If you want to know about epidemiology, COVID-19 and “vaccines” then I can point you to a few who know more than I do. For a NZ context I think Simon Thornley of Auckland University is NZ’s pre-eminent expert (with qualifications) in this area and in an international context I suggest following Bret Weinstein on Twitter or on Odysee and via him you will also come across Pierre Kory and various others in this domain, including Heather Heying, Bret’s wife. They’re all very good on this topic.
Another person worth following is Dr Sam Bailey from Christchurch, she gives you plenty of information so it’s up to you to decide if she’s correct or not.
Both Simon and Sam get harrassed by the same groups who harass me. But they are much more knowledgable on this topic than myself. I don’t believe that’s true of the very unimpressive trio of Baker, Hendy & Wiles who all impress me as lazy researchers and avid media seekers.
My personal view is that I won’t go anywhere near Pfizer’s so called vaccine and would be very, very reluctant to take any of them. And Ivermectin seems fine as a treatment.
If you have daughters you should also keep them away from the HPV vaccine, it does nothing but there’s plenty of risk, not quite as much as coding yourself up with mRNA (i.e. Pfizer, Moderna) but not absent either. The Japanese by the way are very wary of the HPV vaccines (there’s a few, all American) but the Americans have put very large pressure on them in trade negotiations.
———————————————————————————————-
My last post about Siouxsie Wiles was back on April 27th when I took her to task about her science on COVID-19 vaccines (really mRNA experimental technology rather than vaccines but nevermind). Before that it was March 22nd regarding her responsibility for emissions on a flight to (maybe) see the Aurora, a totally unnecessary flight. And before that in February as a reaction to her calling me out in late January (there were a few posts now mostly taken down as I actually do find Siouxsie to be boring and don’t want to leave my feed cluttered with her). She’s in the media all the time here in NZ so ignoring her is a very difficult thing. It’s like ignoring Eddie McGuire in Melbourne or the Turkish president in Turkey or Gerard Depardieu in French movies up until 2010. And I’m certainly not going to ignore her when she attacks me, as she is wont to do fairly regularly.
I put an OIA in on Siouxie’s PhD thesis to Edinburgh Napier University in February. It doesn’t seem to have gone down well even though I helped her get it to their library 20 years later, something that had not been done before that. She’s been a bit more mad at me (than she was before) due to this.
And today I find that I’m being attacked again. At about 13:45 minutes into this interview and for a whole 2 minutes with copyrighted material from this very blog used without my permission
Nor was I asked if it was ok to use the photo that they’ve nicked from the last Dunedin City Council elections. I’ve tried to correct the record in the comments under this youtube video but they keep getting deleted. I was also banned by youtube briefly (for about 10 minutes). Current status, there are two of my comments (out of 6 made) still remaining. I’m still unbanned.
The part about me in the interview is wrong, it is harassment, it is bullying, it is defamatory.
There are some bits though that are a hoot.
13:04 This is bog standard epidemiology, the measures that you take should not cause more harm than they stop. Any epidemiologist worth their salt understands this. That Wiles doesn’t is damning.
14:40 “surprise to me..”
15:05 “I e[mailed]*, I sent, physically sent several copies to my PhD supervisor one of which was to him one of which was to be passed onto the library” (so two?)
* she was clearly about to say “emailed” before stopping herself.
There was more than one PhD supervisor by the way. I’ll come back to all the ‘errors’ in the comments.
Postscript - it seems that the actual interview was in March even if the video has only just gone up. And a quick search on the tweeters who were nasty to her (following the feature on me) suggests that almost all of them were trolls or bots and that more or less none of them actually remain on Twitter. Two of the comments were exactly the same. One wonders whose bots or trolls that they were.