Dr Peter McCullough was on the Highwire last week. His thoughtful analysis as a cardiologist leading the fight was appreciated. He said Hamlin had an excellent chance of recovery. He knew he was stable when the ambulance stopped at the tunnel to let his mother ride to the hospital with him. If he had still been in active cardiac arrest t…
Dr Peter McCullough was on the Highwire last week. His thoughtful analysis as a cardiologist leading the fight was appreciated. He said Hamlin had an excellent chance of recovery. He knew he was stable when the ambulance stopped at the tunnel to let his mother ride to the hospital with him. If he had still been in active cardiac arrest that would not have happened. He also said coding for a second time happens in 50% of these types of attacks.
He did raise the question of why the public can’t be informed of his jab status. There was another player on his team who did not take the shot. If Hamlin had not and this had happened, McCullough surmised it would have been all over the news. He also said the looks on his fellow player’s faces told the tale. He said they were ashen and they looked frightened. Likely they knew or suspected what was happening.
The fact that they keep releasing pictures of Hamlin looking progressively better is purposeful. While everyone wants this young man to recover completely, we also want questions answered. This is camouflage for now, until they can move us along and hope only “conspiracy theorists” keep asking.
"He also said the looks on his fellow player’s faces told the tale. He said they were ashen and they looked frightened. Likely they knew or suspected what was happening."
Another bad take of his, IMO.
I seriously doubt the poison shots were on their minds. It's quite likely that NONE of them had ever seen a player administered CPR on the playing field, and for NINE minutes, and that NONE of them had ever seen a player DFIBbed on the playing field. They were seeing, they thought, a fellow player dying in front of them. THAT is why they were ashen at that moment; not because they were thinking, "oh, it's the jab...am I next?"
I don't doubt that LATER on they may be thinking, "was it the jab?" But on the field, while a player is being CPR'd and DFIB'd in front of them, it was the likelihood that he was dying or dead that had them frightened.
Have to disagree on every point. I have been following Dr McCullough since later 2020. He is one of a handful of doctors who questioned the whole covid narrative being pushed. He questioned why ivermectin was not being routinely used in CoVid cases as a first line of treatment. He is a renowned cardiologist who knows what cardiac arrest looks like and has been on the forefront with myocarditis explosion. I disagree that they allowed his mother in the ambulance only because he was dead. That was my first thought when they carted him off but several other posters agreed that if he was dead they would not have worked on him so long, they would immediately have gotten him off the field. Dr McCullough also addressed the second coding in the hospital as happening 50% of the time. I personally in watching pro football, (and I don’t watch much), have seen two cases of gruesome head injuries and broken and dislocated legs, so sorry, I don’t believe that their ashen faces were because they had never seen anything like this. I am now going to wait and see what happens. If he goes completely from sight, I will ask questions, but this won’t stop what is happening and the connection needs to be made with the death jabs.
I don't dispute his credentials at all. But that doesn't make him omniscient and infallible.
I'm only saying that those two observations of his - after the fact (how convenient) - are questionable. Your rebuttal misrepresents almost everything I wrote.
You wrote, "I disagree that they allowed his mother in the ambulance only because he was dead." but that's NOT what I said. I only said that that - dead OR dying - was equally plausible as HIS explanation.
With regard to the second heart attack, I mentioned that as a counterargument to his saying that Hamlin was "stable". How many of those 50% "second heart attack" victims were considered "stable" after the first but before the second?
And again, the "this" in the statement "...because they had never seen anything like this..." is NOT referencing something akin to "gruesome head injuries and broken and dislocated legs". The "this" is referencing CPR being performed, and for NINE futile minutes, on a player ON the field, AND, that player being DFIB'd - unsuccessfully - ON the field. I guarantee you they have NEVER seen either of those, let alone BOTH of those, on the playing field, ever. That, IMO, is why they were ashen-faced and despondent. Not because they were thinking, "OMG, I got jabbed, I wonder if I'm next".
I don't dispute his credentials at all. But that doesn't make him omniscient and infallible.
I'm only saying that those two observations of his - after the fact (how convenient) - are questionable. Your rebuttal misrepresents almost everything I wrote.
My rebuttal was my opinion, that’s all. I never said Dr McCullough was either omniscient or infallible. I wrote what I best remembered him saying. I believe he was giving his opinion as a cardiologist, what happened to Hamlin. What he said made sense to me. That neither makes it infallible or omniscient, he was asked and he replied. I may have rewrote what I believed I heard not exactly as it was stated. The media has become nothing but opinion and conjecture as they simply won’t ask pertinent questions and those with a reason to lie are blanketed by a complicit media.
I assume, though I do not know that you are a doctor or have some kind of pertinent medical degree. Your opinion would carry great weight, but still it would be opinion and conjecture since you were not on that field and saw what the rest of us were allowed to see. Conjecture at best, answered prayers at it’s finest, and rabbit holes everywhere.
"He knew he was stable when the ambulance stopped at the tunnel to let his mother ride to the hospital with him."
I think that was either a bad take, or Monday morning quarterbacking (no pun intended).
Hamlin suffered a *second* heart attack at the hospital, so I think it's a huge stretch to say he was "stable" when the ambulance let his mother into the vehicle. I could plausibly argue that they let her into the vehicle so that she would be by his side when he died (that is, that they expected him to die or it was at least a very real possibility at that point in time, so let mom in to say goodbye to her son).
I think McCullough is making this one up to make himself sound good, to sound like the outlier who knew all along how it would turn out.
Dr Peter McCullough was on the Highwire last week. His thoughtful analysis as a cardiologist leading the fight was appreciated. He said Hamlin had an excellent chance of recovery. He knew he was stable when the ambulance stopped at the tunnel to let his mother ride to the hospital with him. If he had still been in active cardiac arrest that would not have happened. He also said coding for a second time happens in 50% of these types of attacks.
He did raise the question of why the public can’t be informed of his jab status. There was another player on his team who did not take the shot. If Hamlin had not and this had happened, McCullough surmised it would have been all over the news. He also said the looks on his fellow player’s faces told the tale. He said they were ashen and they looked frightened. Likely they knew or suspected what was happening.
The fact that they keep releasing pictures of Hamlin looking progressively better is purposeful. While everyone wants this young man to recover completely, we also want questions answered. This is camouflage for now, until they can move us along and hope only “conspiracy theorists” keep asking.
"He also said the looks on his fellow player’s faces told the tale. He said they were ashen and they looked frightened. Likely they knew or suspected what was happening."
Another bad take of his, IMO.
I seriously doubt the poison shots were on their minds. It's quite likely that NONE of them had ever seen a player administered CPR on the playing field, and for NINE minutes, and that NONE of them had ever seen a player DFIBbed on the playing field. They were seeing, they thought, a fellow player dying in front of them. THAT is why they were ashen at that moment; not because they were thinking, "oh, it's the jab...am I next?"
I don't doubt that LATER on they may be thinking, "was it the jab?" But on the field, while a player is being CPR'd and DFIB'd in front of them, it was the likelihood that he was dying or dead that had them frightened.
Have to disagree on every point. I have been following Dr McCullough since later 2020. He is one of a handful of doctors who questioned the whole covid narrative being pushed. He questioned why ivermectin was not being routinely used in CoVid cases as a first line of treatment. He is a renowned cardiologist who knows what cardiac arrest looks like and has been on the forefront with myocarditis explosion. I disagree that they allowed his mother in the ambulance only because he was dead. That was my first thought when they carted him off but several other posters agreed that if he was dead they would not have worked on him so long, they would immediately have gotten him off the field. Dr McCullough also addressed the second coding in the hospital as happening 50% of the time. I personally in watching pro football, (and I don’t watch much), have seen two cases of gruesome head injuries and broken and dislocated legs, so sorry, I don’t believe that their ashen faces were because they had never seen anything like this. I am now going to wait and see what happens. If he goes completely from sight, I will ask questions, but this won’t stop what is happening and the connection needs to be made with the death jabs.
I don't dispute his credentials at all. But that doesn't make him omniscient and infallible.
I'm only saying that those two observations of his - after the fact (how convenient) - are questionable. Your rebuttal misrepresents almost everything I wrote.
You wrote, "I disagree that they allowed his mother in the ambulance only because he was dead." but that's NOT what I said. I only said that that - dead OR dying - was equally plausible as HIS explanation.
With regard to the second heart attack, I mentioned that as a counterargument to his saying that Hamlin was "stable". How many of those 50% "second heart attack" victims were considered "stable" after the first but before the second?
And again, the "this" in the statement "...because they had never seen anything like this..." is NOT referencing something akin to "gruesome head injuries and broken and dislocated legs". The "this" is referencing CPR being performed, and for NINE futile minutes, on a player ON the field, AND, that player being DFIB'd - unsuccessfully - ON the field. I guarantee you they have NEVER seen either of those, let alone BOTH of those, on the playing field, ever. That, IMO, is why they were ashen-faced and despondent. Not because they were thinking, "OMG, I got jabbed, I wonder if I'm next".
I don't dispute his credentials at all. But that doesn't make him omniscient and infallible.
I'm only saying that those two observations of his - after the fact (how convenient) - are questionable. Your rebuttal misrepresents almost everything I wrote.
My rebuttal was my opinion, that’s all. I never said Dr McCullough was either omniscient or infallible. I wrote what I best remembered him saying. I believe he was giving his opinion as a cardiologist, what happened to Hamlin. What he said made sense to me. That neither makes it infallible or omniscient, he was asked and he replied. I may have rewrote what I believed I heard not exactly as it was stated. The media has become nothing but opinion and conjecture as they simply won’t ask pertinent questions and those with a reason to lie are blanketed by a complicit media.
I assume, though I do not know that you are a doctor or have some kind of pertinent medical degree. Your opinion would carry great weight, but still it would be opinion and conjecture since you were not on that field and saw what the rest of us were allowed to see. Conjecture at best, answered prayers at it’s finest, and rabbit holes everywhere.
"He knew he was stable when the ambulance stopped at the tunnel to let his mother ride to the hospital with him."
I think that was either a bad take, or Monday morning quarterbacking (no pun intended).
Hamlin suffered a *second* heart attack at the hospital, so I think it's a huge stretch to say he was "stable" when the ambulance let his mother into the vehicle. I could plausibly argue that they let her into the vehicle so that she would be by his side when he died (that is, that they expected him to die or it was at least a very real possibility at that point in time, so let mom in to say goodbye to her son).
I think McCullough is making this one up to make himself sound good, to sound like the outlier who knew all along how it would turn out.