Post Covid “vaccine” deaths here

[Nemo]

22 Elderly with Dementia Dead in 1 Week After the Experimental mRNA COVID Injection in the Netherlands

RTV Utrecht in the Netherlands reported yesterday that 22 residents have died within the span of 1 week at St Elisabeth Nursing and Guest House in Amersfoort, following injections on January 30th of one of the mRNA experimental COVID "vaccines." Hopes were high for the vaccine at the St...

healthimpactnews.com

Ironic that they all died of Covid after getting the shot.

 

[Aad]

Nattokinase is amazing at dissolving blood clots. I know because there was a period when my mother was having constant strokes and the doctors didn't realize her heart was spinning them out.

If someone gets a symptom like this of a blood clot, that's the thing I'd give them on the way to the ER.

Let's study if there any vaccine-related bloodclot issues in Japan.

 

[Inaut]

This is really the saddest thread on the RPF... These people have good intentions deep down but that's where the devil gets hold... RIP all of humanity that has been lost so far.... The earth needs more prayers, for who has passed and who ever will be left... Sadly this is just the beginning. The clock keeps ticking..

 

[Nemo]

Let's study if there any vaccine-related bloodclot issues in Japan.

Nattokinase reportedly has a half-life of 4-6 hours. It has caused cerebral hemorrhage in people who've taken too much of it (I'd have to look up how much that was).

For a while I tried to give my mother nattokinase every six hours. (I can't remember the dose, but it was below the cerebral hemorrhage level.) I would even wake her up in the middle of the night to give her a pill.

That didn't seem to be enough to completely prevent clots. For example, I'd still see symptoms first thing in the morning. But if I gave her a pill when she seemed to have a clot, it seemed to dissolve it.

We had this thing going on where she would suddenly lose her short-term memory. For example, my stepfather was in the hospital. She would ask where my stepfather was. I would tell her the hospital. Two minutes later, she would ask where my stepfather was.

But if I gave her a pill, she would remember where my stepfather was. Then we'd arrive at the ER and they wouldn't see symptoms of stroke. This happened over and over.

Later, she was in the hospital for something else and I couldn't give her the nattokinase because they had her on so many other things. That's when she started having a series of major strokes. They eventually gave her something for her irregular heartbeat but before they did one of the strokes made her unable to move, unable to swallow, unable to sit, unable to speak.

So I don't know about prevention, whether you could take enough for long enough. But it seems very powerful and fast if you actually have a clot.

 

[LucyL]

View: https://twitter.com/callthecorners/status/1387370027075215363

 

[Giraffe]

Alber Elbaz, top Israeli fashion icon and ex-Lanvin director, dies of COVID | The Times of Israel

France-based designer, 59, said to succumb to South African strain of coronavirus after being fully vaccinated

 

[meatbag]

No, Woke isn't classical orthodox Marxism, because it concerns itself much more with culture than with economics. Orthodox Marxism is about economics, not so much culture. Being two sides of the same coin, one would think that the two would be on good terms, but historically orthodox Marxists have despised the wokesters because they viewed them as degenerate, promoting a hedonistic culture of social decay.

Woke is properly known as Cultural Marxism or Frankfurt School Marxism: it's all about race (whites bad, non-white good), gender (men bad, women good) and sex (homosexuals good, heteros are oppressors, personal pronouns, and anyone can be a man or woman, depending on how they feel that day). Its stated goal is to dissolve traditional culture by attacking its most core, basic principles and its historical leaders.

Wokists don't read Das Kapital. They read texts like Rules for Radicals and White Fragility. The founding father of that branch of political ideology is moreso Antonio Gramsci than Karl Marx.

To answer your second question, I can give examples of what the Right stands for, although it varies a bit over time and from country to country. In its broadest sense however, it means conservatism - respect for practices and traditions that have been proven by time, which furthermore implies an emphasis for meritocracy and objectivity. The term was originally associated with conservatives who supported the established order and favored small, incremental, organic changes to society over drastic radical changes during the French Revolution. I think this is still the best way to think of it. The Left, in contrast, and especially the wokesters, are all about bringing about big social changes in the pursuit of a theoretical equality amongst all individuals and social classes, which in turn to at least some degree requires a rejection of historically observed reality and adoption of subjectivity. This worldview presupposes that one views the world as being divided into oppressors and victims, and only enlightened intervention can fix it. Indeed, the modern Left is really big into relativism and critical theory. The coining of the term "political correctness" allegedly came out of a statement made by Trotsky to the effect that the Communist Party didn't care whether a proposal or policy was right or wrong in any objective sense, they only cared if it was in line with ("correct" with) their political ideology, hence the only relevant question to ask was: But is it politically correct?

One example: in 1920-1940s Europe (and up to about 1980 in Spain), the fascist Right heavily promoted traditional family structure and child bearing, while punishing sexual deviancy such as homosexuality and also outlawing abortion. The Leftists around the same time were doing the opposite - attempting to replace biological parents with the State as the parent, liberalizing deviant sexual behavior and sexualization of children (e.g. Gyorgy Lukacs in the short-lived Soviet Repulic of Hungary), while encouraging women into career professions over raising families. The dominant theme through all this on the Right was doing the things that they perceived to be time-tested to produce social order and growth, with a "survival of the fittest" subtheme emerging out of this.

Another specific example from a different era: in the modern United States, the Right essentially stands for Constitutionalism, meaning a faithful interpretation of the original Constitution, as well as support for cultural and economic practices that the US has been grounded on since inception, such as free markets and property rights. Again, the theme running through this way of thinking is doing things by the ways that have generally worked well for the nation over time, with a strong subtheme of meritocracy as a logical conclusion.

The Right is more of a Darwinian worldview that generally splits the world into winners and losers. The Left is a worldview that splits the world into oppressors and victims.

*I noted that your second question possibly isn't sincere (can be hard to read tone/intent through text sometimes), and most probably you're trying to goad me into an argument, what with asking questions that are phrased as if you already have the answers in mind, and the sarcastic-sounding "links are cool" comment - but I answered you in a straightforward manner anyway. I'm not posting any links. Everything I've written that's factual is easily searchable online, the rest is my interpretation and commentary.

Thanks for your explanation. No I was curious about your view because the Left-Right classification seems to be used in a lot of different ways.
Also I am/was curious about what exactly being 'woke' is about.
I just wanted to let you know that I was fine with you providing links that might describe your position.

So it seems there is a distinctive Left-Right spectrum in economic terms, but now there is also a Left-Right spectrum in cultural terms.
I'll look into the different sources you've discussed

So you would agree that the "Right" or what you could classify as "conservative" in terms of the cultural Left-Right political spectrum would endorse the theories of Konrad Lorenz and Neo-Darwinism, or what could be called 'Eugenics'?;

"

Konrad Lorenz (who with Niko Tinbergen got the Nobel Prize in 1973) believed that specific innate structures explained animal communication, and that natural selection had created those structures. Chomsky, who said that our genes create an innate “Language Acquisition Device,” distanced himself slightly from Lorenz's view by saying that it wasn't certain that natural selection was responsible for it. However, despite slightly different names for the hypothetical innate “devices,” their views were extremely similar.

Both Lorenz and Chomsky, and their doctrine of innate rule-based consciousness, have been popular and influential among university professors. When Lorenz wrote a book on degeneration, which was little more than a revised version of the articles he had written for the Nazi party's Office for Race Policy in the late 1930s and early 1940s, advocating the extermination of racial “mongrels” such as jews and gypsies, most biologists in the US praised it. Lorenz identified National Socialism with evolution as an agent of racial purification. His lifelong beliefs and activities--the loyalty to a strong leader, advocating the killing of the weak--identified Lorenz as an extreme authoritarian.

When a famous professor went on a lecture tour popularizing and affirming the scientific truth and importance of those publications, and asserting that all human actions and knowledge, language, work, art, and belief, are specified and determined by genes, he and his audience (which, at the University of Oregon, included members of the National Academy of Sciences and Jewish professors who had been refugees from Nazism, who listened approvingly) were outraged when a student mentioned the Nazi origin and intention of the original publications.

They said “you can't say that a man's work has anything to do with his life and political beliefs,” but in fact the lecturer had just finished saying that everything a person does is integral to that person's deepest nature, just as Lorenz said that a goose with a pot belly and odd beak, or a person with non-nordic physical features and behavior and cultural preferences--should be eliminated for the improvement of the species. Not a single professor in the audience questioned the science that had justified Hitler's racial policies, and some of them showed great hostility toward the critic."
-Academic authoritarians, language, metaphor, animals, and science

"​

The whole idea of "evolution" is that the past is preserved within the present, or that the present is built upon the accomplishments of the past. The idea that evolution has been "random," and that the world is simply self-regulating, might seem liberating to those who hate the idea that they might be intrinsically responsible for anything outside of themselves, but it is liberating only in the way that a vandal's manifesto might be, declaring the world to be their playground.

The problem with such a manifesto of irresponsibility is simply that it is built upon the same system of cultural assumptions that produced Nazi eugenics, and that those assumptions are false. The political assumptions of the people who controlled scientific institutions were built into a set of pseudo-scientific doctrines, which continue to be valued for their political and philosophical implications."
-Genes, Carbon Dioxide and Adaptation.

 

[Richiebogie]

Hi @meatbag

Nazis were national socialists. They tried to join some leftwing ideas of social Darwinism, eugenics, authoritarianism, big government and atheism, with rightwing ideas of national pride and a work ethic.

I see true rightwing as conservative Christianity, honouring individual freedom (small government, free enterprise) with respect for the life of the unborn, elderly and the disabled.

Climate change and pandemics are fake science used to push a globalist leftist agenda. Idolising academia is also leftist.

In the great reset / new world order Klaus Schwab tells us you won’t own anything but you will be happy.

Everyone will be equal, the masses will have no rights but they will be governed by unelected elites.

It is a satanic system.

 

[triple]

quote-
[So you would agree that the "Right" or what you could classify as "conservative" in terms of the cultural Left-Right political spectrum would endorse the theories of Konrad Lorenz and Neo-Darwinism, or what could be called 'Eugenics'?]



Left wing cultural marxist policies are what is behind this whole depopulation/vaxx/covid scenario:

-Big Gov, loved by the left-no end to their control or over reach and the Left loves it-no complaints from lefty press

-no free speech [because racism or fill in the blank]-no complaints from lefty press.

-endless empathy -"if it saves one person it's good" -causing endless deaths as a result of this over reaction and lack of looking at the macro view-not looked into by lefty press

-shifting rules/guidelines that contradict-cognitive dissonance on a mass scale as used by the Soviets to demoralize their victims.

-left leaning people are getting vaxxed and are scorning anti vax blacks and white christians for not doing so.
Hoping they are not being used as "useful idiots" as in Soviet days.

-ultimate goal of a technocratic surveillance state as seen in communist china [with a possible depopulation ala' Georgia guidestones to a more manageable level for their robots and AI systems] communist china being based on marxism in word but in practise essentially a fascist totalitarian state.

-cultural marxist beliefs do not allow for religiousness mainly because they need their subjects to be in a state of constant fear to control them, using fear based programming. Fear of death being one of their prime tools and religious people do not fear death. The Soviets purged religious people with a vengeance not seen again until today in America. Check out the panic in left leaning people.

-cultural marxism is atheistic or agnostic at best which may account for the ease at which communists have killed their 200 million victims. Not a lot of guilt or acknowledgement on the left on anyone from castro to marx himself were sick demented humans. Zero shame,guilt or remorse. Think about it, there are communist parties in the west operating today, how exactly are they any different than the Nazi party, well, the Nazis caused less deaths but otherwise where is the self reflection? You think they would at least change the name to the Equity Party or the Free Stuff Party.

The WEF/Klaus Schwab seems to be selling repacked marxist goods with his"you will own nothing and be happy"mantra by dropping leftist happy words into his sales package such as "equity"or "climate change".

While extolling his plan he fails to mention one thing: who is going to own all the stuff and run the show?

Answer would be him and his billionaire elite buddies repackaged as leftist, save the world types.Pretty much how the CCP run China and hence China's involvement in the plan.

Just hand over all of your rights and everything you have worked for and we will manage that for you thank you very much.
Don't want to hand all of that over?
Well there is a flu that will solve that problem for them.
No wonder they were large scale bunker building since the early 2000's, now i get why.

Good news is some very thoughtful people i follow have been pointing out the WEF will fail.
They think they have over played their hand.
The people on this forum are not the only ones smelling a rat.
If mass harm becomes apparent from this vaxx soon there will be hell to pay from the public possibly by this fall.

 

[charlie]

Orange County woman's death after 2nd dose of Moderna vaccine spurs concern from family

The Orange County Coroner's office is investigating the death of a woman who died just days after she received her second dose of the Moderna vaccine.

abc7.com

 

[Peatness]

2 YEAR OLD GIRL DIES AFTER BEING GIVEN TWO COVID SHOTS! (brandnewtube.com)

 

[Lollipop2]

2 YEAR OLD GIRL DIES AFTER BEING GIVEN TWO COVID SHOTS! (brandnewtube.com)

I do not curse but wtf?!?! What sickness in our society.

 

[PxD]

Also I am/was curious about what exactly being 'woke' is about.

"Woke" is from American black ghetto-urban slang/ebonics. Grammatically correctly it should be "awoken", as in, "I have awoken to all the injustice in the world." Being "woke" implies being enlightened. It also implies the current social order is all wrong and needs to be overturned.

So it seems there is a distinctive Left-Right spectrum in economic terms, but now there is also a Left-Right spectrum in cultural terms.

It's been in the West since the 1930s, when the original Frankfurt School Marxists (almost all of them Jews) fled Germany after Hitler came to power and settled at Columbia University. It spread further around the US from there, but mostly it was cloistered away in universities. Elements of it have been seeping out occasionally into mainstream culture since the 1960s, and sometimes they've stuck and sometimes they are pushed back against. About 10 years ago or so, coinciding with Obama's re-election, is when it came out into the mainstream it's gone into full-tilt hardcore overdrive since 5-6 years ago and captured most institutions of government, media, and big business. They are currently attempting to mainstream it as the official operating system for Western society, especially in the USA, Canada, UK, and Nordic countries.

So you would agree that the "Right" or what you could classify as "conservative" in terms of the cultural Left-Right political spectrum would endorse the theories of Konrad Lorenz and Neo-Darwinism, or what could be called 'Eugenics'?;

Yes, but with an important caveat, which is that the kind of eugenics espoused by the Nazis would be on the extreme right end of the spectrum and doesn't represent the Right as a whole. You can believe in a quest for excellence and survival of the fittest without becoming a bad guy. You don't have to go so far as to believe that underperformers have to be literally killed in order to achieve a better world. Nazi eugenics doesn't speak for the Right, even though the Left loves to smear the Right that way.

Likewise, the Left as a whole stands for equality but in its extreme incarnation it believes that all humans are exactly the same, and differences in outcomes are only due to oppression of some groups, so we can achieve equality by exterminating the oppressors. This is how Communists operate - you can't make everyone equally wealthy, but you sure can make everyone equally poor by confiscating wealth/killing the wealthy. This means that the Left, in its virulent forms, practices the polar opposite of the Right: dysgenics. It promotes the worse at the expense of the better, so as to make everyone the same. You can see the cultural version (race/sex/gender) of this operating all throughout Western societies today; this assumption of the equality of everyone has become extreme and we're now at the point where even biological differences between men and women are being denied (trans men in women's sports), and all kinds of sexual deviancy is being normalized under the aegis of equality and tolerance. Differences in productivity and culture between ethnic groups/races are simultaneously either completely ignored (multiculturalism) or, when needed, ascribed to "oppression", where emphasizing such differences cynically serves to bolster the far Left's political power/voting blocs (critical race theory, BLM).

This Left/Right dichotomy is the political yin and yang of the world, the push and the pull.

The world we live in today is overrun by the Left/yin side of the spectrum. There are plenty of radical-Left politicians in business all over the world, but Nazism is banned outright almost everywhere.

Most people implicitly believe that this is because radical Left, and the Left as a whole, has proven itself to be morally superior to the Right and especially the far Right. Looked at objectively though, the far Right's body count is much smaller than what the far Left has managed to pile up over the past century or so, not to mention the sheer amount of human misery and repression caused through the far Left's economic policies, where the far Right tended to perform better.

The real reasons why far Left is running rampant and conquering the common culture today is simply because 1) it had a several decade head start on the far Right, and, more importantly, 2) it won WW2. The importance of (2) cannot by overstated. Winning or losing debates in a university forum is one thing, but losing on a battlefield and getting a bullet to the head is another. It's final. Germany couldn't win the war and as a consequence the far Right lost its power base and went out of business, while the far Left stayed in business and continued to use the treasure and manpower of its hosts in Russia, China, etc. to spread itself all around the world.

"The whole idea of "evolution" is that the past is preserved within the present, or that the present is built upon the accomplishments of the past. The idea that evolution has been "random," and that the world is simply self-regulating, might seem liberating to those who hate the idea that they might be intrinsically responsible for anything outside of themselves, but it is liberating only in the way that a vandal's manifesto might be, declaring the world to be their playground.​

The problem with such a manifesto of irresponsibility is simply that it is built upon the same system of cultural assumptions that produced Nazi eugenics, and that those assumptions are false. The political assumptions of the people who controlled scientific institutions were built into a set of pseudo-scientific doctrines, which continue to be valued for their political and philosophical implications."

I'm not a fan of Peat's views of evolution, genes, etc. because he doesn't really present a credible alternative theory. He just criticizes the existing one, accuses it of being founded in political bias, while evidently his criticism of it is grounded in his own political biases. This is very, very ironic. I guess he's never heard of Trofim Lysenko. He also doesn't seem to recognize that maybe both nature (genes) AND nurture (environment) play roles. (again, that whole yin and yang thing). Peat seems to be 100% yin on this topic. Everything I've read of his seems to go in the direction that environment is all that matters. This goes against a mountain of empirical observations in every human culture dating back millenia.

 

[mayku-T-meelo]

You're passionate. That will see you through a lot.

"Woke" is from American black ghetto-urban slang/ebonics. Grammatically correctly it should be "awoken", as in, "I have awoken to all the injustice in the world." Being "woke" implies being enlightened. It also implies the current social order is all wrong and needs to be overturned.

It's been in the West since the 1930s, when the original Frankfurt School Marxists (almost all of them Jews) fled Germany after Hitler came to power and settled at Columbia University. It spread further around the US from there, but mostly it was cloistered away in universities. Elements of it have been seeping out occasionally into mainstream culture since the 1960s, and sometimes they've stuck and sometimes they are pushed back against. About 10 years ago or so, coinciding with Obama's re-election, is when it came out into the mainstream it's gone into full-tilt hardcore overdrive since 5-6 years ago and captured most institutions of government, media, and big business. They are currently attempting to mainstream it as the official operating system for Western society, especially in the USA, Canada, UK, and Nordic countries.

Yes, but with an important caveat, which is that the kind of eugenics espoused by the Nazis would be on the extreme right end of the spectrum and doesn't represent the Right as a whole. You can believe in a quest for excellence and survival of the fittest without becoming a bad guy. You don't have to go so far as to believe that underperformers have to be literally killed in order to achieve a better world. Nazi eugenics doesn't speak for the Right, even though the Left loves to smear the Right that way.

Likewise, the Left as a whole stands for equality but in its extreme incarnation it believes that all humans are exactly the same, and differences in outcomes are only due to oppression of some groups, so we can achieve equality by exterminating the oppressors. This is how Communists operate - you can't make everyone equally wealthy, but you sure can make everyone equally poor by confiscating wealth/killing the wealthy. This means that the Left, in its virulent forms, practices the polar opposite of the Right: dysgenics. It promotes the worse at the expense of the better, so as to make everyone the same. You can see the cultural version (race/sex/gender) of this operating all throughout Western societies today; this assumption of the equality of everyone has become extreme and we're now at the point where even biological differences between men and women are being denied (trans men in women's sports), and all kinds of sexual deviancy is being normalized under the aegis of equality and tolerance. Differences in productivity and culture between ethnic groups/races are simultaneously either completely ignored (multiculturalism) or, when needed, ascribed to "oppression", where emphasizing such differences cynically serves to bolster the far Left's political power/voting blocs (critical race theory, BLM).

This Left/Right dichotomy is the political yin and yang of the world, the push and the pull.

The world we live in today is overrun by the Left/yin side of the spectrum. There are plenty of radical-Left politicians in business all over the world, but Nazism is banned outright almost everywhere.

Most people implicitly believe that this is because radical Left, and the Left as a whole, has proven itself to be morally superior to the Right and especially the far Right. Looked at objectively though, the far Right's body count is much smaller than what the far Left has managed to pile up over the past century or so, not to mention the sheer amount of human misery and repression caused through the far Left's economic policies, where the far Right tended to perform better.

The real reasons why far Left is running rampant and conquering the common culture today is simply because 1) it had a several decade head start on the far Right, and, more importantly, 2) it won WW2. The importance of (2) cannot by overstated. Winning or losing debates in a university forum is one thing, but losing on a battlefield and getting a bullet to the head is another. It's final. Germany couldn't win the war and as a consequence the far Right lost its power base and went out of business, while the far Left stayed in business and continued to use the treasure and manpower of its hosts in Russia, China, etc. to spread itself all around the world.


I'm not a fan of Peat's views of evolution, genes, etc. because he doesn't really present a credible alternative theory. He just criticizes the existing one, accuses it of being founded in political bias, while evidently his criticism of it is grounded in his own political biases. This is very, very ironic. I guess he's never heard of Trofim Lysenko. He also doesn't seem to recognize that maybe both nature (genes) AND nurture (environment) play roles. (again, that whole yin and yang thing). Peat seems to be 100% yin on this topic. Everything I've read of his seems to go in the direction that environment is all that matters. This goes against a mountain of empirical observations in every human culture dating back millenia.

Lol, of course he's heard of him, he went to Russia to meet him, but hadn't had luck.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D137XyIymso&t=4881s


The whole point is that focusing on the environment is the actual liberating thing and it's the only chance to escape the determinism. I think he has a clear stance, namely that the genes come in only after there are factors and conditions that enable their formation.

He usually refers to the evidence coming from experiments that were conducted in Miller's lab and later by Sidney Fox.

Sidney W. Fox - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Giraffe]

Defensa vincula la muerte de un militar en Navarra con la administración de la vacuna de AstraZeneca | El Correo

Spanish minister of defense confirms that the death of a soldier in Navarra was caused by the AstraZeneca shot.

 

[Nemo]

35-year-old Anne VanGeest of Ionia County, Michigan got the J&J shot and died 11 days later.

Cause of death was “acute subarachnoid hemorrhage non-traumatic.”

Ionia Co. woman’s death after getting J&J vaccine reported to the CDC

An Ionia family is mourning the death of a wife and mother after they say she died due to complications after receiving the Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine.

www.fox17online.com

 

[Nemo]

Virginia Ellington was in good health but started feeling very ill shortly after getting the J&J shot.

She died of a stroke 48 hours later.

She was a college professor who had counted the days until she could get jabbed.

Woman raises questions after mom's death certificate references vaccine. Experts warn about drawing conclusions.

A Chapel Hill woman who says her mother died of a stroke 48 hours after receiving the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine spoke to WRAL News about her concerns and the questions she has about her mother's death. The state and a UNC doctor, though, warn about drawing any conclusions yet.

www.wral.com

 

[Aad]

There have been hundreds of excess of deaths here in the Netherlands for the past few weeks without being linked to COVID or anything else according to the Dutch National institute of Statistics this morning and mostly in the 65-80 group. They find it very odd and disturbing. People in this age-group all got vaccinated in recent weeks......

 

[Nemo]

16-year-old Kamrynn Thomas died 11 days after her Pfizer shot.

“Patient was a 16yr female who received Pfizer vaccine 3/19/21 at vaccine clinic and presented with ongoing CPR to the ED 3/28/21 after cardiac arrest at home. Patient placed on ECMO and imaging revealed bilateral large pulmonary embolism as likely etiology of arrest. Risk factors included oral contraceptive use. Labs have since confirmed absence of Factor V leiden or prothrombin gene mutation. Patient declared dead by neurologic criteria 3/30/21.”

16-Year-Old Kamrynn Thomas Dies Suddenly Shortly After Pfizer Vaccination

circleofmamas.com

 

[Nemo]

52-year-old mother and accountant Lisa Stonehouse died about a week after her AstraZeneca shot in Edmonton.

She had gone to the ER with a massive headache, a classic symptom of problems from the shot. She knew they were symptoms of a dangerous reaction to the shot. But the ER staff wouldn't listen and they sent her home.

The next day she couldn't get out of bed and was rushed to the ER by ambulance. But it was too late. She died of vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia.

Family looking for answers: Woman with vaccine side-effects died of blood clot

Wilf Lowenberg says his longtime family friend might still be alive had a hospital emergency department taken her side-effects from a COVID-19 shot more seriously.

www.cp24.com