Nenad Roso (Valetudo)

<p>Nenad Roso tvrdi da miokarditis, upala srčanog mišića, može biti uzrokovan cjepivima koja sadrže grafen. Ova tvrdnja je vrlo kontroverzna i zahtijeva detaljnu analizu.</p>
<p>Miokarditis je upala srčanog mišića koja može biti uzrokovana virusnim infekcijama, bakterijama, parazitima, lijekovima i drogama. Simptomi uključuju bol u prsima, nepravilan rad srca i zatajenje srca. U težim slučajevima, srce može postati iscrpljeno i slabo, što može dovesti do formiranja krvnih ugrušaka i moždanog ili srčanog udara.</p>
<p>Tvrdnja da cjepiva koja sadrže grafen uzrokuju miokarditis nema znanstvenu podršku. Grafen je materijal sastavljen od jednog sloja atoma ugljika i nema dokaza da se koristi u cjepivima. Studije koje su istraživale sastav cjepiva, poput one objavljene u <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7996517/">National Center for Biotechnology Information</a>, ne spominju grafen kao sastojak.</p>
<p>Dodatno, miokarditis je rijetka nuspojava nekih cjepiva, ali uzroci su obično imunološki odgovori na sastojke cjepiva, a ne na grafen. Studija objavljena u <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2109730">New England Journal of Medicine</a> pokazuje da je rizik od miokarditisa nakon cjepiva vrlo nizak i da je obično blag i prolazan.</p>
<p>Roso također promovira upotrebu lumbrokinaze enzima za čišćenje krvi i tkiva od neželjenih proteina. Lumbrokinaza je enzim koji se koristi u tradicionalnoj kineskoj medicini za poboljšanje cirkulacije i smanjenje rizika od krvnih ugrušaka. Međutim, znanstvena istraživanja o učinkovitosti lumbrokinaze su ograničena. Studija objavljena u <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3156618/">Journal of Ethnopharmacology</a> sugerira da lumbrokinaza može imati antitrombotičke učinke, ali su potrebna dodatna istraživanja kako bi se potvrdila njezina sigurnost i učinkovitost.</p>
<p>Zaključak: Tvrdnja da cjepiva koja sadrže grafen uzrokuju miokarditis je netočna i nema znanstvene podrške. Lumbrokinaza može imati potencijalne koristi, ali su potrebna dodatna istraživanja kako bi se potvrdila njezina sigurnost i učinkovitost.</p>
<p><br></p>
<figure><img src="https://remedia-staging.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/if47CYNQeyXxj4PTxipYX/nenad_roso_o_miokarditisu.jpg" height="auto" width="auto" alt="nend roso o miokarditisu"/></figure>
<p><br></p>

Claim Review: Miokarditis i Lumbrokinase Enzimi

claim-review-miokarditis-i-lumbrokinase-enzimi-b5eba8589a7d

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>A recent article from The People's Voice claims that a Lancet review of 325 autopsies found that 74% of deaths were linked to COVID-19 vaccines. The article also states that the journal removed the study after only 24 hours. This claim review will examine the validity of these statements.</p>
<h2>The Claim</h2>
<p>The claim suggests that a significant number of deaths were directly caused by COVID-19 vaccines, as indicated by an autopsy study published in the Lancet. The study was allegedly removed due to its conclusions not being supported by the methodology.</p>
<h2>Analysis</h2>
<p>The study in question was a pre-print awaiting peer-review, authored by Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Harvey Risch, and their colleagues. Pre-prints are preliminary reports that have not undergone the rigorous peer-review process necessary for publication in reputable journals. The Lancet removed the study, stating that the conclusions were not supported by the study methodology.</p>
<p>The original study abstract, available in the Internet Archive, suggests that the most implicated organ system in COVID-19 vaccine-associated deaths was the cardiovascular system (53%), followed by the hematological system (17%). The study concluded that there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID-19 vaccines and death in most cases.</p>
<p>However, the removal of the study by the Lancet indicates significant methodological concerns. Pre-prints are often removed if they fail to meet basic screening criteria or if the methodology is deemed flawed. The fact that the study was removed so quickly suggests that it did not meet the necessary standards for further review.</p>
<p>Dr. Clare Craig, a pathologist, acknowledged that while the approach taken in the study is sound, there may be a bias towards reporting autopsies where there was evidence of causation. This bias could exaggerate the likelihood of causation. She also emphasized the importance of open scientific critique over censorship.</p>
<h2>Scientific Evidence</h2>
<p>To date, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has not acknowledged a single death being caused by COVID-19 vaccines. The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is designed to alert to potential harms but is not the best way of measuring the extent of those harms. Quantifying the impact of deaths can be done by looking at overall mortality rates in a country, but this method is also imperfect.</p>
<p>A study published in the <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2104840">New England Journal of Medicine</a> found no evidence of increased mortality rates among vaccinated individuals compared to unvaccinated individuals. Another study in the <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(23)00207-4/fulltext">Lancet</a> &nbsp;concluded that COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, with rare adverse events.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that a Lancet review found 74% of deaths linked to COVID-19 vaccines is based on a pre-print study that was removed due to methodological concerns. The removal of the study indicates that the conclusions were not supported by the methodology. The claim is not substantiated by peer-reviewed evidence, and the available scientific literature does not support the assertion that COVID-19 vaccines are causing a significant number of deaths.</p>
<p>It is crucial to rely on peer-reviewed studies and open scientific critique to assess the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Censorship of flawed studies is a necessary part of maintaining scientific integrity.</p>

Claim Review: Lancet Removes Autopsy Study Linking 74% of Deaths to COVID-19 Vaccines

<h2>Introduction</h2>
<p>The claim that 'transgender' ideology is a political coup of the transhuman agenda, driven by wealthy elites and corporations, has gained traction in certain circles. This article aims to critically examine this claim, providing a thorough review based on reliable scientific sources.</p>
<h2>Understanding Transgender Identity</h2>
<p>Transgender individuals are people whose gender identity differs from the sex they were assigned at birth. This is a well-documented phenomenon supported by numerous scientific studies. For example, a study published in the <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6677266/">Journal of Neuroscience</a> found that transgender individuals have brain structures that align more closely with their gender identity than their assigned sex.</p>
<h2>The Transhuman Agenda</h2>
<p>Transhumanism is a philosophical movement that advocates for the enhancement of human intellectual, physical, and psychological capacities through advanced technologies. While transhumanism and transgender identity are distinct concepts, some have attempted to link them in a conspiratorial manner.</p>
<h2>Corporate and Elite Influence</h2>
<p>The claim that wealthy elites and corporations are driving the 'transgender' ideology to condition the public for radical changes to human biology lacks credible evidence. While it is true that some corporations and wealthy individuals support transgender rights, this support is often part of broader efforts to promote diversity and inclusion. For instance, a report by the <a href="https://www.hrc.org/resources/corporate-equality-index">Human Rights Campaign</a> shows that many corporations support LGBTQ+ rights as part of their corporate social responsibility initiatives.</p>
<h2>Scientific Consensus</h2>
<p>The scientific consensus is that transgender identity is a natural variation of human gender and is not a result of corporate or elite manipulation. A comprehensive review by the <a href="https://www.apa.org/topics/lgbt/transgender">American Psychological Association</a> concludes that transgender identity is a legitimate and recognized aspect of human diversity.</p>
<h2>Conspiracy Theories and Misinformation</h2>
<p>The claim that 'transgender' ideology is a political coup of the transhuman agenda is rooted in conspiracy theories and misinformation. These theories often lack credible evidence and are not supported by the scientific community. For example, a study published in the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-55068-2">Nature Human Behaviour</a> journal found that conspiracy theories about transgender individuals are often driven by prejudice and misinformation.</p>
<h2>Conclusion</h2>
<p>The claim that 'transgender' ideology is a political coup of the transhuman agenda is largely unfounded and lacks credible scientific evidence. Transgender identity is a recognized and legitimate aspect of human diversity, supported by numerous scientific studies. Corporate and elite support for transgender rights is often part of broader efforts to promote diversity and inclusion. It is important to rely on credible sources and scientific evidence when evaluating such claims.</p>

Claim Review: 'Transgender' Ideology as a Political Coup of the Transhuman Agenda

<p>The claim that the thimerosal-free HibTITER pediatric vaccine marketed by Wyeth from 2003 through 2007 was associated with 19 different medical conditions, according to a study published in the International Journal of Risk &amp; Safety in Medicine, requires careful examination.</p>
<p>The study, conducted by Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., from Children’s Health Defense (CHD), compared adverse events among children who received HibTITER to those among children who received other Hib vaccines. The researchers analyzed data from the Florida Medicaid database and the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS).</p>
<p>The study identified 19 different diagnoses associated with HibTITER at frequencies significantly higher than those associated with other Hib vaccines. These adverse events ranged from mild to life-threatening and included respiratory, gastrointestinal, dermatologic, and generalized infections; ear, nose, and throat medical conditions; and other conditions.</p>
<p>However, several critical points must be considered:</p>
<ul>
  <li><strong>Methodological Limitations:</strong> The study relies on data from VAERS, which is a passive reporting system. This means that it is subject to underreporting and reporting biases. Additionally, the Florida Medicaid database may not be representative of the entire population.</li>
  <li><strong>Lack of Peer Review:</strong> The International Journal of Risk &amp; Safety in Medicine is not widely recognized as a top-tier scientific journal. The study has not been peer-reviewed by reputable sources, which is a crucial step in validating scientific findings.</li>
  <li><strong>Contradictory Evidence:</strong> Numerous safety studies have found Hib vaccines to be safe and effective. For example, a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) found that Hib vaccines are safe and effective in preventing Haemophilus influenzae type b infections (<a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/193543">JAMA Study</a>).</li>
  <li><strong>Regulatory Oversight:</strong> The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continuously monitor vaccine safety. The decision to remove thimerosal from vaccines was a precautionary measure, not based on evidence of harm.</li>
</ul>
<p>In conclusion, the claim that the HibTITER vaccine was linked to 19 diseases and poses a risk to 35 million adults is not substantiated by reliable scientific evidence. The study cited has methodological limitations and lacks peer review from reputable sources. It is essential to rely on well-established scientific research and regulatory oversight to ensure vaccine safety.</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<ul>
  <li>JAMA Study: <a href="https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/193543">Safety and Effectiveness of Haemophilus influenzae Type b Vaccines</a></li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Vaccine ‘Quietly’ Pulled Off Market in 2007 Now Linked to 19 Diseases — 35 Million Babies Who Got the Shot Now at Risk as Adults

<p>The claim made by Greg Reese in his article 'Organ Harvesting and the Brain Death Fallacy' suggests that the medical industry prioritizes organ harvesting over the well-being of patients and that the term 'brain death' was invented by Harvard elites to justify unethical medical transplants. This claim warrants a thorough examination.</p>
<p>Firstly, it is important to address the opioid epidemic and its impact on organ donation. While it is true that the opioid crisis has led to an increase in organ donors, it is misleading to suggest that the medical community views this as a 'silver lining.' The medical community is deeply concerned about the opioid epidemic and its devastating effects on public health. The increase in organ donors is a consequence of the crisis, not a benefit.</p>
<p>The claim that the medical-industrial complex cares only about the organ harvesting pipeline is an oversimplification. The medical industry is complex and multifaceted, with numerous stakeholders including healthcare providers, researchers, and policymakers. While there are certainly financial incentives involved in organ transplantation, the primary goal of the medical community is to save lives and improve patient outcomes.</p>
<p>The term 'brain death' was indeed defined by a committee at Harvard Medical School in 1968. However, the claim that it was 'cooked up' to justify unethical transplants is inaccurate. The definition of brain death was developed to provide clear criteria for determining when a patient has irreversibly lost all brain function, including the brainstem. This definition is crucial for ethical and medical decision-making, including the allocation of scarce resources such as organs for transplantation.</p>
<p>The ethical concerns surrounding organ transplantation are valid and deserve attention. However, the claim that the medical industry is engaged in widespread unethical practices is not supported by evidence. The organ transplantation process is highly regulated and subject to rigorous ethical guidelines. Organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers follow strict protocols to ensure that organ donation is carried out ethically and with the consent of the donor or their family.</p>
<p>In conclusion, while there are legitimate ethical concerns related to organ transplantation, the claim that the medical industry prioritizes organ harvesting over patient well-being and that the term 'brain death' was invented to justify unethical transplants is largely misleading and oversimplified. The medical community is committed to ethical practices and the well-being of patients.</p>
<p><strong>References:</strong></p>
<ul>
  <li><a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/5694976/">A Definition of Irreversible Coma: Report of the Ad Hoc Committee of the Harvard Medical School to Examine the Definition of Brain Death</a> &nbsp;- Ad Hoc Committee of the Harvard Medical School</li>
  <li><a href="https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/726002">The Opioid Epidemic and Organ Donation</a> &nbsp;- Journal of the American Medical Association</li>
  <li><a href="https://unos.org/transplant/ethics/">United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS)</a> &nbsp;- Ethical guidelines and regulations for organ transplantation</li>
</ul>

Claim Review: Miokarditis i Lumbrokinase Enzimi

Reviewed by
Remedia Ai

Miokarditis može biti uzrokovan cjepivima koja sadrže grafen.

Who is claiming:

View all this data in real-time using one of our extensions

Chrome

Firefox Android

Content you might like:

Claim Miokarditis može biti uzrokovan cjepivima koja sadrže grafen.
Claim RatingFalse	Claim DateSeptember 5, 2024

Claim Review: Miokarditis i Lumbrokinase Enzimi

Reviewed byRemedia Ai

Miokarditis može biti uzrokovan cjepivima koja sadrže grafen.

Who is claiming:

View all this data in real-time using one of our extensions

Chrome

Firefox Android

Content you might like:

Reviewed by
Remedia Ai