Wayne Selänne

Tähän ketjuun kokoan hyviä tutkimuksia, linkkejä jne. kumoamaan yleisiä vääriä väitteitä koronapandemiasta. Laitetaan ensimmäiseksi ansiokas vertaisarvio Ioannidiksen IFR-paperista: twitter.com/GidMK/status/1…

@FelixFaustus @angie_rasmussen @drdrew Has access narrowed? To my knowledge it's still easy to access.

But notice what that assumes. You're saying it's popular because of quackery. But that's already a conclusion, not an observation. Another explanation also fits the facts: It was historically easy to access Then access narrowed Demand remained So attention increased That alone can increase popularity without requiring quackery. Because when something becomes restricted, two things tend to happen: Scarcity increases attention Institutional friction increases distrust Both amplify visibility. So popularity doesn't uniquely point to quackery. It can also point to incentive shifts. And importantly, both can exist at once: Some people may promote unsupported claims While others are reacting to access restrictions Lumping the entire phenomenon into "quackery" compresses those into one cause. That's where the blade cuts. Because when multiple explanations fit the same observation, choosing one without distinguishing them is inference inflation.

I was unpleasantly surprised to have my taxi ride interrupted by @drdrew selling ivermectin—which doesn’t work to treat respiratory viruses—at a 600% markup & claiming falsely that vaccines are dangerous & don’t work. When does quackery exceed board standard tolerability limits?

@FelixFaustus @angie_rasmussen @drdrew It's popular because of the quackery. A very good medicine for its purpose though.

Calling a medication quackery is already a category error. Ivermectin is a real drug. It has proven uses. It’s been prescribed safely for decades. So the question isn’t whether the drug is quackery. The real question is whether specific claims about specific uses are supported. But my point wasn’t even about that. It was about incentives. When access to a low-cost, widely known medication becomes restricted, demand doesn’t disappear. It shifts. Parallel markets emerge. Alternative channels form. Trust fragments. That’s not quackery. That’s economics. And importantly, this is true regardless of whether the disputed use ultimately works or not. Because parallel markets don’t form when something is true. They form when access and demand diverge. So calling the entire phenomenon "quackery" skips a layer. It jumps from "Some claims may lack strong evidence" to "Everything around it is quackery" That’s where the reasoning overreaches. The blade cuts there. A drug can be legitimate. A use can be uncertain. A market response can still be predictable. All three can be true at once.

@FelixFaustus @angie_rasmussen @drdrew It's still quackery anyway.

Maybe part of the reason alternative channels emerge is that access changed. For years, ivermectin was inexpensive, widely prescribed, and uncontroversial. Then during COVID, it suddenly became difficult to obtain, restricted, and framed as dangerous. When low-cost, generic medications become hard to access through normal medical channels, demand doesn’t disappear. It shifts. And when demand shifts, markets follow. So the real systems question isn’t just: "Why is ivermectin being advertised?" It's also: "What incentives were created when access was restricted?" Because when institutional access narrows, parallel markets tend to expand. That's not quackery. That's economics.

@DranttiHeikkila Miksi niistä olisi valehdeltu?

Kaikki mitä yleisölle on kerrottu rokotteista on vain valetta

@Sheryl_EH @stkirsch You did not read the paper either?

@stkirsch Ohhhh, the irony. So, what exactly is the point of the vaccine? It's literally causing the thing it's meant to stop. You just can't make this stuff up. 🤦‍♀️

Shingles vaccine transiently increases your risk of shingles by 11X in adults 65 and over. You knew that, right? An 11x INCREASE. Did your doctor warn you?

@DrSuzanneH7 @zee_parody Why would she cry? Siri is a liar as you're too. Or the other option is that you both are just stupid.

@zee_parody 😂😂😂

Imagine Dorit Reiss debating Aaron Siri. Who would like to mop up her tears? It would be a bloody massacre. She has nothing to stand on except her acceptance into the brotherhood with all the perks and privileges. I watched her lecture at NYU several years ago and she twitched her way through it with literally nothing of substance.

@JenniG65103034 @ER_Korhola Oli ja yllättävän tarkka. Rekisteri johon varsinaiset kuolinsyyt ilmoitetaan on liian hidas ollakseen toimiva työkalu.

@WayneSelanne @ER_Korhola Oliko tää sun mielestä järkevää tilastointia? 👇

Liikenneonnettomuus olikin koronakuolema. Näin meitä höynäytettiin. #hölmöläistarinoita

@ninja_monk85 @SariHeinonen5 @ER_Korhola @ApeKanerva Ei ole ohjeistettu. Kuolinsyytutkimus on erikseen.

@WayneSelanne @SariHeinonen5 @ER_Korhola @ApeKanerva Kunnon lampaan tavoin, sinulla ei herännyt ”mitä, onko minulle valehdeltu?” Vaan hyökkäsin asian ilmoittajan kimppuun.Ikäänkuin olisi hänen syynsä mitä tapahtui. Toisekseen, noin lääkäreitä on ohjeistettu pandemian aikana. Eli mistä syystät lääkäriä, ohjeiden noudattamisettako?

@SariHeinonen5 @ER_Korhola @ApeKanerva Älähän puhu paskaa. Tuosta syystä voit hyvillä mielillä laittaa lääkäristä ilmoituksen valviraan, mutta ethän sitä tietenkään tee, koska puhut paskaa.

@ER_Korhola @ApeKanerva Täällä syöpään kuollut nainen laitettiin koronakuolleeksi, koska terminaalivaiheessa tältä ihmiseltä ronkittiin nenästä positiivinen tulos. Törkeää vääristelyä ja törkeää kohtelua tuossa tilanteessa olevaa ihmistä kohtaan. Omaiset vaativat ja saivat lopulta oikaisun asiaan.

@AdmiralOfAotea @stkirsch Cant' believe this guy has invented the mouse.

@stkirsch Steve is a liar for money.

COVID-19 DEATHS IN COUNTRIES BEFORE AND AFTER MASS VACCINATION from Oct 2021. Timeless video by Joel Smalley.

@RuutuUrheilu Missähän Oilers-Indians -pelin tallenne?

@Michell01123596 @MatterRichLives @AaronSiriSG Siri is still a moron who lies.

@MatterRichLives @AaronSiriSG Isn't it great that we can read discovery in lawsuits to find the information a corporation and its employees want hidden from the public ? Isn't it great that not all doctors agree , no matter the narrative, and give second opinions ? Isn't it great we can read those ?

The legacy media is now arguing that "shared clinical decision-making" is somehow an anti-vaccine, anti-science concept. Just like they had to get rid of the concept of natural immunity, now they are trying to frame your ability to participate in deciding what to inject into your or your child’s body as some fringe “hijacked” concept. To understand how dangerous this is, here is how even they define "shared clinical decision making" and what they seek to call fringe: "clinicians giving their patients accurate information about the various options before them, and then the two parties collaboratively articulating a plan built on both the scientific evidence and the person’s own goals and preferences." statnews.com/2026/01/20/sha…

@DominiekC @GeeksGolfers @stkirsch @StanWillenbring Any comments Steve?

@GeeksGolfers @stkirsch @StanWillenbring FYI :

Think about it…

@Nakah1111 @AaronSiriSG @RandPaul You do not have natural immunity when you get the disease for the first time or do you?

@AaronSiriSG @RandPaul Natural immunity. Natural immunity lasts a very long time.

“The belief in the vaccines, and the belief that you should do it, was like a religious belief. That’s the way they treated it. So if you didn’t believe in it, you were someone to be demonized as a non-believer. You were to be cast out.” — @RandPaul

@AaronSiriSG @RandPaul You must be an idiot Mr. Siri?

@PhilipRafferty5 @drterrysimpson She's done so much research and still makes so stupid mistakes. Why's that? She's just not competent?

@drterrysimpson Dr. Suzanne Humphries has done 25,000+ hours of research on vaccines. Neil has done a few hours of research funded by companies that have been fined 35 billion for fraud. Terry is delusional. x.com/toobaffled/sta… x.com/myhiddenvalue/… x.com/PhilipRafferty…

This claim is a masterclass in rhetorical fraud, delivered with confidence instead of evidence. Let’s dismantle it carefully. Suzanne Humphries asserts that early polio vaccines caused more polio than they prevented, that iron lungs merely “became ventilators,” and that modern transverse myelitis is “the same pathology as polio.” Every part of this is false, misleading, or deliberately confused. 1. “Early vaccines caused more polio than they prevented” This is a statistical lie by misclassification. Before vaccination, polio paralyzed tens of thousands of children every year. After mass vaccination, paralytic polio collapsed to near zero worldwide. The tiny number of vaccine-associated paralytic polio cases (roughly 1 in 2–3 million doses with early oral vaccines) was openly documented, studied, and—crucially—orders of magnitude smaller than wild polio. That’s why medicine abandoned OPV in wealthy countries and moved to IPV. That is science correcting itself—not hiding. 2. “The iron lung didn’t go away—it’s now called a ventilator” This is historically illiterate. Iron lungs existed because polio selectively destroyed the motor neurons that control breathing. When polio disappeared, so did wards full of paralyzed children encased in steel cylinders. Ventilators did not replace iron lungs because polio “changed its name.” They exist because modern medicine treats trauma, surgery, sepsis, ARDS, prematurity, anesthesia, and neurologic disease—conditions that existed before, during, and after polio. If polio were still here, you’d know. Pediatric ICUs would be full of flaccid paralysis again. They are not. 3. “Transverse myelitis is the same pathology as polio” This is biological nonsense. Polio is a neurotropic enterovirus that destroys anterior horn motor neurons. Transverse myelitis is an immune-mediated inflammatory condition affecting multiple spinal cord tracts, often with sensory loss, pain, and autonomic dysfunction—features not characteristic of polio. Same organ ≠ same disease. That’s like saying a heart attack is the same as myocarditis because both involve the heart. 4. The real tell Notice the pattern: No population data No timelines No epidemiology No global eradication context No explanation for why polio vanished everywhere vaccines were used Instead, we get semantic tricks and category errors designed to frighten parents. The bottom line Polio didn’t disappear because we renamed it. It disappeared because vaccination worked. And the reason claims like this persist is not because they are brave truths—but because they rely on audiences who don’t know the history, the biology, or the math. Fear is easy. Evidence is harder. Medicine chose evidence—and children stopped dying. That’s the part they never want you to remember.

Presumably he meant Covid from the SARS-2 coronavirus, which killed 1.2 million Americans during the pandemic. Covid vaccines actually saved 3.2 million American lives. Tragically >200,000 Americans died needlessly bc they refused vaccines during delta/BA.1 waves in 2021-22

@toml86 @Jamie_K420 @stkirsch @DrNeilStone Yes, that's pretty interesting and probably partly due to healthy vaccinee effect. Anyway, it's hard to conclude that vaccines are somehow dangerous.

@WayneSelanne @Jamie_K420 @stkirsch @DrNeilStone Interestingly, unvaccinated people just seem generally more likely to die.

Hi I gave informed consent to get an mRNA Covid jab And very happy with my decision to get it.

@Jamie_K420 @stkirsch @DrNeilStone jamanetwork.com/journals/jaman…

@stkirsch @DrNeilStone Or, what was the efficacy rate when he took the jabs. They’ve been changing quite a bit. Moderna’s literally doesn’t exist because it was so dangerous they pulled it.