Here is The Data to Prove ‘The Shots Don’t Work!’
In This Special Report
In a shock to no one, quadruple-injected Joe Biden tested positive for COVID…AGAIN.
Nationwide, there are just under 12 Million Confirmed Vaccine Breakthrough Cases where the shot failed to prevent infection. An increase of more than 10 Million failures in less than 7 months and with only a handful of states tracking this crucial data.
There are just over 276,000 Confirmed Vaccine Breakthrough Hospitalizations where the shot failed to keep people out of the hospital. The average cost per hospitalization? An average of $74,591 to $317,810 per person, according to FairHealth.org.
There are over 56,000 Confirmed Vaccine Breakthrough Deaths, proof the shots don’t save lives. How many of the supposed COVID deaths were vaccinated? If the CDC knows, they’re not telling.
The CDC stopped reporting all vaccine breakthrough data in October 2021, not coincidentally, just as vaccine breakthroughs began skyrocketing.
At the peak of state reporting in February 2022, there were only 26 states reporting vaccine breakthrough data. By June 2022, that number had dropped to 17 as nine states decided to terminate all breakthrough reporting despite the urgent need for this data.
While many states like Florida refuse to report any vaccine breakthrough data, some states like Colorado decided inexplicably to switch from reporting vaccine breakthroughs to reporting a made-up statistic never used before called vaccine efficacy, and other states like Texas and Massachusetts stopped reporting altogether.
Maryland & Utah are actually doing an excellent job of publishing vaccine breakthrough data and demonstrating clearly that the majority of cases and hospitalizations are in the ‘fully vaxxed’ compared to the ‘unvaxxed,’ proving the shots don’t work.
How’s your state doing? See the PDF below with individual state data and references.
THE SHOTS DON’T WORK!
https://www.americaoutloud.com/here-is-the-data-to-prove-the-shots-dont-work/
Who is in charge of your children? That has been a perennial question that has grown in importance over the last few years. When I was a child, it was understood that, with rare exceptions, parents were in charge of a child’s upbringing. This included medical, religious, and educational decisions. However, over the last few decades, the role of the parent in these decisions has been replaced by experts. What happens when the goal of the experts differs from those of the parents? Who decides the future of the rising generations? It was understood that the state acted in loco parentis, in place of the parents, only for the safety of the child. A recent case in U.S. District Court shows that be it health departments, child services, schools, or even the courts. Government not only believes they know better than the parents, they are more than willing to act in loco parentis tyrannis.
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8897
With the release of ChatGPT and other artificial intelligence (AI) applications, there has been a lot of speculation and downright assertions about our future. With over 30 years of experience in Information Technology (IT), not more than a passing understanding of AIs, I've come to the conclusion that much of what I've heard is more science fiction than fact. A recent court case decided in the D.C. District Court revolved around one very important question. Do AIs have rights?
In this third installment of the three-part series on the branches of government, we look at the role of the third and weakest branch. At least that is what our Founding Fathers thought of it. What is the role of the federal judiciary? What are the extent of their powers, how do they related to the other two branches of government, and why is a proper understanding of the role of the judiciary critical if the United States is to remain a constitutional republic?
https://constitutionstudy.com/?p=8575
We all have things we wish for. Maybe a car, a home, or a nice vacation. While those are generally safe wishes, we really should take some time to consider the second and third-order consequences of those wishes. Which leads to the axiom, “Be careful what you wish for, you may just get it.” - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
Recent actions by the Trump Department of Justice are a sharp turn from what we’ve seen over the past few years. Are these attempts to correct pervious errors, or are they just more political activism in federal law enforcement? - Live 4PM ET with Host Paul Engel @CyberEngel @OutLoudNews
LIVE http://rdo.to/TALKLOUD
iHEART RADIO http://bit.ly/2mBrCxE
When is discrimination not discrimination? While the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals would have you think that reverse discrimination is not only legal, but OK. However, discrimination is discrimination, even when it’s used in an attempt to right some past wrong.
https://constitutionstudy.com/2025/06/30/480-ames-v-ohio-department-of-youth-services/
