@akim_eckert Here's another one that says nearly 9 in 10 C19 patients who are put on a ventilator die https://t.co/OPQXINCWHz
RT @Taxed12: @Wood_House76 @jamie_reinhold See study Hospitalised WITH covid not FOR covid (note few had discernable symptoms) https://t.co…
@Wood_House76 @jamie_reinhold See study Hospitalised WITH covid not FOR covid (note few had discernable symptoms) https://t.co/CSkHHZzHG4
@gunsnrosesgirl3 VoA ventilate on arrival in NYC, 2020. https://t.co/K5wRcxUyKF https://t.co/V1ic9tctI3
@jerrybrenner165 @TheDrJon Sorry Jerry, we have receipts: 97.2% mortality rate for those put on mechanical ventilators vs 26.6% mortality rate for those not put on mechanical ventilators https://t.co/Q4OgmcpFe1
@PolskiPolak2x @tw_wolfgang Śmiertelność osób, które otrzymały wentylację mechaniczną w grupach wiekowych od 18 do 65 lat i powyżej 65 lat wyniosła odpowiednio 76,4% i 97,2%. https://t.co/FMml974KLY
@ArtiomStanbaum Śmiertelność osób, które otrzymały wentylację mechaniczną w grupach wiekowych od 18 do 65 lat i powyżej 65 lat wyniosła odpowiednio 76,4% i 97,2%. https://t.co/FMml974KLY
@TTTeatrzyk Śmiertelność osób, które otrzymały wentylację mechaniczną w grupach wiekowych od 18 do 65 lat i powyżej 65 lat wyniosła odpowiednio 76,4% i 97,2%. https://t.co/FMml974KLY
@Gabriel02255244 Prawidlowo to sie nazywalo, oststni gwozdz do trumy. 9 na 10 konczylo pod ziemia po respiratorach. "Śmiertelność osób, które otrzymały wentylację mechaniczną w grupach wiekowych od 18 do 65 lat i powyżej 65 lat wyniosła odpowiednio 76,4% i
@THEHCC This JAMA paper. https://t.co/N6j0HUSs0Z
@JordanA8156 @wesbury NY..Covid Panic Central. https://t.co/SACkqXxoWc
@JordanA8156 @wendobi @BeaglesResist Here are a few MORE studies proving it: A study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA): https://t.co/MMWRQyYxxC Another study in the journal Anaesthesia: https://t.co/lYgAOtgJSG A study i
@Wood_House76 @PierreKory NY seen 24.2% “covid” deaths age under 65. All of EU including Italy seen 2.8% under 65. Can’t forget the 88% death rate on vents They can’t keep hidden the meta data behind all these anomalies https://t.co/I1OXfQQQQf
@DrJ56013122 ... many died due to mechanical artificial pulmonary ventilation/intubation ... https://t.co/IE2om2qtYD "Mortality rates for those who received mechanical ventilation in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age groups were 76.4% and 97.2%, respec
@Jacquifrench27 Involuntary manslaughter at best: 97.2% mortality rate for those put on mechanical ventilators vs 26.6% mortality rate for those not put on mechanical ventilators https://t.co/Q4OgmcpFe1
Le taux de 76.4%, présenté dans la publication, peut être issu de l'interprétation de deux études différentes : - Une première d'avril 2020 du Northwell Health (https://t.co/gJYuoP7983) - Une seconde d'avril 2023 du Northwestern Memorial Hospital (https:
@Robert_Janez @elonmusk @ray4tesla https://t.co/u8Nc7nyhXq Třeba tuhle, odkud to číslo pochází.. :) Zkuste si to přečíst.
@al_antdp O resultado não parece ter sido bom. "Mortality rates for those who received mechanical ventilation... 76.4% and 97.2%"👇 https://t.co/2JISfmPAQu Alguns especialistas têm falado sobre efeitos adversos e doses erradas https://t.co/20HyVfALNZ htt
@nickmmark @RyanMarino @BadMedicalTakes We had pretty dismal results for intubated patient during the first wave. https://t.co/FNmzqtbJwr
RT @nickmmark: Shocking because it’s untrue. It’s a misunderstanding of data published in the first COVID wave in NYC. With limited follo…
@PerthDomer @mattyglesias Thanks! The US patients in that study were in GA and PA, not NYC. In NYC, 97.2% of patients age 65+ who were put on ventilators died, which is consistent with ventilator overuse => not enough trained nurses to care for them =&g
RT @nickmmark: Shocking because it’s untrue. It’s a misunderstanding of data published in the first COVID wave in NYC. With limited follo…
@espiers Read the study. A brave NY doctor tried to warn people in 2020 that ventilators were killing. He was ignored. Dr Cameron Kyle-Slidell. https://t.co/7GxqVObamI
RT @nickmmark: Shocking because it’s untrue. It’s a misunderstanding of data published in the first COVID wave in NYC. With limited follo…
RT @nickmmark: Shocking because it’s untrue. It’s a misunderstanding of data published in the first COVID wave in NYC. With limited follo…
RT @nickmmark: Shocking because it’s untrue. It’s a misunderstanding of data published in the first COVID wave in NYC. With limited follo…
Shocking because it’s untrue. It’s a misunderstanding of data published in the first COVID wave in NYC. With limited followup (median 4.5 days), most (72%) of patients were still alive. Among those who had been discharged *AFTER 4 DAYS* 88% were dead. h
https://t.co/jjKieaHut8 "Mortality rates: -received mechanical ventilation in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age groups were 76.4% and 97.2%, respectively. -did not receive mechanical ventilation in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age groups were 1.98% and
@bob_bob2131 @Steve_Sailer "Overall, about 20% of the hospitalized COVID-19 patients died. Of hospitalized patients who were placed on ventilators, which force air into the lungs of patients who cannot breathe on their own, 88 percent died." - https://t.co
@Steve_Sailer "Mortality rates for those who received mechanical ventilation in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age groups were 76.4% and 97.2%, respectively." Whoops. https://t.co/8SMqtuhWuY
@JordanA8156 @beuchelt @fitness_linda Yes they did. 97.2% mortality rate for those put on mechanical ventilators vs 26.6% mortality rate for those not put on mechanical ventilators https://t.co/Q4OgmcpFe1
RT @michaelpsenger: @SoCalValleyGal Yep, different hospitals ended it at different times. The number placed on ventilators was clearly in t…
@rdmorris @TheEliKlein Yes. Iatrogenesis is very disturbing. No early treatment, vents, midazolam & the deviation from standard of care killed thousands. And the WHO, ECDC, The EU, UK & Scandinavia all agree with Martin. Perhaps consider graceful
人工呼吸器は命を救ったか? pandemic発生数週以内にコロナ患者に人工呼吸器装着は死刑宣告 NY市で人工呼吸器装着18〜65歳コロナ患者76.4%🙏 政府承認コロナ治療は死の罠 https://t.co/Ut5CJwLGQF 換気した65歳≦🙏率97.2% 論文 https://t.co/SxIfE9LoVb 65歳以上は非装着で 生存26倍≦⬆️
@JordanA8156 97.2% mortality rate among those over age 65 who were put on mechanical ventilators—as opposed to a 26.6% mortality rate among those over age 65 who weren’t put on mechanical ventilators https://t.co/Q4OgmcpFe1
@JordanA8156 @jelistrop @LauraPowellEsq "The findings of high mortality rates among ventilated patients are similar to smaller case series reports of critically ill patients in the US.*10" https://t.co/xW4KZ6EPbF
Nasıl dezenformasyon yapılır örneği 👇 Journal of the American Medical Association'da yayınlanan çalışma , 1 Mart ile 4 Nisan tarihleri arasında New York metropolündeki 12 Northwell Health hastanesine başvuran 5.700 koronavirüs hastasını takip etti. https:/
@Dod1977 @geby85 @AkkuDoktor @1234Fit Ach und wegen den 50%: "Mortality rates for those who received mechanical ventilation in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age groups were 76.4% and 97.2%, ..." https://t.co/GD97adGfXh
@WillThomson130 @Amy31129057 Me, May 2020
@TheDrJon @frankeff65 @lsdres Here is a citation dipshit. Now you go https://t.co/zObMaM0kjC
RT @bingsuzuki: @jinpeiishii ちなみに97%の根拠はこのJAMA論文でしょう。正確には「65才以上の装着者の致命率は97.2%だったが、非装着者は26.6%だった」です。 https://t.co/yoUuno7yXp
@jinpeiishii ちなみに97%の根拠はこのJAMA論文でしょう。正確には「65才以上の装着者の致命率は97.2%だったが、非装着者は26.6%だった」です。 https://t.co/yoUuno7yXp
@pmnordkvist We published our early data. It was scary. https://t.co/FNmzqtbJwr
@wpgcoder @19joho Are you saying the medical profession is lying about the dangers of ventilators? If so, then please back up your claim https://t.co/Q4OgmcpFe1
@wpgcoder @19joho Are you saying the medial profession is lying about the dangers of ventilators? Do you have data to backup your claim? https://t.co/Q4OgmcpFe1
@DrCureyourcough @RandyVegetables @NuovaRealta During the initial wave in NY hospital mortality was extremely high. This gives your an idea of what Covid looks like in unvaccinated population. Look at our data that we published. https://t.co/FNmzqtbJwr
@michaelpsenger #TheGreatCoronavirusFraudOf2020 #VentilatorMadness https://t.co/jbteCrYzcc "Mortality rates for those who received mechanical ventilation in *18-to-65* & older-than-65 age groups were *76.4%* & 97.2%, respectively." [!] The media
@WallStreetSilv Read our early data and decide if masks and lockdowns were potentially justified early in pandemic. https://t.co/FNmzqtbJwr
In fact, in the Northwell study they cite https://t.co/anwTBvv07B Most ventilated patients (589) were under 65 (vs 558). We saw a similar pattern in the UK and previously did for other viral pneumonias. https://t.co/wTbOSlA5qf
@Murphyjojo12 The stats I used were from NYC with an overall small sample size. There'd have to be upwards of at least ~11 million that were put on vents to account for 'millions' of lives potentially saved with such high fail rates. https://t.co/V57MYSV3
2020/4 NY市地域でコロナ入院5700人https://t.co/q2Xweog0bR 退院か🙏2634人:ICU14.2% 侵襲的人工呼吸12.2% 透析3.2%、🙏21% 人工呼吸器装着1151人中 🙏18~65歳:76.4% 65歳≦:97.2% 未人工呼吸器 🙏18~65歳:1.98% 65歳≦:26.6%
RT @boriquagato: sweden: https://t.co/hJf23A593L new york: https://t.co/Gz8dXJDZgy
RT @JoshWalkos: @GidMK https://t.co/r9S1O3olcJ A total of 1,151 patients required mechanical ventilators. Of the 320 for whom final outcom…
@mpc_xetts @peaches_e78 @OV_Matter @newscomauHQ You’re wrong puppy face https://t.co/VRqt2IfXOg https://t.co/Ldf4ABOevW
RT @JoshWalkos: @GidMK https://t.co/r9S1O3olcJ A total of 1,151 patients required mechanical ventilators. Of the 320 for whom final outcom…
RT @JoshWalkos: @GidMK https://t.co/r9S1O3olcJ A total of 1,151 patients required mechanical ventilators. Of the 320 for whom final outcom…
@GidMK https://t.co/r9S1O3olcJ A total of 1,151 patients required mechanical ventilators. Of the 320 for whom final outcomes are known (either death or discharge), 88 percent died.
Presenting Characteristics,Comorbidities,and Outcomes Among 5700 Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19 in the New York City Area https://t.co/54hBIOSP2f «Mortality rates for those who received mechanical ventilation in the 18-to-65 and older-than-65 age grou
@elonmusk @zerohedge https://t.co/FNmzqtbJwr. Read our data. One of the largest studies at the time. Overall mortality was 21%! Among the hospitalized. The study also provides the data by age groups.
@markstuartdavis @JacsUniverse @Justinsteer3 @senatorbabet This study - https://t.co/ALt93qoxeT 97.2% > 65yrs mortality rate for those mechanically vented. 76.4% 18-65yrs Not exactly a 'glowing' report on venting covid patients. Mortality rates for th
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
@AblemanAdam @KrauthBen Well, now we know why you didn't try to backup your stupid claims. Maybe read the actual study. Ventilators were not considered as a cause of death. https://t.co/mQ9rrU3a51
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
@michaelpsenger Is this the study? https://t.co/1adomWyIuV
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
@michaelbw1998 @jlazewatsky @AngryCardio @kiranpa88 How about a study? https://t.co/HxGaJhKw8G
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…
RT @michaelpsenger: @Craig_A_Spencer “They were going to die. Full. Stop.” That’s literally the opposite of what the peer-reviewed data sa…