Jump to content
27 Time World Champions

How’s that COVID-19 “Vaccine” working out for you?

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, Jacksonx3 said:

I woke up this morning unsure of how to best take care of my health during a pandemic.  I have the choice of following the advice of the best professionals science has to offer, who have dedicated their lives to studying their fields, or following the advice of the guys at BCVoice who have really snappy memes, access to real internet websites with “information that the government and big pharma doesn’t want you to know about”, who quote VAERS data despite the VAERS program stating directly that it is raw reporting and should not be utilized until validated, and who know that the statistics regarding 90+% of hospitalizations being unvaccinated (despite being a minority of the population) are just manipulations to scare people.  Thank the lord I found this thread before making a foolish decision.  Seriously, there are no “both sides” to this topic.  The verified risks of vaccine are not even in the ballpark of the verified risks from covid. To use a poker analogy, if you draw to an inside straight you are making a losing bet.  You may occasionally still win, but if you do, you made a bad decision with a good outcome. It’s not evidence of having made a good decision.  Don’t believe everything you think.  Incorrect facts are not opinions, they are simply incorrect. 

VAERS is all we got and that won’t be around much longer. Do I really need to explain why?!

To get the true fatality rate of COVID-19 we need to defer, not to hyperbolic media mainstream outlets and dishonest bureaucrats who repeatedly and shamelessly lie to their audiences, but to genuine and respectable scientists.

In the world of science, they don’t come much more respected than Dr. John Ioannidis, Professor of Medicine, Health Research and Policy, and of Biomedical Data Science at Stanford University School of Medicine.

After scrutinizing studies from around the world, Dr. Ioannidis concluded the best estimate average global infection fatality rate (IFR) for COVID-19 is around 0.15%

Let me repeat that slowly for you, Jacksonx3

Zero. Point. One. Five. Percent.

The entire world has been turned upside down over 0.15%   Oh Yeah!

7121-CE98-F9-B3-49-A4-A188-FA9060-E756-E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bo Marsh said:

I agree with most of what you say except I don’t think anyone should be forced to have a vaccine. If vaccines work the way we are told, the unvaxxed are mostly hurting themselves. But no to forcing anyone to get one. That’s just wrong. 
 

I didn’t say anyone should be forced to take the vaccine.   I do think that those who take the vaccine shouldn’t be forced to be exposed to those who are unvaccinated.  I expect we will see requirements for proof of  vaccination e.g. to fly, to go to large events.  Also, higher insurance premiums.  Both have a parallel in those who exercise their right to smoke.  Right now, people have all the rights of a bad choice with none of the responsibilities.  Going back to the poker analogy, they are making bad bets with house money.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, 27 Time World Champions said:

VAERS is all we got and that won’t be around much longer. Do I really need to explain why?!

To get the true fatality rate of COVID-19 we need to defer, not to hyperbolic media mainstream outlets and dishonest bureaucrats who repeatedly and shamelessly lie to their audiences, but to genuine and respectable scientists.

In the world of science, they don’t come much more respected than Dr. John Ioannidis, Professor of Medicine, Health Research and Policy, and of Biomedical Data Science at Stanford University School of Medicine.

After scrutinizing studies from around the world, Dr. Ioannidis concluded the best estimate average global infection fatality rate (IFR) for COVID-19 is around 0.15%

Let me repeat that slowly for you, Jacksonx3

Zero. Point. One. Five. Percent.

The entire world has been turned upside down over 0.15%   Oh Yeah!

7121-CE98-F9-B3-49-A4-A188-FA9060-E756-E

Cute meme.  Now I’m convinced.  Not familiar with the Doctor’s work, but one of the interesting things about science is that it relies on peer reviewed studies.  I’d love to see the journal article that citation is from.   It flies in the face of the following from JAMA regarding excess mortality from March 1, 2020 through January 2 2021 - it was referenced on the CDC website.   
The US experienced 2,801,439 deaths, 22.9% more than expected (522,368 excess deaths).

  • Deaths attributed to COVID-19 accounted for 72.4% of excess deaths in the US.

This is standard scientific method for determining the impact of a phenomenon on mortality.  Note that this is only through 1/2 - the peak of the pandemic (so far) was well after.  I know we are all encouraged to “do our own research” but honestly, I will never have the depth of knowledge needed to form a coherent opinion on the risks/benefits of MRNA vaccines.   I do know enough to be susceptible to massive confirmation bias by rooting through articles - yeah, that’s what I thought and here it is right on you tube!  I will stick with the expert consensus.  There is no scientific consensus that vaccines are anywhere in the ballpark of covid in terms of health risk.  None.  It is not a both sides issue - not all opinions are of equal merit.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jacksonx3 said:

Not familiar with the Doctor’s work

This is not the Spanish Flu

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/eci.13554
 

Now, if you are like many people, your brain is struggling frantically to comprehend those figures. After all, the average person has been so heavily bombarded with hysterical bullshit, and so utterly incapable of independent thought. 

Stop calling them Vaccines! The Pfizer drug is based on long-problematic mRNA technology. This technology is so dangerous it has repeatedly failed to make it to even Phase 3 clinical testing, despite the dogged efforts of aggressively entrepreneurial companies like Moderna. 

Are you aware the vaccines have not been proven effective under true double-blind conditions, and are proving to be extremely dangerous?

The only study that appears to have been conducted under genuinely double-blind conditions was the South African arm of the Oxford-AstraZeneca trials, and it failed to find any efficacy for the 'vaccine.'

And even if we take the other criminal-conducted trials at face value, the 67-95% efficacy figures are a brazen lie. The real absolute protection figures are as follows:

  • 1·3% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford drug;
  • 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH mRNA drug;
  • 1·2% for J&J;
  • 0·93% for Gamaleya;
  • 0·84% for the Pfizer–BioNTech mRNA drug.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext#
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jacksonx3 said:

... or following the advice of the guys at BCVoice who have really snappy memes, access to real internet websites with “information that the government and big pharma doesn’t want you to know about” ...

Thank the lord I found this thread before making a foolish decision.


From the snark, I get the impression that you haven't been reading the posts I have been making nor watching the videos contained in them. Let me point one of them out for you:
 

A prestigious British research facility — the Francis Crick Institute — recently published a report on the results of a study they conducted on people who had received the vaccine.

The report, peer reviewed, was authored by 24 doctors/researchers.

The doctor who was in the video summary is the Group's Leader, and is also a Rhodes Scholar.

The conclusion of the study? That people who received the vaccine saw their neutralizing antibodies — the key component of their immune systems — reduced five to six fold.

Let me repeat.

The power and capability of their immune systems were reduced by a factor of five to six times!


And people wonder why those who have been vaccinated get Covid. It's because they no longer have an immune system to fight it.

 

Since you never hear that on the MSM, that looks suspiciously much like information that "they don't want you to know."
 

But then, I guess all Rhodes Scholars are wackos, right?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 27 Time World Champions said:

This is not the Spanish Flu

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/eci.13554
 

Now, if you are like many people, your brain is struggling frantically to comprehend those figures. After all, the average person has been so heavily bombarded with hysterical bullshit, and so utterly incapable of independent thought. 

Stop calling them Vaccines! The Pfizer drug is based on long-problematic mRNA technology. This technology is so dangerous it has repeatedly failed to make it to even Phase 3 clinical testing, despite the dogged efforts of aggressively entrepreneurial companies like Moderna. 

Are you aware the vaccines have not been proven effective under true double-blind conditions, and are proving to be extremely dangerous?

The only study that appears to have been conducted under genuinely double-blind conditions was the South African arm of the Oxford-AstraZeneca trials, and it failed to find any efficacy for the 'vaccine.'

And even if we take the other criminal-conducted trials at face value, the 67-95% efficacy figures are a brazen lie. The real absolute protection figures are as follows:

  • 1·3% for the AstraZeneca–Oxford drug;
  • 1·2% for the Moderna–NIH mRNA drug;
  • 1·2% for J&J;
  • 0·93% for Gamaleya;
  • 0·84% for the Pfizer–BioNTech mRNA drug.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext#
 

Thanks for the articles.   I’m actually doing pretty well with the numbers, I don’t even need to slow them down so I can understand them.  Based on an admittedly quick scan, the first article  that covid fatality rates are overestimated as we are under diagnosing covid I.e. we know the number of deaths, but many more people have actually had covid so the death rate is lower.   The cdc covid tracker indicates 34,413,532 cases with 608,528 deaths.  That works out to 1.7%  actual (not projected) deaths of known cases.  This does not consider individuals with long term issues as sequelae to the infection.   That 608,528 is with 10% of the US population known to have been infected - that leaves a lot of headroom.  Conversely, even If the entire population (334,000,000) of the US had already been infected the 0.15% model would predict 510,000 covid deaths.  Guess we’re just overachievers.  Even using the prediction model of 0.15% global, using the article’s estimate of 2,000,000,000 people infected  that is 3,000,000 deaths.   I would personally look to mitigate that with effective tools.   

Interestingly,the lancet article refers to them as vaccines - if it’s good enough for them it’s good enough for me.   Thanks for that.  As I read it, again admittedly a quick scan, it says that further information is needed for clarification of efficiency of effectiveness.   The main point seems to be that the concern is what portion of the population needs to be vaccinated to see the effect I.e. that you may need a higher NNV to show the desired effect of suppressing the virus.   This seems to argue for the need for MORE of the population to be vaccinated I.e. herd immunity.   Nowhere in either article do I see that covid isn’t a serious health risk, that vaccination is a greater risk than covid, or that vaccination is ineffective.  

The bigger point still is that I do not and will not ever have the depth of knowledge needed to make policy decisions on this topic.   I will rely on the experts whose life has been spent learning the background info necessary to do so.  So while I found the articles interesting I won’t “do my own research”.  I might be prone to clinging to a single line from a single article that proves the point i already believe I.e. confirmation bias.    I’ll rely on scientific consensus, even if it changes as new information becomes available because that’s what science does.  Thanks, and have a great evening   

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, YankeeDoodle said:


From the snark, I get the impression that you haven't been reading the posts I have been making nor watching the videos contained in them. Let me point one of them out for you:
 

A prestigious British research facility — the Francis Crick Institute — recently published a report on the results of a study they conducted on people who had received the vaccine.

The report, peer reviewed, was authored by 24 doctors/researchers.

The doctor who was in the video summary is the Group's Leader, and is also a Rhodes Scholar.

The conclusion of the study? That people who received the vaccine saw their neutralizing antibodies — the key component of their immune systems — reduced five to six fold.

Let me repeat.

The power and capability of their immune systems were reduced by a factor of five to six times!


And people wonder why those who have been vaccinated get Covid. It's because they no longer have an immune system to fight it.

 

Since you never hear that on the MSM, that looks suspiciously much like information that "they don't want you to know."
 

But then, I guess all Rhodes Scholars are wackos, right?

 

Bless your heart.  You are correct, I didn’t.  The post about links to autism were a good start to my ignoring them.  The link of vaccines to autism was based on a debunked article which was withdrawn from the publishing journal decades ago due to fraud by the author.  There is no scientific evidence of this link.  None. Yet the myth persists.  And it was hard for me to resist the video posted from the feed of Dr. phukkgovt (sp?) but I find I simply don’t have the time or energy for such pursuits.  Call me judgmental but once I’ve seen stuff like that posted, I suspect anything further I see and tend to disregard it.  Not all opinions are equally credible, nor valuable.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jacksonx3 said:

Thanks for the articles.   I’m actually doing pretty well with the numbers, I don’t even need to slow them down so I can understand them.  Based on an admittedly quick scan, the first article  that covid fatality rates are overestimated as we are under diagnosing covid I.e. we know the number of deaths, but many more people have actually had covid so the death rate is lower.   The cdc covid tracker indicates 34,413,532 cases with 608,528 deaths.  That works out to 1.7%  actual (not projected) deaths of known cases.  This does not consider individuals with long term issues as sequelae to the infection.   That 608,528 is with 10% of the US population known to have been infected - that leaves a lot of headroom.  Conversely, even If the entire population (334,000,000) of the US had already been infected the 0.15% model would predict 510,000 covid deaths.  Guess we’re just overachievers.  Even using the prediction model of 0.15% global, using the article’s estimate of 2,000,000,000 people infected  that is 3,000,000 deaths.   I would personally look to mitigate that with effective tools.   

Interestingly,the lancet article refers to them as vaccines - if it’s good enough for them it’s good enough for me.   Thanks for that.  As I read it, again admittedly a quick scan, it says that further information is needed for clarification of efficiency of effectiveness.   The main point seems to be that the concern is what portion of the population needs to be vaccinated to see the effect I.e. that you may need a higher NNV to show the desired effect of suppressing the virus.   This seems to argue for the need for MORE of the population to be vaccinated I.e. herd immunity.   Nowhere in either article do I see that covid isn’t a serious health risk, that vaccination is a greater risk than covid, or that vaccination is ineffective.  

The bigger point still is that I do not and will not ever have the depth of knowledge needed to make policy decisions on this topic.   I will rely on the experts whose life has been spent learning the background info necessary to do so.  So while I found the articles interesting I won’t “do my own research”.  I might be prone to clinging to a single line from a single article that proves the point i already believe I.e. confirmation bias.    I’ll rely on scientific consensus, even if it changes as new information becomes available because that’s what science does.  Thanks, and have a great evening   

 

 

Science is supposed to be an impartial and ruthless quest for facts. In reality, much of what is presented as 'science' today is sheer nonsense. Modern science has long since degenerated into a bastion of corruption and politically motivated propaganda. Peer review processes have been tainted for years. I heard enough stories about corruption in academia from my relatives who were engineers in the 1980’s. I’m sure it’s only gotten worse since then. More like “Pal Review.”

The two main funders of scientific research today are government agencies and companies whose products are under investigation in that research. In the medical arena, the overwhelming majority of clinical trials are sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. The pitfalls of this arrangement go far beyond an unavoidable and inherent risk of bias. All niceties aside, history has confirmed time and time again the drug giants are little more than white collar crime cartels.

Governments and media have been incessantly telling you that taking a COVID 'vaccine' reduces your risk of getting a COVID infection by up to 95%.

That is complete and utter bullshit.

Remember, in the real world, authorities and doctors have been quick to diagnose anyone with a sniffle as having "suspected" or "probable" COVID-19 infection. Little surprise, then, that in 2020 seasonal influenza miraculously near-disappeared, while the media instead kept bombarding us with alarming numbers of new 'COVID cases.'

You can bet your sweet ass much of what was being called COVID last year was in fact the regular flu being rebranded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 27 Time World Champions said:

Science is supposed to be an impartial and ruthless quest for facts. In reality, much of what is presented as 'science' today is sheer nonsense. Modern science has long since degenerated into a bastion of corruption and politically motivated propaganda. Peer review processes have been tainted for years. I heard enough stories about corruption in academia from my relatives who were engineers in the 1980’s. I’m sure it’s only gotten worse since then. More like “Pal Review.”

The two main funders of scientific research today are government agencies and companies whose products are under investigation in that research. In the medical arena, the overwhelming majority of clinical trials are sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. The pitfalls of this arrangement go far beyond an unavoidable and inherent risk of bias. All niceties aside, history has confirmed time and time again the drug giants are little more than white collar crime cartels.

Governments and media have been incessantly telling you that taking a COVID 'vaccine' reduces your risk of getting a COVID infection by up to 95%.

That is complete and utter bullshit.

Remember, in the real world, authorities and doctors have been quick to diagnose anyone with a sniffle as having "suspected" or "probable" COVID-19 infection. Little surprise, then, that in 2020 seasonal influenza miraculously near-disappeared, while the media instead kept bombarding us with alarming numbers of new 'COVID cases.'

You can bet your sweet ass much of what was being called COVID last year was in fact the regular flu being rebranded.

I certainly agree about the need to keep science fact based.  But if you look at the progress of the discussion we’ve moved from “top flight Drs and scientists say” to “Don’t listen to what they say cuz they’re all corrupt”. We’ve arrived at “All those social structures built to track health issues are wrong because I think they are”.  Sorry, it’s not perfect but I’ll stick with the science on this one.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Jacksonx3 said:

I certainly agree about the need to keep science fact based.  But if you look at the progress of the discussion we’ve moved from “top flight Drs and scientists say” to “Don’t listen to what they say cuz they’re all corrupt”. We’ve arrived at “All those social structures built to track health issues are wrong because I think they are”.  Sorry, it’s not perfect but I’ll stick with the science on this one.    

I’ll stick with history. All the best. One of the better debates on BCVoice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, 27 Time World Champions said:

One of the better debates on BCVoice. 

Agreed!  Have a good one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2021 at 8:30 PM, 27 Time World Champions said:

Shocking!!! I'm Shocked!

Dumfounded.
 

With Narrative Established, CDC Announces Withdrawal of Rapid Response COVID Test to Belatedly Stop Diagnosing Influenza as SARS-COV-2?

This looks like a back-door admission that many of the COVID positive results were actually, perhaps intentionally & purposefully, Flu cases diagnosed as COVID. If so, this would explain why the number of cases of influenza disappeared over the last 18 months…..

…And, if so, this would seem to indicate an intentionally inflated outcome from prior COVID-19 testing

Looks like the news is going to completely ignore this. Juliet Huddy on WAbc was being all snarky on Twitter yesterday about the flu being eradicated because of masks, hand washing and hand sanitizer... I couldn't link her but I did copy your post verbatim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a Reminder About the "Science" Behind a "Covid Death"

The government, the media, along with those promoting vaccination, frequently point to the 700,000 reported "Covid Deaths" in the database.

What many are not aware of is that each state defines what they consider, classify and record as a "Covid Death."

Most people automatically assume that if a person and their death are recorded in that database, that means that Covid was the reason for their dying.

That may not always be true.

The video below, with Governor J. B. Pritzker and Dr. Ngozi Enzike (Director of that state's Department of Public Health), describes how the state of Illinois defines a "Covid Death."

Each state varies and can change. The State of Washington became more specific on their causes of death in July 2020, and revised their Covid death numbers when Covid was not the actual primary cause of death.

Some states have always been very specific. While others counted anyone with Covid in their bodies as a "Covid Death," even if they died in a motorcycle crash or were struck by lightning (Florida), had alcohol poisoning (blood level of 0.55 in Colorado), or gunshot wounds (five people in Washington State, before that state revised their process as previously stated).

So yes, a number of people did tragically die due to the Covid virus.

But one cannot assume that that 700,000 figure is totally accurate.

Especially when hospitals get paid more when treatment is listed as due to Covid.

Although anecdotal, I was talking to a local woman a month back who said that her boyfriend — a carpenter — was severely injured when the ladder he was on kicked out from under him. He was in a coma for a few days, but thankfully completely recovered.

The hospital coded his stay as due to Covid, and the insurance paid everything with no question.

Anyway, here is that Illinois press conference:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone still on the fence regarding the vaccine, you might want to check out the website C19 Vax Reactions:
https://www.c19vaxreactions.com/

A lot of information and testimonials from doctors, nurses, first responders and victims can be found there.

Here, from that site, a Maryland nurse shares her personal observations:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/YVfQribXCEsX


Remember — once you take that shot, there is no turning back.

Choose wisely.


But you have to wonder ... why is the media absolutely refusing to acknowledge these side effects? Why is the government ratcheting up the rhetoric and threats to make sure everyone takes the vaccine?

And why is the usual push-back against this data and the testimonials just insults and name calling?  Why can't the specific damages to the body being described be discussed?
 

If anyone is having any doubts about the vaccine, you need to ask why you are being bullied from so many directions and at so many levels to take it. That alone should be a big red flag.

The problem is, too many people do not seem to have the strength to fight back against that pressure. No one wants to be alone, harassed by their friends and family. Peer pressure is overwhelming. The spirit of John Wayne is long gone.

I guess I am different. I was physically bullied and beat up nearly every day at school, while teachers turned a blind eye. But instead of giving in, it only made me stronger.


There is NO WAY I am going to risk permanent damage. I will NEVER take the vaccine.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, YankeeDoodle said:


There is NO WAY I am going to risk permanent damage. I will NEVER take the vaccine.

We’re all going to die sometime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, JoeTheDrunk said:

We’re all going to die sometime.

I'm more concerned with spending my remaining years severely impaired or incapacitated. Like the people in the previously posted videos who are suffering seizures, tremors, convulsions, paralysis, unable to walk 20 feet without shortness of breath, etc. that occurred immediately after taking their shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

07-C311-EB-BCEA-4226-A045-092-C05-B45-EA
Gibraltar, according to Reuters, has 'vaccinated' the equivalent of 116.3% of the country’s population 

Apparently some people got in the line twice. Or maybe they took the false positives from Tanzania seriously and started injecting goats, sheep and pawpaws.

At any rate, it's not doing the country any good. Infections have recently spiked in the country, as with most countries that have rolled out the S-protein hot shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/25/2021 at 8:30 PM, 27 Time World Champions said:

Shocking!!! I'm Shocked!

Dumfounded.
 

With Narrative Established, CDC Announces Withdrawal of Rapid Response COVID Test to Belatedly Stop Diagnosing Influenza as SARS-COV-2?

This looks like a back-door admission that many of the COVID positive results were actually, perhaps intentionally & purposefully, Flu cases diagnosed as COVID. If so, this would explain why the number of cases of influenza disappeared over the last 18 months…..

…And, if so, this would seem to indicate an intentionally inflated outcome from prior COVID-19 testing

Looks like the news is going to completely ignore this. Juliet Huddy on WAbc was bring all snarky on Twitter yesterday about the flu being eradicated because of masks, hand washing and hand sanitizer... I couldn't link her but I did copy your post verbatim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're vaccinated and still get the disease, have you actually been vaccinated?

You really need to suspend a lot of logic to believe the bullshit concerning the “vaccines.” I guess it helps if they throw big words at you, like "relative risk reduction for fatal outcomes".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, 27 Time World Champions said:

Worth 10 minutes of your time. Dr. Malone knows a little something about mRNA. 

The Vaccine Causes The Virus To Be More Dangerous

https://rumble.com/vkfz1v-the-vaccine-causes-the-virus-to-be-more-dangerous.html

Sorry.  This guy has gone rogue - if he was ever truly mainstream.  He’s on a ton of anti vax propaganda sites but can’t find a trace of him on anything mainstream/science oriented.  That’s the problem with confirmation bias.  You start with a premise e.g. “vax is bad” and search the net for it you will find a ton of sites with “verifiable proof that the government and big pharma don’t want you to know about”. There will be “experts” quoted and lots of degrees.  Within science you can always find a credentialed outlier to support almost whatever point you wish. That’s why science relies on scientific consensus - a pool of accumulated knowledge.  He would need to present scientific verification that outweighs the accumulated knowledge on the topic.  So far he hasn’t.  Here’s one example of his claims being debunked by a mainstream publication (with references). 

“…So far no scientific evidence is available that gives credence to claims that spike proteins created from vaccines travel in our bloodstreams. Research shows that spike proteins stay stuck to the surface of the cells around the vaccine's injection site. They are not known to wander around to other parts of the body. 

A very tiny dose of the vaccine does make it to the bloodstream (about 1%), but as soon as it gets to the liver, the enzymes there destroy it completely. The U.S. CDC refers to the spike protein made from the vaccine as “harmless.””

https://health-desk.org/articles/what-do-we-know-about-the-toxicity-of-spike-proteins-made-from-covid-19-vaccines
 

Here’s another

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/jun/16/youtube-videos/no-sign-covid-19-vaccines-spike-protein-toxic-or-c/
 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bo Marsh said:

Pure speculation but I would imagine that vaccination status will evolve much like smoking I.e. you have the right to make a bad choice, but not to subject others to it.  We went through a period where we had no tools in the arsenal except staying home. Now we do.  Don’t want to vax?  Your choice, but this time you stay home (the honor system of requiring the unvaccinated to mask hasn’t worked out so well).   Currently, responsibly for the bad choice is shifted to others behaviorally (if they are concerned they should stay home), health wise, and economically through unneeded spread which impacts economies on a large scale.  I’m not thinking that will be the long term approach.  I would also anticipate impacts on insurance (health and life).  The actuaries who determine rates and availabilities aren’t known to be swayed by “but I found this video on you tube”.  

Republican leadership has recently changed their messaging on this to a pro-vax message - polling must show that anti-vax as a political strategy is not a winning position.  That puts them in step with science.  This got morphed into a political fight (as had previous vax campaigns such as smallpox) but it appears that the health and socioeconomic costs got too great to maintain that front of the battle.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A Former Pfizer Employee and Now an Analyst For the Pharmaceutical & Medical Device Industries Confirms the "Vaccine" Is a Bioweapon


I know a lot of people are going to see the above subject line and immediately blow it off. However, what she does in the interview is go through an in-depth review and analysis of actual patent filings.

Can you really dismiss actual facts? (Can you say "cognitive dissonance" and "normalcy bias"?)

And don't forget — in the quickly aborted animal trials, all of the animals died.

Those that are taking the "vaccine" are the new lab rats. But, "no cheese for you!"
 

https://rumble.com/vkgdq7-deadly-shots-former-pfizer-employee-confirms-poison-in-covid-vaccine.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bo Marsh said:


If there is one thing the past year of lockdowns have allowed many of us to discover, is that there are a lot of things where we can manage to get along just fine without them.

Won't let unvaxxed people inside your eatery? Doesn't bother me, and I'm guessing many others as well. The prices keep going up and the portions getting smaller anyway. More money staying in my pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×