Thank you, Colleen, for taking time to provide this important documentation. These are valuable support resources for the items in the documentary that are accurate.
At the same time, the feedback shared in the following Substack posts provide what is to me a compelling critique of certain aspects of this documentary ~ and I would encoura…
Thank you, Colleen, for taking time to provide this important documentation. These are valuable support resources for the items in the documentary that are accurate.
At the same time, the feedback shared in the following Substack posts provide what is to me a compelling critique of certain aspects of this documentary ~ and I would encourage everyone to review and consider various perspectives on this issue since ANY inaccuracies, misrepresentations and/or irrelevancies will reflect badly on the medical freedom movement about which we all care so deeply:
Thank you for these links. I enjoyed reading A Midwestern Doctor’s fascinating discussion of formation and composition of both typical blood clots and amyloid formations. But that microscopic view was almost entirely inapposite to the macroscopic findings of the embalmers.
Steve Kirsch had far more support for the film than opposition. (But memo to filmmakers: Don’t use footage that is unrelated to your theme, that – by fact of juxtaposition – may be assumed to be part of one event when it may not be.)
If people are going to critique something, they should be verifiably accurate in their critique.
Jackanapes is sloppy in his criticism. He writes: “footage from . . . Dec 2020 before the COVID vaccine rollout.” But the vaccines were first used in the US in December 2020. So then he needs to dig into specific dates. Yoho makes this same sloppy error by repetition. If you dispute that the collapse of a basketball player was related to the COVID vaccine due to chronology, show us your specific chronology. Yoho’s “Uh, yeah, what he said” critique is not impressive.
Jackanapes also says, “There WAS an increase in many different diagnoses, it was not nearly as large as those whistleblowers thought.” Again without supporting his assertion. He writes as if a vast increase in healthcare consults is unimportant, and that only an increase in healthcare patients is. Also, implying that military data showed low increase in morbidity - contradiction of Dr. Long's and other military doctors' direct experience - requires more substantiation of data on his part. His minimization of the that data is like saying a stone is smaller than previously thought, while ignoring the boulder in the room: Pfizer’s confession of over 158,000 distinct individual injuries and about 1500 distinct disease conditions, many of them life threatening and / or permanently disabling, found during the clinical trials of their COVID vaccine come from the court-ordered document release from Pfizer/FDA itself.
Ultimate the movie brought mass attention, organized information, galvanized, brought criticism and refinements and consolidated a lot of thinkers who post here and elsewhere. It is glorious in that accomplishment.
Thank you, Colleen, for your thoughtful and well considered feedback. I genuinely appreciate your specific remarks in response to issues raised in these articles ~ and I will be sure to reference your comment (above) when I share your article in my BeyondC19.org library.
In the meantime, I am aware Steve Kirsch's comments are generally positive, which is why I originally recommended considering "various perspectives" on the issues raised in the video.
I also appreciate your important memo to filmmakers:
> "Don’t use footage that is unrelated to your theme, that – by fact of juxtaposition – may be assumed to be part of one event when it may not be."
Unfortunately, much of the extraneous footage included in the video, while vitally important, may be significantly distracting for people who are still skeptical about the horrendous harms of the vaccines.
This is not a beauty contest, and no one need worrying whether Stew Peters´ nose is powdered or not. His fly is certainly zipped up. You make the very unfortunate impression of what at other sites dealing with sensitive topics (notably, Ukraine) would be classified as concern trolling.
Thank you, Colleen, for taking time to provide this important documentation. These are valuable support resources for the items in the documentary that are accurate.
At the same time, the feedback shared in the following Substack posts provide what is to me a compelling critique of certain aspects of this documentary ~ and I would encourage everyone to review and consider various perspectives on this issue since ANY inaccuracies, misrepresentations and/or irrelevancies will reflect badly on the medical freedom movement about which we all care so deeply:
> https://robertyoho.substack.com/p/1755-a-personal-failure
> https://jackanapes.substack.com/p/died-suddenly-is-typical-trash-from
> https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/what-is-causing-the-died-suddenly
> https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/answering-the-critics-of-died-suddenly
Thank you for these links. I enjoyed reading A Midwestern Doctor’s fascinating discussion of formation and composition of both typical blood clots and amyloid formations. But that microscopic view was almost entirely inapposite to the macroscopic findings of the embalmers.
Steve Kirsch had far more support for the film than opposition. (But memo to filmmakers: Don’t use footage that is unrelated to your theme, that – by fact of juxtaposition – may be assumed to be part of one event when it may not be.)
If people are going to critique something, they should be verifiably accurate in their critique.
Jackanapes is sloppy in his criticism. He writes: “footage from . . . Dec 2020 before the COVID vaccine rollout.” But the vaccines were first used in the US in December 2020. So then he needs to dig into specific dates. Yoho makes this same sloppy error by repetition. If you dispute that the collapse of a basketball player was related to the COVID vaccine due to chronology, show us your specific chronology. Yoho’s “Uh, yeah, what he said” critique is not impressive.
Jackanapes also says, “There WAS an increase in many different diagnoses, it was not nearly as large as those whistleblowers thought.” Again without supporting his assertion. He writes as if a vast increase in healthcare consults is unimportant, and that only an increase in healthcare patients is. Also, implying that military data showed low increase in morbidity - contradiction of Dr. Long's and other military doctors' direct experience - requires more substantiation of data on his part. His minimization of the that data is like saying a stone is smaller than previously thought, while ignoring the boulder in the room: Pfizer’s confession of over 158,000 distinct individual injuries and about 1500 distinct disease conditions, many of them life threatening and / or permanently disabling, found during the clinical trials of their COVID vaccine come from the court-ordered document release from Pfizer/FDA itself.
Ultimate the movie brought mass attention, organized information, galvanized, brought criticism and refinements and consolidated a lot of thinkers who post here and elsewhere. It is glorious in that accomplishment.
Thank you, Colleen, for your thoughtful and well considered feedback. I genuinely appreciate your specific remarks in response to issues raised in these articles ~ and I will be sure to reference your comment (above) when I share your article in my BeyondC19.org library.
In the meantime, I am aware Steve Kirsch's comments are generally positive, which is why I originally recommended considering "various perspectives" on the issues raised in the video.
I also appreciate your important memo to filmmakers:
> "Don’t use footage that is unrelated to your theme, that – by fact of juxtaposition – may be assumed to be part of one event when it may not be."
Unfortunately, much of the extraneous footage included in the video, while vitally important, may be significantly distracting for people who are still skeptical about the horrendous harms of the vaccines.
This is not a beauty contest, and no one need worrying whether Stew Peters´ nose is powdered or not. His fly is certainly zipped up. You make the very unfortunate impression of what at other sites dealing with sensitive topics (notably, Ukraine) would be classified as concern trolling.
You find the devils in the details.