clips / buried news articles themselves.
For example, stories like these:
https://amp.9news.com.au/article/04697462-e53f-4587-8aa3-a793af9a38fb
might go well with stuff like:
https://doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(21)00648-4 (same transmission indoors between jab/unjab with same initial viral loads, the jabbed just return to baseline a little quicker)
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/ (pop % jabbed is not correlated with number of cases as we'd expect if the jabs were effective)
So in that concept, we're sticking to showing examples of jabs meaning nothing for the spread. Then say, in another one we could go for something along the lines of 'Does Pfizer really have your kids best interests at heart?' or 'Can we really trust Pfizer?'
then hit em with stuff like
https://archive.jsonline.com/business/39719447.html/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8437699/
https://www.corpwatch.org/article/pfizer-admits-bribery-eight-countries
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n2635 (whistleblower on data integrity issues in Pfizer trial)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33113270/
etc etc. Sorry for the formatting but yeah I hope that gets the idea accross.