• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

“Fully vaccinated “

Wingman68

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Biden’s Bounty on Your Life: Hospitals’ Incentive Payments for CoVID-19
BY MEDICAL SOURCES · DECEMBER 19, 2021


…more than 800,000 deaths in America’s hospitals, in COVID-19 and other patients, have been caused by approaches restricting fluids, nutrition, antibiotics, effective antivirals, anti-inflammatories, and therapeutic doses of anti-coagulants…



By Elizabeth Lee Vliet, M.D. and Ali Shultz, J.D. from Truth For Health

Upon admission to a once-trusted hospital, American patients with COVID-19 become virtual prisoners, subjected to a rigid treatment protocol with roots in Ezekiel Emanuel’s “Complete Lives System” for rationing medical care in those over age 50. They have a shockingly high mortality rate. How and why is this happening, and what can be done about it?

medical-money-handcuffs.jpg

As exposed in audio recordings, hospital executives in Arizona admitted meeting several times a week to lower standards of care, with coordinated restrictions on visitation rights. Most COVID-19 patients’ families are deliberately kept in the dark about what is really being done to their loved ones.

The combination that enables this tragic and avoidable loss of hundreds of thousands of lives includes (1) The CARES Act, which provides hospitals with bonus incentive payments for all things related to COVID-19 (testing, diagnosing, admitting to hospital, use of remdesivir and ventilators, reporting COVID-19 deaths, and vaccinations) and (2) waivers of customary and long-standing patient rights by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS).

In 2020, the Texas Hospital Association submitted requests for waivers to CMS. According to Texas attorney Jerri Ward,

“CMS has granted ‘waivers’ of federal law regarding patient rights. Specifically, CMS purports to allow hospitals to violate the rights of patients or their surrogates with regard to medical record access, to have patient visitation, and to be free from seclusion.” She notes that “rights do not come from the hospital or CMS and cannot be waived, as that is the antithesis of a ‘right.’ The purported waivers are meant to isolate and gain total control over the patient and to deny patient and patient’s decision-maker the ability to exercise informed consent.”

Creating a “National Pandemic Emergency” provided justification for such sweeping actions that override individual physician medical decision-making and patients’ rights. The CARES Act provides incentives for hospitals to use treatments dictated solely by the federal government under the auspices of the NIH. These “bounties” must paid back if not “earned” by making the COVID-19 diagnosis and following the COVID-19 protocol.

The hospital payments include:

  • A “free” required PCR test in the Emergency Room or upon admission for every patient, with government-paid fee to hospital.
  • Added bonus payment for each positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
  • Another bonus for a COVID-19 admission to the hospital.
  • A 20 percent “boost” bonus payment from Medicare on the entire hospital bill for use of remdesivir instead of medicines such as Ivermectin.
  • Another and larger bonus payment to the hospital if a COVID-19 patient is mechanically ventilated.
  • More money to the hospital if cause of death is listed as COVID-19, even if patient did not die directly of COVID-19.
  • A COVID-19 diagnosis also provides extra payments to coroners.
CMS implemented “value-based” payment programs that track data such as how many workers at a healthcare facility receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Now we see why many hospitals implemented COVID-19 vaccine mandates. They are paid more.

Outside hospitals, physician MIPS quality metrics link doctors’ income to performance-based pay for treating patients with COVID-19 EUA drugs. Failure to report information to CMS can cost the physician 4% of reimbursement.

Because of obfuscation with medical coding and legal jargon, we cannot be certain of the actual amount each hospital receives per COVID-19 patient. But Attorney Thomas Renz and CMS whistleblowers have calculated a total payment of at least $100,000 per patient.

What does this mean for your health and safety as a patient in the hospital?

There are deaths from the government-directed COVID treatments. For remdesivir, studies show that 71–75 percent of patients suffer an adverse effect, and the drug often had to be stopped after five to ten days because of these effects, such as kidney and liver damage, and death. Remdesivir trials during the 2018 West African Ebola outbreak had to be discontinued because death rate exceeded 50%. Yet, in 2020, Anthony Fauci directed that remdesivir was to be the drug hospitals use to treat COVID-19, even when the COVID clinical trials of remdesivir showed similar adverse effects.

In ventilated patients, the death toll is staggering. A National Library of Medicine January 2021 report of 69 studies involving more than 57,000 patients concluded that fatality rates were 45 percent in COVID-19 patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation, increasing to 84 percent in older patients. Renz announced at a Truth for Health Foundation Press Conference that CMS data showed that in Texas hospitals, 84.9% percent of all patients died after more than 96 hours on a ventilator.

Then there are deaths from restrictions on effective treatments for hospitalized patients. Renz and a team of data analysts have estimated that more than 800,000 deaths in America’s hospitals, in COVID-19 and other patients, have been caused by approaches restricting fluids, nutrition, antibiotics, effective antivirals, anti-inflammatories, and therapeutic doses of anti-coagulants.

We now see government-dictated medical care at its worst in our history since the federal government mandated these ineffective and dangerous treatments for COVID-19, and then created financial incentives for hospitals and doctors to use only those “approved” (and paid for) approaches.

Our formerly trusted medical community of hospitals and hospital-employed medical staff have effectively become “bounty hunters” for your life. Patients need to now take unprecedented steps to avoid going into the hospital for COVID-19.

Patients need to take active steps to plan before getting sick to use early home-based treatmentof COVID-19 that can help you save your life.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
“We need to find out what the durability of protection of the third shot is before we start thinking about the fourth shot,” Fauci also said.”

Fauci: Government Using Terminology 'Keeping Your Vaccinations up to Date'

Ya know. If we’d done industry standard R/D … we d know this when the shots were released to the public.
I question your forthcoming on this issue. You do know there are two ways to be "fully vaccinated", right?

Take the shots (to include upcoming boosters) or purchase a vaccine offset from the DNC. :Coffee
 

Two Wings

Well-Known Member
I question your forthcoming on this issue. You do know there are two ways to be "fully vaccinated", right?

Take the shots (to include upcoming boosters) or purchase a vaccine offset from the DNC. :Coffee

LOL.

Well, for better or for worse, Fauci has been the front man for this entire deal ... and it turns out actually an integral part in bringing us SARSCovi2 virus ... so when do those criminal proceedings begin?

I'm not sufficiently sophisticated to be that complicated. I know this cv vax went zero-60 faster than a '23 Z06 when the industry standard for a new vax is 10 years ... plus/minus .... but not minus 9.25 years. If they'd taken just two years ... Fauci et al would have known before the rollout the number of jabs needed and whether/how many follow-up shots (boosters).

Given what the Israelis just published ... seems like 3 is it ... all sciency/all.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
LOL.

Well, for better or for worse, Fauci has been the front man for this entire deal ... and it turns out actually an integral part in bringing us SARSCovi2 virus ... so when do those criminal proceedings begin?

I'm not sufficiently sophisticated to be that complicated. I know this cv vax went zero-60 faster than a '23 Z06 when the industry standard for a new vax is 10 years ... plus/minus .... but not minus 9.25 years. If they'd taken just two years ... Fauci et al would have known before the rollout the number of jabs needed and whether/how many follow-up shots (boosters).

Given what the Israelis just published ... seems like 3 is it ... all sciency/all.
I disagree with the industry standard part. If it is the standard then the scientists need to do much better.

I'm not talking about the covid vaccine but in general.

If there is a public danger due to a virus and our medical experts require 10 years (plus or minus) to get us a vaccine then they should start developing new methods to get vaccines out quicker. In every other science the present builds on the past - even with new problems.

10 years is simply an unacceptable standard when addressing a crisis (again, speaking in general).
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
Be honest. You still would look for an escape clause to not be vaccinated. This whole thing is about you demanding independent control with no one telling you what to do.
At some point, you and others need to admit that your revolt is entirely coming from your own pride and unwillingness to submit to God ordained authority.
The God Ordained authority in the United States, Congress, has not demanded we get vaccinations.
 

Two Wings

Well-Known Member
I disagree with the industry standard part. If it is the standard then the scientists need to do much better.

I'm not talking about the covid vaccine but in general.

If there is a public danger due to a virus and our medical experts require 10 years (plus or minus) to get us a vaccine then they should start developing new methods to get vaccines out quicker. In every other science the present builds on the past - even with new problems.

10 years is simply an unacceptable standard when addressing a crisis (again, speaking in general).

the conditions for requiring the vaccine are irrelevant if safe is the first requirement. 10 years is the standard to bring a new type of vaccine to market/use. I've no doubt some of that is bureaucratic red tape ... but the other end of that is what we were presented in this cv jab. 9 months from start to finish ... noting there has been previous work in mRNA vaxes --- for animals and it didn't go well.

Then you have one of the policy makers saying we need to wait and see if we need a 4th jab ... when there was no expectation of a 3rd jab in December '20. A proper human trial period would have answered that question and we would have this dubious definition of "fully vaccinated" changing with the whims of the power brokers.

We will all understand at some point ... the grossly abbreviated human trial period was wrong. Like Lockheed and Douglass racing to get the first wide-body tri-jet to market. The first one wasn't good. It needed a LOT of modification. The difference in this analogy, is the product is a machine which CAN be modified. the subject is an injection which is done when it's injected. for better or worse.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
the conditions for requiring the vaccine are irrelevant if safe is the first requirement. 10 years is the standard to bring a new type of vaccine to market/use. I've no doubt some of that is bureaucratic red tape ... but the other end of that is what we were presented in this cv jab. 9 months from start to finish ... noting there has been previous work in mRNA vaxes --- for animals and it didn't go well.

Then you have one of the policy makers saying we need to wait and see if we need a 4th jab ... when there was no expectation of a 3rd jab in December '20. A proper human trial period would have answered that question and we would have this dubious definition of "fully vaccinated" changing with the whims of the power brokers.

We will all understand at some point ... the grossly abbreviated human trial period was wrong. Like Lockheed and Douglass racing to get the first wide-body tri-jet to market. The first one wasn't good. It needed a LOT of modification. The difference in this analogy, is the product is a machine which CAN be modified. the subject is an injection which is done when it's injected. for better or worse.
When you say "new type" I take it you mean the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines (as opposed to the Jansen vaccine).

Historically, how many new types have we had? (I have no clue).

Or do you mean the target virus?
 

Two Wings

Well-Known Member
When you say "new type" I take it you mean the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines (as opposed to the Jansen vaccine).

Historically, how many new types have we had? (I have no clue).

Or do you mean the target virus?
No sir ... new type. as in attenuated live virus, modified live virus, killed virus, protein segment, or DNA segment. Not necessarily a current type with a different pathogen against which to gain immunity.

Jansen's is a type of mRNA too ... IDK where that originated ... that shot still unwinds the ribosomes but it does it with a different chemical process. Still end-up self-generating the S Spike protein.

The good news is ... if the community is doing what it should be, it will make alterations in this mRNA tech to reduce the adverse effects ... and be ready to deploy a different mRNA vaccine. But right now, it's been based upon fallacy and the only reason we don't have most people succumbing is because the 5% of the lot numbers are the "bad juju" ... but no one I know can predict which ones are adverse and which ones are basically saline.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
No sir ... new type. as in attenuated live virus, modified live virus, killed virus, protein segment, or DNA segment. Not necessarily a current type with a different pathogen against which to gain immunity.

Jansen's is a type of mRNA too ... IDK where that originated ... that shot still unwinds the ribosomes but it does it with a different chemical process. Still end-up self-generating the S Spike protein.

The good news is ... if the community is doing what it should be, it will make alterations in this mRNA tech to reduce the adverse effects ... and be ready to deploy a different mRNA vaccine. But right now, it's been based upon fallacy and the only reason we don't have most people succumbing is because the 5% of the lot numbers are the "bad juju" ... but no one I know can predict which ones are adverse and which ones are basically saline.
Looks like "the Johnson & Johnson vaccine uses the more traditional virus-based technology" as it does not use mRNA. But either way is fine.....I don't want to hijack my own question.

What are the past "new types" of vaccines (I'm trying to compaire a timeline)?
 

Two Wings

Well-Known Member
Looks like "the Johnson & Johnson vaccine uses the more traditional virus-based technology" as it does not use mRNA. But either way is fine.....I don't want to hijack my own question.

What are the past "new types" of vaccines (I'm trying to compaire a timeline)?
all of those I listed at some point was a new type of vaccine.

here, I'll reload my paper which gives a broad overview of these vaccine TYPES. Despite researching for this paper, I do not have the specific knowledge of WHICH did what ... all I know is what is available to anyone else ... it typically takes the better part of 10 years to produce a new vaccine type ...

except when we gotta have it for a made for broadway play, then we can git r done in 9 months with a no nonsense guy like Donald Trump in the whitehouse.

For the paper ... here are my alibis ... it was completed the day the cv jabs went public 14 Dec 20 IIRC. There were questions about the cv jab which have been addressed, but perhaps yet answered (like Fauci's recent comment about a 4th jab). The biggest objection I've had to these things is in the inability to predict with any certainty which of 3 responses my immune system will make to a legitimate (dosed) mRNA cv vax; too much, too little, or just right, Goldilocks.
 

Attachments

  • Vaccines and your immune system - COVID.pdf
    78.9 KB · Views: 0

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
all of those I listed at some point was a new type of vaccine.

here, I'll reload my paper which gives a broad overview of these vaccine TYPES. Despite researching for this paper, I do not have the specific knowledge of WHICH did what ... all I know is what is available to anyone else ... it typically takes the better part of 10 years to produce a new vaccine type ...

except when we gotta have it for a made for broadway play, then we can git r done in 9 months with a no nonsense guy like Donald Trump in the whitehouse.

For the paper ... here are my alibis ... it was completed the day the cv jabs went public 14 Dec 20 IIRC. There were questions about the cv jab which have been addressed, but perhaps yet answered (like Fauci's recent comment about a 4th jab). The biggest objection I've had to these things is in the inability to predict with any certainty which of 3 responses my immune system will make to a legitimate (dosed) mRNA cv vax; too much, too little, or just right, Goldilocks.
Thanks.
 

Bible Thumpin n Gun Totin

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
It seems you are still looking for an excuse to justify your rebellion.
Clearly Luther and Calvin were doing nothing more than making excuses.

I can only imagine what it must feel like to have a mind capable of theological thought greater than Luther and Calvin combined.
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
The God Ordained authority in the United States, Congress, has not demanded we get vaccinations.

All persons in authority over you are God ordained.

If the government mandated vaccines, then Christians should be the first persons in line to get the vaccine. This is a no brainer...unless individual Christians get to pick and choose what verses in the Bible they will reject and disobey. If that's the case, then let the god of individualism be the idol which is worshipped.
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
Clearly Luther and Calvin were doing nothing more than making excuses.

I can only imagine what it must feel like to have a mind capable of theological thought greater than Luther and Calvin combined.
Indeed, you can only imagine.

Funny how you idolize a couple of dead men in your post.

I'd prefer we address scripture. Shall we?
 

Reformed1689

Well-Known Member
All persons in authority over you are God ordained.

If the government mandated vaccines, then Christians should be the first persons in line to get the vaccine. This is a no brainer...unless individual Christians get to pick and choose what verses in the Bible they will reject and disobey. If that's the case, then let the god of individualism be the idol which is worshipped.
Right, if it was a passed law by our process, yes. A component of government exercising authority they do not have need not be heeded by anyone much less Christians.
 

AustinC

Well-Known Member
Right, if it was a passed law by our process, yes. A component of government exercising authority they do not have need not be heeded by anyone much less Christians.
You are looking for a loophole to justify rebellion. Such is the idol of individualism.
 

RipponRedeaux

Well-Known Member
All persons in authority over you are God ordained.

If the government mandated vaccines, then Christians should be the first persons in line to get the vaccine. This is a no brainer...unless individual Christians get to pick and choose what verses in the Bible they will reject and disobey. If that's the case, then let the god of individualism be the idol which is worshipped.
So if the government forced millions of Americans to be gassed to death, that's okay with you? You're okay with a Nazi regime where people are rounded up and killed?
 

Two Wings

Well-Known Member
So if the government forced millions of Americans to be gassed to death, that's okay with you? You're okay with a Nazi regime where people are rounded up and killed?
Yes apparently AustinC does his own picking/choosing of scripture.

vv3-4 of Romans 13 explicitly places the qualification of God's appointed to ... DO GOOD in order to receive the praise/submission.

rulers are a terror to EVIL ... not Good. But when good is 'terrorized,' clearly they are no longer rulers in the Romans 13 frame but despots.

This is the same idea as holding one of the 3 church offices and then failing to promote Christ as The Head of the Church. Greater woe for that officer's actions due to the result of leading people away from Christ. Higher standard/expectation for those in authority.
 
Top