59 Comments
Oct 11, 2022Liked by The Vigilant Fox

I’m sorry I can’t be a paid subscriber. I’m 66 and crippled on a marginal salary. But I’m sharing your work across my social networks. Hope it brings in a subscriber or two.

Love your work

Expand full comment

Take care on the road, heart attacks and strokes are now more frequent.

Expand full comment
Oct 11, 2022Liked by The Vigilant Fox

This video was the most well informed, concise, easy to understand explanation of the fraud perpetuated over the C19 injections that I've herd. Huge thanks to you and the courageous RFK Jr.

Expand full comment

Sharing..

Expand full comment

The vaccine did not fail, its purpose was never to stop you from getting Covid, its purpose was to inject you all with 99% Graphene Oxide and nanotechnology and parasites, which sometimes cause those long white blood clots recovered from the dead.

Let me put that more simply. If you were taken to a race course and told you were going to bet your life on a horse race outcome, where one horse had never been beaten and had a 99.17% chance of winning and the slowest horse in the race had a 0.87% chance of winning - according to The Lancet - and had never won a race - why then did you all bet your lives on the slowest horse in the race?

Let me explain Covid 99.17% Pfizer 0.87% - do you understand the gravity of those vaccines now?

Expand full comment

The jab was only approved for emergency use, that means it's still an experimental vaccine. There is no evidence of full approval from any document on the FDA website. Even life insurance companies know this and they won't pay if a person dies and took the jab. They don't pay for death from experimental procedures.

I figured people knew this by now.

Expand full comment
Oct 11, 2022Liked by The Vigilant Fox

Thanks for simply telling it like it is!

Expand full comment

This is a fundamentally incorrect way of interpreting the results of an RCT. In an RCT we don’t get to “determine” the cause of death as anything other than INTERVENTION vs PLACEBO. This is the very purpose of RCT, to eliminate any secondary guesses, inference, estimations about causality. Even if more people died in car accidents in the study following the vaccination, this would have to be statistically attributed to the vaccine (intervention), even if we do not understand how the vaccine could cause more lethal car accidents. In this sense both Pfizer and RFK are committing a basic methodological error (although Pfizer surely knows this). The study shows that 15 people died in the intervention arm and 14 in the placebo arm, and this is all we can say about these deaths if we want to stay within the RCT protocol. Additional 5 deaths are reported soon after unblinding, and all of these deaths occurred following vaccination. This result (mortality) was not statistically significant, which only means that Pfizer failed to show, via RTC, that their vaccine does not kill more people than it saves, and this is all we need to know about their quackery.

Expand full comment

All you have to do is tune into your local fire and emergency live feeds and it's all heart attacks, strokes, people just collapsing all over the place-- in restaurants, while pumping gas, while grocery shopping. I listen all the time and it's shocking.

Expand full comment

I really appreciate the support from the substack community.

All of my friends and family are triple or quadruple jabbed and thinking I wouldn't have got this sick if I had complied. This is hard to take but I don't regret my decision to stay unjabbed and will enjoy my natural immunity once I recover.

Expand full comment

I am wondering two things:

1) Do we know the specific comorbidities and ages of the people that died of or with Covid in the vaccine group and placebo group, because if they had the flu and a comorbidity they would have been reported as a death based on their comorbidity, not the flu. So I am wondering if any of these three deaths were truly solely Covid.

And 2) Do we know what the placebo was made of? Was it saline or was it the adjuvant? Obviously a trial comparing the entire vaccine to the adjuvant of the vaccine would be misleading and fraudulent.

Expand full comment

My adult son got three Covid jabs even though his brother and I told him it was a bioweapon. Now he has heart issues. I told him again in September it was a bioweapon and he still doesn’t believe it. Maybe it’s too much for his mind to accept, although he did say he won’t get another jab.

Expand full comment

Yes, I have been following all of this but still surprised how brutal I feel.

Expand full comment

Off topic but I need advice from my fellow unjabbed. Just got sick for the first time since the plandemic started. Am feeling truly horrible -- fever, massive headache that won't go away (I never get headaches normally), nausea, chills, body aches, fatigue (but it is hard to sleep because my head hurts so bad). Have tested negative twice but am assuming covid so I started my Ivermectin and the nutraceutical protocol from Truth for Health Foundation yesterday. No improvement so far. Any suggestions? I am an otherwise healthy 56 year old in Canada.

Expand full comment

The secret servants of Satan (members of the Satanic Globalists' New World Order ORGANIZED CRIME SYNDICATE, aka the Kingdom of Satan) are becoming so obvious: murderers, warmongers, liars, thieves. "Ye shall know them by their fruits."

Expand full comment

I know this is really just an aside when considering the totality of evidence of statistical nitpicking, deceit, fraud, corruption and glib disregard for human health and life, but...

Does it bother anyone else that they made a beginner's mistake with this "100% effective against COVID death" claim? Of course they have to divide the treatment group number, 1, by the placebo group number, 2, and not subtract the former from the latter and divide by the former, that should be obvious to anyone even remotely involved in any scientific enterprise of any kind.

Dividing the placebo group number by the treatment group number is madness. Imagine doing a study on motorcycle helmets where you smash dummies head's with a sledgehammer and you find that 19 out of 20 dummies without helmets had fatal head injuries and only 1 out of 20 dummies with a helmet did. Their formula would make their motorcycle helmets 1800% effective against fatal head injuries, meaning it prevents your head from being injured, plus the heads of 17 other people?

Expand full comment