# 'Get vaccinated to protect others' was all a lie



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Pfizer admits the vaccine was never tested to see if it prevented transmission of COVID.

Rob Roos MEP 🇳🇱 on Twitter: "🚨 BREAKING: In COVID hearing, #Pfizer director admits: #vaccine was never tested on preventing transmission. "Get vaccinated for others" was always a lie. The only purpose of the #COVID passport: forcing people to get vaccinated. The world needs to know. Share this video! ⤵ https://t.co/su1WqgB4dO" / Twitter


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

“…_erhm…no. We had to move at the speed of The Science!_”

Fun fact: once thought to travel at the so-called Cosmological Constant, ie. The Speed of Light_, The Science!_ has since been proven to travel at the slightly slower speed of the ACH Transfer.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

But if the vaccine protects someone from getting covid, he can't pass it on to others.

That's how I always thought it protected the public. I never read that the vaccine could prevent people with covid from passing it on.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> But if the vaccine protects someone from getting covid, he can't pass it on to others.
> 
> That's how I always thought it protected the public. I never read that the vaccine could prevent people with covid from passing it on.


And, if a pig had wings, it wouldn’t land so hard when it jumps.

We’re talking about the Covid “vaccine” here, not something that _protects someone from getting Covid_.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> We’re talking about the Covid “vaccine” here, not something that _protects someone from getting Covid_.


But that's what vaccines do.


----------



## mzgarden (Mar 16, 2012)

Nevada said:


> But if the vaccine protects someone from getting covid, he can't pass it on to others.
> 
> That's how I always thought it protected the public. I never read that the vaccine could prevent people with covid from passing it on.


If vaxed folks were protected from getting Covid then Anthony Fauci (among others) should not have gotten Covid.
*(Quadruple-vaxxed Dr. Fauci tests positive for COVID-19 Quadruple-vaxxed Dr. Fauci tests positive for COVID-19)*


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Vaccines don't protect you from getting something themselves. They fight it when you get it and lessen the chance ( but don't eliminate it ) that you pass it on by lessening the symptoms.

If you are lucky you never know you had it and your body fought it off.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> But that's what vaccines do.


Right- and we don’t have one for Covid, hence the quotation marks around what Pfizer says their shot is.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

Everything they told us was a lie, and it is being tested. On us. From the lab, to the bats, to humans. The testing is still ongoing.


----------



## Adirondackian (Sep 26, 2021)

Nevada said:


> But that's what vaccines do.


Exactly why many people object to the term "vaccine". I could call my truck an airplane, that doesnt make it able to fly.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Adirondackian said:


> I could call my truck an airplane, that doesnt make it able to fly.


Correct, even if the government encourages the folks printing the dictionaries to "adjust" the definition.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

Adirondackian said:


> I could call my truck an airplane, that doesnt make it able to fly.


If you drove it off a cliff, you would be testing your new airplane. They put us in it, and drove it off the cliff.


----------



## kinderfeld (Jan 29, 2006)

Nevada said:


> That's how I always thought it protected the public.


You misunderstood. Or...believed a lie. Maybe both.



Nevada said:


> But that's what vaccines do.


No they don't.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

mzgarden said:


> If vaxed folks were protected from getting Covid then Anthony Fauci (among others) should not have gotten Covid.


It's not 100% effective.


----------



## Alice In TX/MO (May 10, 2002)

Understatement of the decade.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Nevada said:


> It's not 100% effective.


Hang on to the lies until you settle on the bottom of the pool. Never let go


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Alice In TX/MO said:


> Understatement of the decade.


No vaccine is 100% effective because they rely on patients' ability to make antibodies.


----------



## Adirondackian (Sep 26, 2021)

Nevada said:


> It's not 100% effective.


But they said 95% effective. Are you saying they were wrong or they lied?


----------



## TxGypsy (Nov 23, 2006)

Nevada said:


> No vaccine is 100% effective because they rely on patients' ability to make antibodies.


I keep trying to explain this concept to Drs about my severely immune compromised body 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

Adirondackian said:


> But they said 95% effective. Are you saying they were wrong or they lied?


Yes.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

TxMex said:


> I keep trying to explain this concept to Drs about my severely immune compromised body 🤣🤣🤣


There's a point where vaccines will do no good at all. If your doctor still wants you to take vaccines then he must believe that you are still capable of making antibodies.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

The purpose of vaccines used to be to prevent people from getting infected with a specific pathogen, and thereby to also prevent people from spreading that pathogen to others. Traditional vaccines actually do what they are intended to do, almost every time ... albeit possibly with negative side effects.

Now evidently, the purpose of some 'vaccines' (such as the covid shots) is not to prevent anyone from getting or spreading anything, but instead, to generate $$, increase the power of a small number of people, transfer wealth from some people to others, reduce individual freedom of some people, cause as many health problems that can be blamed on other things as possible (including death, now or not long after one or multiple injections -- for depopulation) ... and to identify the sheeple vs the people.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

CC Pereira said:


> The purpose of vaccines used to be to prevent people from getting infected with a specific pathogen, and thereby to also prevent people from spreading that pathogen to others. Traditional vaccines actually do what they are intended to do, almost every time ... albeit possibly with negative side effects.
> 
> Now evidently, the purpose of some 'vaccines' (such as the covid shots) is not to prevent anyone from getting or spreading anything, but instead, to generate $$, increase the power of a small number of people, transfer wealth from some people to others, reduce individual freedom of some people, cause as many health problems that can be blamed on other things as possible (including death, now or not long after one or multiple injections -- for depopulation) ... and to identify the sheeple vs the people.


Fauci tripled his wealth in the last 3 or four years. He is worth $12+ million


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Nevada said:


> There's a point where vaccines will do no good at all. If your doctor still wants you to take vaccines then he must believe that you are still capable of making antibodies.


Just curious. Did you not see all those people on TV saying things like 'If you don't get the vaccine for yourself, get it for others and your love ones because you don't want to give COVID to them'? We now know that was disinformation by our government and their media sycophants trying to put guilt on people so they would get the vax. Doesn't it bother you when government lies to you?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

poppy said:


> Just curious. Did you not see all those people on TV saying things like 'If you don't get the vaccine for yourself, get it for others and your love ones because you don't want to give COVID to them'?


Sure. If you don't have covid you can't spread covid.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Nevada said:


> Sure. If you don't have covid you can't spread covid.


The shot doesn't stop you from getting Covid.


----------



## TxGypsy (Nov 23, 2006)

Nevada said:


> There's a point where vaccines will do no good at all. If your doctor still wants you to take vaccines then he must believe that you are still capable of making antibodies.


If Drs don't understand that transplant patients are on strong immune suppressants and the effects that has, they need to go to a different medical school.

I think the world of my pcp/nephrologist and as long as the CDC or other government entity hasn't issued guidelines on something, shes a good Dr. 
If the CDC advised that you should cut everyones arms off at the elbows she'd recommend it 🤦

I have a Dr in the family through marriage(none of my kin are smart enough for that) that was right up on that soap box singing the praises of the vaccine....until she was affected. 
You can tell the Drs that have been affected themselves or have family that were adversely affected. They don't ever mention the shot.


----------



## Kiamichi Kid (Apr 9, 2009)

CC Pereira said:


> The purpose of vaccines used to be to prevent people from getting infected with a specific pathogen, and thereby to also prevent people from spreading that pathogen to others. Traditional vaccines actually do what they are intended to do, almost every time ... albeit possibly with negative side effects.
> 
> Now evidently, the purpose of some 'vaccines' (such as the covid shots) is not to prevent anyone from getting or spreading anything, but instead, to generate $$, increase the power of a small number of people, transfer wealth from some people to others, reduce individual freedom of some people, cause as many health problems that can be blamed on other things as possible (including death, now or not long after one or multiple injections -- for depopulation) ... and to identify the sheeple vs the people.


You nailed it.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines don't protect you from getting something themselves. They fight it when you get it and lessen the chance ( but don't eliminate it ) that you pass it on by lessening the symptoms.
> 
> If you are lucky you never know you had it and your body fought it off.


Not true. Perhaps you heard that they changed the definition of vaccine when they could no longer get away with the lie that it prevented disease as other vaccines had been developed to do. You are using the new, revised definition of vaccine. Look up the polio vaccine. Look up the smallpox vaccine.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Orchardsmith said:


> Not true. Perhaps you heard that they changed the definition of vaccine when they could no longer get away with the lie that it prevented disease as other vaccines had been developed to do. You are using the new, revised definition of vaccine. Look up the polio vaccine. Look up the smallpox vaccine.


LOL. My post stands. You need to get something for your immune response to fight it off and that is always what vaccines have done, teach your body to fight off the the disease.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

painterswife said:


> LOL. My post stands. You need to get something for your immune response to fight it off and that is always what vaccines have done, teach your body to fight off the the disease.


LOL back at you. Vaccines traditionally prevented people from getting the disease, as with the polio vaccine. They didn't let you get the disease but not feel so bad. And after getting vaccinated you couldn't pass it along to others. Now, because people woke up to the lies, they changed the definition. Now you get the shot which isn't a vaccine, you get covid, you can pass it along to others, and you can get it again. With polio, we didn't get it, we couldn't pass it along, and we couldn't get it again later. The only reason we're still having this dispute is that some people accepted the lies AND THE NEW DEFINITION!


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

Nevada said:


> Sure. If you don't have covid you can't spread covid.


Where is your proof the vaccine prevented anyone from catching COVID? Good grief. Doesn't the fact that many high in government that took all the shots and boosters in a timely manner but still caught COVID (some of them multiple times) show you that you are wrong?


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Orchardsmith said:


> LOL back at you. Vaccines traditionally prevented people from getting the disease, as with the polio vaccine. They didn't let you get the disease but not feel so bad. And after getting vaccinated you couldn't pass it along to others. Now, because people woke up to the lies, they changed the definition. Now you get the shot which isn't a vaccine, you get covid, you can pass it along to others, and you can get it again. With polio, we didn't get it, we couldn't pass it along, and we couldn't get it again later. The only reason we're still having this dispute is that some people accepted the lies AND THE NEW DEFINITION!


Vaccines always boosted your immunity to fight the disease. It has to enter your body to be fought. That has never changed. That is the science. The new definition only added new ways to make the vaccines.

Putting things in all capitals does not make your incorrect statements correct.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Nevada said:


> But that's what vaccines do.


Read the CDC updated information. It does not prevent you from getting covid.

"People who are fully vaccinated have lower risk of severe illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19."

From the CDC website;









COVID-19 Vaccination


COVID-19 vaccines protect against COVID-19. Get safety info and more.




www.cdc.gov







painterswife said:


> Vaccines don't protect you from getting something themselves. They fight it when you get it and lessen the chance ( but don't eliminate it ) that you pass it on by lessening the symptoms.
> 
> If you are lucky you never know you had it and your body fought it off.


Vaccines used to be used to prevent people from getting sick. Why should we firce children to get the Guardasil or chicken pox vaccine if the just lessen the severity. What about measles? Oh you'll just have a mild outbreak that leaves some scars but you won't die from it. Smallpox would never have been eliminated if people just got a milder version after vaccination.

People not knowing they have covid or thinking they can't possibly have covid because they were vaccinated helped spread the disease. We were lied to when they said the vaccinated couldn't get it. We were lied to when they said the vaccinated couldn't spread it. We were lied to when we were promised updated information about the early trial effectiveness.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines always boosted your immunity to fight the disease. It has to enter your body to be fought. That has never changed. That is the science. The new definition only added new ways to make the vaccines.
> 
> Putting things in all capitals does not make your incorrect statements correct.



Polio and smallpox vaccines caused your body to make antibodies so you would be immune to the disease. While not 100% effective they didn't allow you to become infected and a carrier because you just weren't as sick as you might have been without the series of shots.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Danaus29 said:


> Read the CDC updated information. It does not prevent you from getting covid.
> 
> "People who are fully vaccinated have lower risk of severe illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19."
> 
> ...


What vaccines do has not changed. Some work better than others. I was never lied to because I always knew what vaccines do and are for and what the expectations are.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Danaus29 said:


> Polio and smallpox vaccines caused your body to make antibodies so you would be immune to the disease. While not 100% effective they didn't cause you to become infected and a carrier because you just weren't as sick as you might have been without the series of shots.


Vaccines boost your immune response. Some will fight if off immediately, some will not. You still need to be infected before your body can fight it off. Just because your body effectively fights it off before you get symptoms does not mean you were never infected. 

Covid vaccines do not infect you either.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

painterswife said:


> What vaccines do has not changed. Some work better than others. I was never lied to because I always knew what vaccines do and are for and what the expectations are.


You knew from the beginning that the shots would not keep people from getting or spreading covid? I don't have time to go back and look at the old posts but weren't you advocating that people should get the shot to stop the spread?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I never meant to imply that the covid vaccine, or any vaccine, would cause one to become infected. That was poor wording on my part. I fixed my post to reflect what I meant.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Danaus29 said:


> You knew from the beginning that the shots would not keep people from getting or spreading covid? I don't have time to go back and look at the old posts but weren't you advocating that people should get the shot to stop the spread?


Vaccines reduce spread and save lives in those who it works to raise your immune reactions. I never said it stopped the spread altogether. I know that Vaccines have limitations.


----------



## TomR43 (3 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> But if the vaccine protects someone from getting covid, he can't pass it on to others.
> 
> That's how I always thought it protected the public. I never read that the vaccine could prevent people with covid from passing it on.


I agree with you. The vaccine helps to make the immune system strong and fight the covid.


----------



## Evons hubby (Oct 3, 2005)

Nevada said:


> But if the vaccine protects someone from getting covid, he can't pass it on to others.
> 
> That's how I always thought it protected the public. I never read that the vaccine could prevent people with covid from passing it on.


It doesn’t prevent people from getting or passing COVID. We’ve known that from the start,


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Pretty sure Nevada believed and said otherwise. Pretty sure Nevada posted that it was our patriotic duty to be vaccinated.


----------



## Adirondackian (Sep 26, 2021)

Whats even more fascinating than the failure of the vaccines, is the psychology of those who bought into the lies. Even as it becomes more and more obvious that they were lied into taking an untested drug, they continue to defend and protect those who lied to them. They change their story, lie about the lies, deny, argue, obfuscate...ANYTHING to avoid acknowledging that they were fooled.

Im convinced that many will go to their deaths defending their poisoners. From a psychological/mental health perspective it is truly fascinating to watch.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

The vaccines were a bust. That is settled science.

The question is:
A) Did the government partner with pharma to do the best they could to fight a new unknown?
Or
B) Did they dupe us for some purpose we have yet to discover?

In either case there was lots of money to be made. Pfizer alone made almost $50 billion from Covid. Fauci's net worth doubled during Covid. Maybe the answer is as simple as money. It is frightening to think the world, and our government, created a global panic for no other reason than to harvest train loads of money.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines reduce spread and save lives in those who it works to raise your immune reactions. I never said it stopped the spread altogether. I know that Vaccines have limitations.


I'm confused about how the Covid shot reduces spread?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Mish said:


> I'm confused about how the Covid shot reduces spread?


Maybe taking a college-level microbiology course will help.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Nevada said:


> Maybe taking a college-level microbiology course will help.


Nevada, that was not necessary. I have purposely not posted so I would not be nasty., It does not help any discussion.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)




----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Nevada said:


> Maybe taking a college-level microbiology course will help.


You might reread your old posts on this topic.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

Nevada said:


> Maybe taking a college-level microbiology course will help.


If the shot does not stop one from getting Covid, and thus allows the passing of Covid along to others, then it surely does not reduce the spread.

I'll take a logic course over a microbiology course on this one.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Vaccines ( even Covid) reduce infection in those that can mount a robust immunity reaction. That reduces symptoms and that helps reduce transmission. The less virus spreading in your body due to robust immunity response. the less virus you can pass on. That is logic.

The covid vaccines are less effective at reducing the symptoms that allow spread as other vaccines are capable of but they still do help reduce spread. They do reduce hospitalizations and deaths and that is a great thing.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

painterswife said:


> Nevada, that was not necessary. I have purposely not posted so I would not be nasty., It does not help any discussion.


OK, fair enough. But answering a question like that is pointless. I'll either be told that I don't know what I'm talking about, or be presented with a quote taken out of context.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Nevada said:


> OK, fair enough. But answering a question like that is pointless. I'll either be told that I don't know what I'm talking about, or be presented with a quote taken out of context.


No that is not true. I have answered it now and it was not pointless. Choosing to be kind and effective instead of snarky is helpful to a conversation. I had to sit back and stew on my answer instead of being snarky but it worked out in the end.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines ( even Covid) reduce infection in those that can mount a robust immunity reaction. That reduces symptoms and that helps reduce transmission. The less virus spreading in your body due to robust immunity response. the less virus you can pass on. That is logic.
> 
> The covid vaccines are less effective at reducing the symptoms that allow spread as other vaccines are capable of but they still do help reduce spread. They do reduce hospitalizations and deaths and that is a great thing.


Flawed logic in the case of of Wuflu jab.


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines ( even Covid) reduce infection in those that can mount a robust immunity reaction. That reduces symptoms and that helps reduce transmission. The less virus spreading in your body due to robust immunity response. the less virus you can pass on. That is logic.


Absolutely, that is the way vaccines work. The problem is there are zero studies that prove that this is the way the Covid "vaccine" works or doesn't work, because it was rushed through on a highly...I'll be nice and say hysterical track. It is not a traditional vaccine.

I would love to see the proof that this is the case with this particular "vaccine." 

I also find it strange that it is alleged that the Covid "vaccine" reduces symptoms. Has this been proven? How does one prove something like this? If I am "vaccinated" and get Covid, how does one prove I would have been more sick had I not been "vaccinated?" Or toss it around the other way, I'm not "vaccinated" and I get Covid, how does one prove that I would have not been as sick had I had the shot? I just have a very hard time understanding the logic here.



Nevada said:


> OK, fair enough. But answering a question like that is pointless. I'll either be told that I don't know what I'm talking about, or be presented with a quote taken out of context.


I have never told you you don't know what you're talking about or quoted you out of context.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Evons hubby said:


> It doesn’t prevent people from getting or passing COVID. We’ve known that from the start,


But the CDC says otherwise. In fact they say it three times in the following quote.

*COVID-19 Vaccines Protect Against COVID-19 Infections*_ and Hospitalizations
*Vaccines reduce the risk of COVID-19*, including the risk of severe illness and death among people who are fully vaccinated. In addition to data from clinical trials, evidence from real-world vaccine effectiveness studies show that *COVID-19 vaccines help protect against COVID-19 infections*, with or without symptoms (asymptomatic infections). Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalizations has remained relatively high over time, although it tends to be slightly lower for older adults and for people with weakened immune systems._









COVID-19 Vaccination


COVID-19 vaccines protect against COVID-19. Get safety info and more.




www.cdc.gov


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines ( even Covid) reduce infection in those that can mount a robust immunity reaction. That reduces symptoms and that helps reduce transmission. The less virus spreading in your body due to robust immunity response. the less virus you can pass on. That is logic.


But that’s exactly what getting exposed to Covid does. I’m reasonably healthy and happened to be on my show-season anti-viral vitamin regimen when I was first exposed to Covid and I had almost no symptomatic reaction to it at all.

When the Covid vaccine shot came out, and there was lots of money to be changing hands, the topic of natural immunity was shut down and the very mention of it could get you cancelled. Now, they’re saying the profit-shot does, at best, the same thing as a natural exposure and recovery/response.

When prior vaccines (the actual things, not the shot we’re talking about for Covid) were rolled out while the disease they were designed to counter were still in wide-spread transmission, it was standard procedure to test people for the disease before administering the vaccine. We had a Covid “test” before we had the Covid shot, but none of your fellow Branch Covidians wanted to even entertain the idea of testing and exempting those with existing antibodies.

This fascistic profit-shot campaign had nothing (nothing) to do with trying to protect the public from Covid. It had everything (*EVERYTHING*) to do with getting the sheep to believe the lie, repeat the lie, transfer as much of our money as possible to the pharmaceutical companies, and use it as a litmus test to silence and financially ruin anyone who dared resist the directive.

And, you were party to it.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Mish said:


> Absolutely, that is the way vaccines work. The problem is there are zero studies that prove that this is the way the Covid "vaccine" works or doesn't work, because it was rushed through on a highly...I'll be nice and say hysterical track. It is not a traditional vaccine.
> 
> I would love to see the proof that this is the case with this particular "vaccine."
> 
> ...











Post-vaccination infection rates and modification of COVID-19 symptoms in vaccinated UK school-aged children and adolescents: A prospective longitudinal cohort study


One dose of BNT162b2 vaccine reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for at least 90 days in CA aged 12-17 years. Vaccine protection varied for SARS-CoV-2 variant type (lower for Omicron than Delta variant), and was enhanced by pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection. Severity of COVID-19 presentation...



www.thelancet.com





"
*Interpretation*
One dose of BNT162b2 vaccine reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for at least 90 days in CA aged 12-17 years. Vaccine protection varied for SARS-CoV-2 variant type (lower for Omicron than Delta variant), and was enhanced by pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection. Severity of COVID-19 presentation after vaccination was generally milder, although unvaccinated CA also had generally mild disease. Overall, vaccination was well-tolerated.
"


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

The fact is, they refused to test prior to administering the shot, and shut down any talk about natural immunity because they knew that so many people had already had and recovered from Covid that exempting those with antibodies would seriously cut into the profits of the pharmaceutical companies (and their dividends from investing in them). 

People lost their jobs and saw their lives destroyed because of your complicity in the Covid shot lies and mandates. 

Everyone of you Branch Covidians should be ashamed- and would be, if you knew what shame was.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Nevada said:


> But the CDC says otherwise. In fact they say it three times in the following quote.
> 
> *COVID-19 Vaccines Protect Against COVID-19 Infections*_ and Hospitalizations
> *Vaccines reduce the risk of COVID-19*, including the risk of severe illness and death among people who are fully vaccinated. In addition to data from clinical trials, evidence from real-world vaccine effectiveness studies show that *COVID-19 vaccines help protect against COVID-19 infections*, with or without symptoms (asymptomatic infections). Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalizations has remained relatively high over time, although it tends to be slightly lower for older adults and for people with weakened immune systems._
> ...


You know the CDC has been caught in intentional misinformation, false statements and lies, right?


----------



## Mish (Oct 15, 2015)

painterswife said:


> Post-vaccination infection rates and modification of COVID-19 symptoms in vaccinated UK school-aged children and adolescents: A prospective longitudinal cohort study
> 
> 
> One dose of BNT162b2 vaccine reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection for at least 90 days in CA aged 12-17 years. Vaccine protection varied for SARS-CoV-2 variant type (lower for Omicron than Delta variant), and was enhanced by pre-vaccination SARS-CoV-2 infection. Severity of COVID-19 presentation...
> ...


I have to go clean up a garden bed before the husband pops a vessel waiting for me.

Will read thoroughly later, but from the quote - we're testing infection risk on an already low risk population with a generally mild disease. Also (unless I'm skimming too fast), the vaccination was enhanced by infections which happened before vaccination?

Again, will read more closely later, but I'm not getting much out of that blurb that makes me feel any better.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> But that’s exactly what getting exposed to Covid does.


But there's one striking difference. Exposure to covid is dangerous, because getting covid can be fatal for some people.



GunMonkeyIntl said:


> I’m reasonably healthy and happened to be on my show-season anti-viral vitamin regimen when I was first exposed to Covid and I had almost no symptomatic reaction to it at all.


Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove much. After all, I've had five covid shots so far yet I haven't suffered any serious side effects, and I've never tested positive for covid. While that was my experience, it doesn't necessarily follow that everyone will have the same experience as me.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

I’ve never tested for covid, never took the shot. I have had a cold once during this apparent “pandemic”. Why would I test for Covid? I know ppl who test weekly. I kid you not. Weekly. 

my orange juice did test positive though. That is how accurate the tests are.


----------



## nodak3 (Feb 5, 2003)

Confirmation bias is having a field day with the anti shot crowd I see.

Simple truth is if you want to find data against the shot and look long and hard enough you will find some kook misinterpreting the data to support what you say.

Public health people do know what they are talking about. Cohort studies compare how many per 100,000 thousand get a disease without a jab and with a jab. They also look at cohorts by age, previous health issues, etc. They also look at deaths per 100,000 with the jab and without. Ditto for severe outcome, usually based on need for hospitalization, oxygen, or icu. So that is how they know, statistically speaking, whether people get sicker without the jab or with. It would be easier and more accurate if we were testing everyone all the time, but that is impractical so they can use other metrics, like percentage of all hospital beds with covid patients, including those not admitted for covid. And why the positivity rate on tests matters.

They use math and science to find the trends. It doesn't matter to public health if you know a cousin of someone you had a beer with, and they got really sick but had the jab, and your best friend's boss's brother in law did not got the jab and they did not get very sick. Anecdotal evidence like that is worthless. Congregate data is golden.

Like the wild accusation babies are dropping dead in droves if mama got the shot and breast fed. That started from one woman who reported the death of her child as vaccine related adverse outcome. Problem was the kid died six week later, and they found the cause: rhinovirus.

Or the kerfuffle that the shot causes still birth. No, what they are finding is that having covid causes stillbirth at a higher rate, and that the shot may not protect against that outcome. We don't have excess still birth ONLY among those that got the shot. But we DO have excess still birth among those that get covid. But the baby and mama DO both have a better shot of not dying FROM COVID if mama gets the shot. Reduces mama's odds of directly dying from covid. Does not apparently reduce the odds of the placenta being destroyed by covid blood clots. Before you go there, if it was the jabs causing the clots we would not see this in unvaxxed women. But we do.

Use the brains God and granny gave you.

Thankfully with better ppe, the jabs, and for now the pills, along with rapidly fading after infection natural infection we are in a lull on cases. This stuff might disappear, or it could come roaring back and kill nine out of ten people. Nobody on planet earth knows, because while it is true that USUALLY the milder viruses have a better chance of replicating, that isn't ALWAYS true. It could mutate into the andromeda strain this afternoon, or die off by tomorrow morning. Roll of the dice.

The real worry now is not the acute phase and high death rates. The real worry now is long covid and worse yet, covid effect on mental health. Think what the world will be like if 85% of people were to lose their critical reasoning ability, be easily enraged, and have poor impulse control.

And we are seeing an uptick in all that right now that is keeping some folks in the medical business awake at night. And yes, it is showing up in those that had covid in high numbers, not in those that had the jab.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

nodak3 said:


> Confirmation bias is having a field day with the anti shot crowd I see.
> 
> Simple truth is if you want to find data against the shot and look long and hard enough you will find some kook misinterpreting the data to support what you say.


Generalizations make you look lazy and unwilling to think. No posts that I have seen have indicated members who are against getting shots. Skepticism about this one is a good thing.

And I didn't have to look hard at all. My search engine doesn't tell me what someone else wants me to hear.
The kooks starring in this episode have names like Fauci, CDC, WHO, oh, I think you get the idea.
Maybe Granny's common sense is a little rusty in your neck of the woods.


----------



## farmerDale (Jan 8, 2011)

Those who trust public health officials implicitly. Relay to us what the state of Florida has said recently about the clot shot for males 18 to 49.

Or do you just trust the health officials that tow the line?


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

farmerDale said:


> Those who trust public health officials implicitly. Relay to us what the state of Florida has said recently about the clot shot for males 18 to 49.
> 
> Or do you just trust the health officials that tow the line?


A certain amount of government intervention to the medical profession is necessary so that only qualified people and safe medications are available. What I will say is that I trust bureaucrats over politicians. At least bureaucrats understand the topics they regulate.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Nevada said:


> But there's one striking difference. Exposure to covid is dangerous, because getting covid can be fatal for some people.
> 
> 
> 
> Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove much. After all, I've had five covid shots so far yet I haven't suffered any serious side effects, and I've never tested positive for covid. While that was my experience, it doesn't necessarily follow that everyone will have the same experience as me.


And that is anecdotal evidence. Several people who had all their shots still have got covid.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> But there's one striking difference. Exposure to covid is dangerous, because getting covid can be fatal for some people.
> 
> 
> 
> Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove much. After all, I've had five covid shots so far yet I haven't suffered any serious side effects, and I've never tested positive for covid. While that was my experience, it doesn't necessarily follow that everyone will have the same experience as me.


Exposure to the Covid shot is dangerous. Were you trying to make a point there?

My point about my exposure to Covid wasn’t to present it as evidence of anything, just an illustration of what we’ve known about infectious diseases for hundreds of years. In most cases, if your body is exposed to a pathogen, and successfully fights it off, some level of protection against future exposures is to be expected. That’s what science has taught us and what proved to be true in my case and, for some inexplicable reason, is different than what purveyors of The Science! wants us to believe today.

We were lied to when we were told that the Covid shot was a vaccine. We were lied to when we were told it was 95% effective immunization. Now, when your side has run out of new lies to make up about it, you’re resorting to telling us that the Covid shot just causes an immune response that may (or may not) provide protection similar to natural immunity.

That is exactly what our natural immune response does after exposure to Covid, and THAT was my point. The Covid shot doesn’t do anything that natural exposure does (and that’s being quite generous given the multi-layered lies you’ve told about it so far), and those who had overcome natural exposure should have been exempt from taking any undue risk with the clot-shot.

But that wasn’t allowed to happen. Your side insisted that no tests be conducted before forcing individuals to take this risky shot. You people had no problem destroying the lives of the people who refused, refused to entertain exemptions for those with antibodies, and actively worked to silence anyone who even suggested that natural immunity offered protection like your precious shot.

Disgusting.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> Exposure to the Covid shot is dangerous.


For whatever reason, convincing the public of that seems very important to some. Honestly, I've been trying to understand it. I don't think any reasonable person believes that the vaccine is more dangerous than the disease.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Nevada said:


> For whatever reason, convincing the public of that seems very important to some. Honestly, I've been trying to understand it. I don't think any reasonable person believes that the vaccine is more dangerous than the disease.


I think the statistics bear out, quite clearly, that the jab is as dangerous, if not more so, than the Wuflu for those young and healthy.

Bear in mind, as well, you have no idea of the long term effects of the jab.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Hiro said:


> I think the statistics bear out, quite clearly, that the jab is as dangerous, if not more so, than the Wuflu for those young and healthy.


You're not suggesting that more have died from the vaccine than from the disease, are you? I'd like to see those numbers.


----------



## Adirondackian (Sep 26, 2021)

They told the public that the shot is 95% effective at preventing infection and transmission of the virus. No matter what twists of logic you make up to explain that away, the fact remains that they LIED. Get it through your skull...THEY LIED. What did they do? THEY LIED. Its not debatable, it is recorded fact.

The vaxx was never 95% effective at anything. They told you it was a "pandemic of the unvaxxed" even while entire cruise ships were coming back infected with a 100% vaccination rate. They lied. Its not some complex "twist of science" that we just dont understand...they were just plain old LIES. Healing begins with acceptance. Accept it, they lied repeatedly about pretty much every single thing.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> You're not suggesting that more have died from the vaccine than from the disease, are you? I'd like to see those numbers.


I didn't see where he said anyone died, could you point that out? Or did you make that up?


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> A certain amount of government intervention to the medical profession is necessary so that only qualified people and safe medications are available. What I will say is that I trust bureaucrats over politicians. At least bureaucrats understand the topics they regulate.


You do know that Fauci lied and did fund gain of function research don't you? Here is one example:









Harvard University Professor and Two Chinese Nationals Charged in Three Separate China Related Cases


BOSTON – The U.S. Attorney’s Office announced today that the Chair of Harvard University’s Chemistry and Chemical Biology Department and two Chinese nationals have been charged in connection with aiding the People’s Republic of China.




www.justice.gov





According to court documents, since 2008, Dr. Lieber who has served as the Principal Investigator of the Lieber Research Group at Harvard University, which specialized in the area of nanoscience, has *received more than $15,000,000 in grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DOD).

Lieber became a “Strategic Scientist” at Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) in China and was a contractual participant in China’s Thousand Talents Plan from in or about 2012 to 2017. China’s Thousand Talents Plan is one of the most prominent Chinese Talent recruitment plans that are designed to attract, recruit, and cultivate high-level scientific talent in furtherance of China’s scientific development, economic prosperity and national security. These talent programs seek to lure Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts to bring their knowledge and experience to China and reward individuals for stealing proprietary information. Under the terms of Lieber’s three-year Thousand Talents contract, WUT paid Lieber $50,000 USD per month, living expenses of up to 1,000,000 Chinese Yuan (approximately $158,000 USD at the time) and awarded him more than $1.5 million to establish a research lab at WUT. In return, Lieber was obligated to work for WUT “not less than nine months a year” by “declaring international cooperation projects, cultivating young teachers and Ph.D. students, organizing international conference, applying for patents and publishing articles in the name of” WUT. *

The Department of Justice announced today that the Chair of Harvard University’s Chemistry and Chemical Biology Department and two Chinese nationals have been charged in connection with aiding the People’s Republic of China. 

Dr. Charles Lieber, 60, Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University, was arrested this morning and charged by criminal complaint with one count of making a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement. Lieber will appear this afternoon before Magistrate Judge Marianne B. Bowler in federal court in Boston, Massachusetts.

Yanqing Ye, 29, a Chinese national, was charged in an indictment today with one count each of visa fraud, making false statements, acting as an agent of a foreign government and conspiracy. Ye is currently in China.

Zaosong Zheng, 30, a Chinese national, was arrested on Dec. 10, 2019, at Boston’s Logan International Airport and charged by criminal complaint with attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research to China. On Jan. 21, 2020, Zheng was indicted on one count of smuggling goods from the United States and one count of making false, fictitious or fraudulent statements. He has been detained since Dec. 30, 2019.

Yanqing Ye

According to the indictment, Ye is a Lieutenant of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the armed forces of the People’s Republic of China and member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). On her J-1 visa application, Ye falsely identified herself as a “student” and lied about her ongoing military service at the National University of Defense Technology (NUDT), a top military academy directed by the CCP. It is further alleged that while studying at Boston University’s (BU) Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering from October 2017 to April 2019, Ye continued to work as a PLA Lieutenant completing numerous assignments from PLA officers such as conducting research, assessing U.S. military websites and sending U.S. documents and information to China.

Zaosong Zheng

In August 2018, Zheng entered the United States on a J-1 visa and conducted cancer-cell research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston from Sept. 4, 2018, to Dec. 9, 2019. It is alleged that on Dec. 9, 2019, *Zheng stole 21 vials of biological research and attempted to smuggle them out of the United States aboard a flight destined for China.* Federal officers at Logan Airport discovered the vials hidden in a sock inside one of Zheng’s bags, and not properly packaged. It is alleged that initially, Zheng lied to officers about the contents of his luggage, but later admitted he had stolen the vials from a lab at Beth Israel. Zheng stated that he intended to bring the vials to China to use them to conduct research in his own laboratory and publish the results under his own name.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Ok, those lines weren't there when i posted this???


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Nevada said:


> But if the vaccine protects someone from getting covid, he can't pass it on to others.
> 
> That's how I always thought it protected the public. I never read that the vaccine could prevent people with covid from passing it on.


Never protected from getting covid. Just from getting deathly sick, supposedly, so far is the current info.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

JeffreyD said:


> I didn't see where he said anyone died, could you point that out?


As I pointed out in post 57, the CDC disagrees.

Besides, I got vaccinated and didn't get covid. Doesn't that prove it?


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Nevada said:


> But the CDC says otherwise. In fact they say it three times in the following quote.
> 
> *COVID-19 Vaccines Protect Against COVID-19 Infections*_ and Hospitalizations
> *Vaccines reduce the risk of COVID-19*, including the risk of severe illness and death among people who are fully vaccinated. In addition to data from clinical trials, evidence from real-world vaccine effectiveness studies show that *COVID-19 vaccines help protect against COVID-19 infections*, with or without symptoms (asymptomatic infections). Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalizations has remained relatively high over time, although it tends to be slightly lower for older adults and for people with weakened immune systems._
> ...


Even the manufacture does not claim all that CDC claims


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

When the government give immunity for any liability or side affects to a drug any sane person should be immediately concern


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Redlands Okie said:


> When the government give immunity for any liability or side affects to a drug any sane person should be immediately concern



In this case, anyone that was interested knew the jabs never were never tested on whether they prevented contraction or transmission. They had a group that had been jabbed and a control group that was given a placebo. They tested only those symptomatic and for a very short period of time. The control group was intentionally sabotaged by informing them.

It is a travesty all around and I would like to say I am shocked anyone is defending it. But, the regular suspects here don't surprise me in the least.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> As I pointed out in post 57, the CDC disagrees.
> 
> Besides, I got vaccinated and didn't get covid. Doesn't that prove it?


Ok, you made it up! 
You should read and comment on my DOJ post!
Why don't you?


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines boost your immune response. Some will fight if off immediately, some will not. You still need to be infected before your body can fight it off. Just because your body effectively fights it off before you get symptoms does not mean you were never infected.
> 
> Covid vaccines do not infect you either.


Real vaccines put a bit of the virus, or a killed virus in your system so that your body produces antibodies to prevent getting the disease. If you had to get the disease to build antibodies, then we'd still be getting polio. 
They changed the definition of "vaccine" to suit the liars at the CDC and the politicians who still thought it would keep you from getting covid.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> Maybe taking a college-level microbiology course will help.


Try just explaining how the jab helps prevent the spread. If you can.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> A certain amount of government intervention to the medical profession is necessary so that only qualified people and safe medications are available. What I will say is that I trust bureaucrats over politicians. At least bureaucrats understand the topics they regulate.


Just let that one sink in, folks. Read this again a few times. . . Bureaucrats are hired by politicians, and politicians and bureaucrats have one main goal in their lives: to expand their power. . . . Thank God the government intervention keeps us from being exposed to any unqualified people! I've never heard of an unqualified doctor practicing anywhere.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

The founder of Rolling Stone was just on the Joe Rogan podcast stating that we need more censorship on social media.
In his view, just because government regulation has failed before doesn't mean the government is bad. He thinks we just need better politicians handling the regulation.
To believe bureaucrats are different than politicians is like believing the dog poop on the bottom of your shoe is different than the dog poop your shoe left all over the kitchen floor.


----------



## TxGypsy (Nov 23, 2006)

Mish said:


> I have to go clean up a garden bed before the husband pops a vessel waiting for me.
> 
> Will read thoroughly later, but from the quote - we're testing infection risk on an already low risk population with a generally mild disease. Also (unless I'm skimming too fast), the vaccination was enhanced by infections which happened before vaccination?
> 
> Again, will read more closely later, but I'm not getting much out of that blurb that makes me feel any better.


I don't know that 'a generally mild disease' is an accurate description. If you were perfectly healthy that might be an ok statement. If you have any medical conditions it isn't mild at all. 
I'm not advocating for the shot but the attitude that it's no big deal is incorrect. It has been manipulated to have certain properties.
I know quite a few folks that died from it. I had to have a transplant because of it. In a conversation on a transplant support group just the other day this subject came up and there are a lot of people of all ages that ended up needing a transplant because of covid. I know several folks with long term covid too.

Unfortunately we'll never get accurate statistics on what folks die from and whether they have had the shot or not. I'm seeing a lot more stories of athletes, ems workers and other people that should be in great physical conditions dropping dead, having heart attacks or other serious medical concerns. I want yo know if they've had the shot or covid or both...and how long ago. Chances are good there is a connection.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> For whatever reason, convincing the public of that seems very important to some. Honestly, I've been trying to understand it. I don't think any reasonable person believes that the vaccine is more dangerous than the disease.


Apparently you don't know many reasonable people. Covid 19 is a cold virus. The people whose health is threatened by a cold should take care to protect themselves from it. It's a cold virus. IT'S A COLD VIRUS. Have you heard it's a cold virus? And on two separate occasions, even the CDC admitted that only 6% of the deaths it reported was for people who died OF covid. That's the CDC's figure. European countries reported that the number of deaths from covid was less than that. They scared lots of people with the scary stuff, which turned out to be untrue. Some people are still scared by it. Take yer choice.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Nevada said:


> You're not suggesting that more have died from the vaccine than from the disease, are you? I'd like to see those numbers.


I would like to see the numbers of people who actually died from covid instead of the inflated numbers that included medical neglect and death from other causes within 30 days after a covid diagnosis.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Nevada said:


> As I pointed out in post 57, the CDC disagrees.
> 
> Besides, I got vaccinated and didn't get covid. Doesn't that prove it?


Again, ANECDOTAL EVIDENCE. Many, including Fauci, who have all their shots have contracted covid. Doesn't that prove the shots don't keep people from getting covid?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I will be the last one to say the shot is worse than the disease. I had it. I was sick with it. It took me months to recover from it. I can easily see where someone who is not in good health could easily die from it. *BUT*, the mRNA therapy was touted as an end to the pandemic.









Vaccines should end the pandemic, despite the variants, say experts


Can the current crop of vaccines get us to herd immunity even if variants become widespread? A Harvard immunologist says yes.




news.harvard.edu













Will the COVID-19 vaccine end the pandemic?







www.piedmont.org













A vaccine will not end the pandemic unless everyone can get it | Naciones Unidas







www.un.org





The person who wrote this article did so from the point of view that the vaccine makes you immune and compares it to the measles vaccine. I expected more reliable and accurate information from Johns Hopkins.









Rethinking Herd Immunity and the Covid-19 Response End Game | Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health


Additional data, emerging variants, and new understandings of the disease update our earlier thinking about herd immunity for Covid-19.




publichealth.jhu.edu





Since it was such a miracle cure that should never be questioned, the side effects and contraindications were overlooked, pooh-poohed and swept under the rug. The only side effects that were studied were the J&J blood clots, but that wasn't from the miracle cure mRNA therapy.

The governments, drug companies and doctors had a chance to look at the real life advantages vs disadvantages of the "vaccines" yet they _*refused*_ to do so. And now they wonder why the public doesn't trust the vaccine and people would rather take their chances with the virus!


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

*Stopped Transmission of Covid*
Pfizer executive Janine Small admitted to a European Parliament Member that Pfizer couldn't test for this, because they were moving "at the speed of science" or something.











__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1579830040858329089


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

GTX63 said:


> *Stopped Transmission of Covid*
> Pfizer executive Janine Small admitted to a European Parliament Member that Pfizer couldn't test for this, because they were moving "at the speed of science" or something.
> View attachment 115004
> 
> ...


I think she created a new term there. What exactly is "the speed of science"? First, true science requires collecting solid information before making a determination. She admits they did not do that. All previous vaccines had long term trials as to effectiveness and safety. That is true science. Rushing something a market like they did the vaccines was the opposite of science.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

poppy said:


> I think she created a new term there. What exactly is "the speed of science"?


You would have to ask the HT Patriots.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

nodak3 said:


> Confirmation bias is having a field day with the anti shot crowd I see.
> 
> Simple truth is if you want to find data against the shot and look long and hard enough you will find some kook misinterpreting the data to support what you say.
> 
> ...


You know, you are obviously one of the Convinced. It is your religion, your life. No one dare show you fact or truth, because you will deny reality.

You are also one of the people who vociferously called for the painful demise of those who dared disagree with you, those who insist on having our autonomy and personal choice. You called for your brand of retribution against freedom-loving folk, even when you were shown that your blind belief in the government was incorrect.

SMH


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

poppy said:


> I think she created a new term there. What exactly is "the speed of science"? First, true science requires collecting solid information before making a determination. She admits they did not do that. All previous vaccines had long term trials as to effectiveness and safety. That is true science. Rushing something a market like they did the vaccines was the opposite of science.


IME, the "speed of science" is a plodding, thoughtful, ponderous rate of movement.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Nevada said:


> But if the vaccine protects someone from getting covid, he can't pass it on to others.
> 
> That's how I always thought it protected the public. I never read that the vaccine could prevent people with covid from passing it on.



It never was a vaccine. They lied/changed the definition.

They also now say that Ivermectin is a treatment, Imagine that!


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Orchardsmith said:


> Just let that one sink in, folks. Read this again a few times. . . Bureaucrats are hired by politicians, and politicians and bureaucrats have one main goal in their lives: to expand their power. . . . Thank God the government intervention keeps us from being exposed to any unqualified people! I've never heard of an unqualified doctor practicing anywhere.



The eleven scariest words you will ever hear: "I am from the government, and I am here to help" - R. Regan


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Nevada said:


> As I pointed out in post 57, the CDC disagrees.
> 
> Besides, I got vaccinated and didn't get covid. Doesn't that prove it?


Actually, you may have had covid but didn't know it and most likely you did. It is very contagious.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Pony said:


> You know, you are obviously one of the Convinced. It is your religion, your life. No one dare show you fact or truth, because you will deny reality.
> 
> You are also one of the people who vociferously called for the painful demise of those who dared disagree with you, those who insist on having our autonomy and personal choice. You called for your brand of retribution against freedom-loving folk, even when you were shown that your blind belief in the government was incorrect.
> 
> SMH



How do you feel about Ivermectin?


----------



## Texas23 (6 mo ago)

It could be argued that the “vaccine“ actually ⬆ increased ⬆ the spread of the virus. It is obvious and acknowledged that the vaccine did not prevent people from catching COVID. However, it reduced the symptoms and severity. Therefore, there where a lot people with mild symptoms out in public spreading the virus that otherwise would have been at home in bed eating grandma’s chicken soup.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Texas23 said:


> It could be argued that the “vaccine“ actually ⬆ increased ⬆ the spread of the virus. It is obvious and acknowledged that the vaccine did not prevent people from catching COVID. However, it reduced the symptoms and severity. Therefore, there where a lot people with mild symptoms out in public spreading the virus that otherwise would have been at home in bed eating grandma’s chicken soup.


It could also be argued that the "Two weeks to Slow the Spread" that lasted months was the original super spreader event. All college students sent back home, outdoor activity stopped, packed grocery stores and home improvement stores, and stressing out folks (not to mention intentionally sending Wuflu infected people to nursing homes) seems like an effective way to spread a respiratory virus...a very effective way.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> Maybe taking a college-level microbiology course will help.


Maybe knowing the difference between a virus and a microbe would help.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> How do you feel about Ivermectin?


It's certainly more than horse wormer. Originally, it was developed for humans, but the veterinary world embraced it big time. I remember when I was working as a vet tech (back in the Dark Ages) and Ivermectin came into popular use.

Game changer.

And I still think it is a game changer, for both humans and animals.

Why do you ask?


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> It never was a vaccine. They lied/changed the definition.
> 
> They also now say that Ivermectin is a treatment, Imagine that!


Last year, I acquired a copy of a 1990's era Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, in case I ever needed to look up a word when I did not have access to anything online.

Little did I know that I would need it to be able to back up the true meaning of words.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines ( even Covid) reduce infection in those that can mount a robust immunity reaction. That reduces symptoms and that helps reduce transmission. The less virus spreading in your body due to robust immunity response. the less virus you can pass on. That is logic.
> 
> The covid vaccines are less effective at reducing the symptoms that allow spread as other vaccines are capable of but they still do help reduce spread. They do reduce hospitalizations and deaths and that is a great thing.


It is true that traditional vaccines tend to include either parts of pathogenic microbes or dying pathogenic microbes, which are injected into the body, which the immune system responds to and uses as practice to prevent future infections by the same pathogenic microbes... so yes, infection is caused by traditional vaccines. However, aside from a small handful of pathogenic microbes (such as HCV), in almost every case, after the immune system has destroyed the parts of pathogenic microbes or killed the dying pathogenic microbes, the vaccinated individual cannot thereafter become infected with that strain of that pathogenic microbe, and therefore cannot thereafter spread that pathogenic microbe, even if exposed to it. Traditional vaccines therefore actually do prevent future infections and the spreading of infections ... whereas the covid injections do not.

Many illnesses (such as covid, HIV / AIDS, TB, HCV, etc.), can be spread, whether or not there are symptoms of infection. If anything, reducing symptoms increases the spread of covid, because if you have symptoms, you know you are ill, so you are more likely to reduce your interactions with others, in order to get well and help reduce the spread. If you don't have symptoms, you don't know you are ill, so you are not likely to reduce your interactions with others, and therefore are not likely to reduce the spread.

Covid injections do not prevent anyone from becoming infected with covid, and therefore do not prevent anyone from spreading covid. Covid injections are however, more likely to cause more harm (such as harmful or fatal, temporary or permanent side effects) than good ... as well as generate $$, cause divisions between people, increase the power and control of some people over others, reduce individual freedom of some people, cause many people to be fired or not hired for not drinking the kool-aid ... and then of course there's the political side of things, unnecessary shut downs, loss of small businesses and their employees ... all supposedly due to the covid virus (which actually causes less harm to people than the common flu or covid injections).

Another difference between traditional vaccines and covid injections, is that traditional vaccines were only intended to work for living pathogenic microbes (bacteria, fungi, protozoa), not viruses (non-living parasitic bits of genetic material).

No vaccine is perfect though, and any one of them can produce harmful or even fatal side effects ... but the covid injections have thus far caused far more harmful or fatal side effects than all traditional (real) vaccines before it -- combined.


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> Exposure to covid is dangerous, because getting covid can be fatal for some people.


Exposure to covid injections is dangerous, because getting covid injections can be fatal for some people.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Orchardsmith said:


> Bureaucrats are hired by politicians


Bureaucrats are generally career employees.


----------



## JRHill02 (Jun 20, 2020)

In our house I've had every covid stick. The next (4th) comes next Monday. I also get a flu shot every year. I've had the shingles shot. The tetanus, the this and the that. I get anything that is advised by my PC. Oh noooo.

I'm still breathing. A a matter of fact I don't even get a seasonal cold or flu. Its been a bunch of years since any of that and I am getting old. I should be vulnerable.

There was a time when none of my children, seven of 'em, (previous marriage) were allowed to get shots, checkups, nothing. Guess what happened when they had to go off to the military, colleges or whatever. They were screwed. No education credentials, nothing medical, no SSN and in a few cases no birth certificates, NO MEDICAL RECORDS. It was disaster for me to prove they were alive. At one point I loaded them into the pickup and drove 2.5 hours to the SSA office to get them a number. That worked. It was pre 9/11. I gave them the mark of the beast. The Ex actually got mileage in court against me for doing that.

Friggin' shot arguments.... I'd be willing to bet that those who get sick or are worried about a vaccinations are already sick in some way, obese, malnourished, or emotionally complex. But you will risk those around you. But you have something to blame. Yup, you have to have something to blame, eh? The evil shot. The system.

I live way off the system. Every one of my kids is a success except for one that died. Heads of corporate departments, high in the military, successful self employed, a daughter who is a successful aircraft mechanic, another in nursing. Living away was my choice. But look at what they did with their opportunities. Oh, and they ALL got their shots and are doing just fine.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I wish the shots had worked as well as the developers wanted them to work. It would have been great if the covid shots were as safe and effective as the dead polio virus vaccine or the smallpox vaccine. Suffocating because your lungs are full of gunk or being poisoned by your body because your kidneys have shut down is a horrible way to die. 

The studies should have been continued. Side effects should have been recognized and addressed. So much more should have been done.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

painterswife said:


> Vaccines always boosted your immunity to fight the disease. It has to enter your body to be fought. That has never changed. That is the science. The new definition only added new ways to make the vaccines.
> 
> Putting things in all capitals does not make your incorrect statements correct.


It apparently doesn't help with reading them, either.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Texas23 said:


> It could be argued that the “vaccine“ actually ⬆ increased ⬆ the spread of the virus. It is obvious and acknowledged that the vaccine did not prevent people from catching COVID. However, it reduced the symptoms and severity. Therefore, there where a lot people with mild symptoms out in public spreading the virus that otherwise would have been at home in bed eating grandma’s chicken soup.


Where is the comparison to show that the jab reduced the symptoms and severity. It's a cold virus. Cold viruses affect different people differently. Infections with low mortality are best fought with herd immunity. About a year ago, everybody stopped talking about herd immunity. That's about the time the problem began to go away. Why did it fade in importance? HERD IMMUNITY.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> Bureaucrats are generally career employees.


Glad you responded. You've bought the old Progressive argument that if we just hire experts and SCIENTISTS, they'll guide us because they're only interested in science, not politics. This ascribes superhuman traits to them, and that kind of worship is never warranted. They're still human. They are political creatures like many of the rest of us. They still have points of view and agendas and egos. The fact that they're often career employees is one of the worst aspects. They know it's nearly impossible to fire one of them, so they do things others would lose their jobs for. They're parasites and agenda-drivers for the most part, and they are a plague on the Republic, like most lawyers. To think they will just purely think scientific thoughts and look out for us from on high is the ultimate self-deception.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Danaus29 said:


> I wish the shots had worked as well as the developers wanted them to work. It would have been great if the covid shots were as safe and effective as the dead polio virus vaccine or the smallpox vaccine. Suffocating because your lungs are full of gunk or being poisoned by your body because your kidneys have shut down is a horrible way to die.
> 
> The studies should have been continued. Side effects should have been recognized and addressed. So much more should have been done.


The problem is that the science types knew much of this and lied about it. What they didn't know they made up and told lies about that. The studies are ongoing, but the CDC and the science types have so discredited themselves now that nobody except a few of the ultra-gullible believe them, or will ever believe them again. Your grasp of the obvious is truly remarkable.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Orchardsmith said:


> Your grasp of the obvious is truly remarkable.


Your pointing it out is precious.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1580308698290757632


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Danaus29 said:


> I would like to see the numbers of people who actually died from covid instead of the inflated numbers that included medical neglect and death from other causes within 30 days after a covid diagnosis.


To get the CDC's estimate of the number of people who died FROM covid, multiply the total number of deaths by .06. The CDC says only 6% of the people they originally had reported as dying actually died from covid. They repeated this statistic twice publicly. They haven't mentioned it since. It's a pack of crooks and scaremongers. It's a cold virus. That's it.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

About 5.5% of death certificates listed covid as the only cause.









Death Certificate–Based ICD-10 Diagnosis Codes for COVID-19


Among 378,048 death certificates from 2020 listing COVID-19 as a




www.cdc.gov





But even those can't be verified as attributable to covid.

"The findings in this report are subject to at least two limitations. First, the accuracy of documentation of chain-of-event and significant contributing conditions on death certificates is known to be suboptimal (_10_); the effect of COVID-19 on completion of death certificates merits further study, with an emphasis on variation by time, jurisdiction in which the death occurred, age group, race, ethnicity, and setting of death. Second, CDC was unable to compare death certificate data with decedent’s medical records or autopsy reports for end-of-life events and co-occurring diagnoses. Medical record review is needed to confirm findings from this study and elucidate more information for decedents with only COVID-19 listed on their death certificate or those that could not be plausibly categorized as attributable to COVID-19 based on death certificate data alone."


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Danaus29 said:


> About 5.5% of death certificates listed covid as the only cause.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No kidding. Even the CDC admitted it's only 6%. They're probably still exaggerating the numbers. All of these turkeys have destroyed their own credibility. Who is goofy enough to believe anything they say now?


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Danaus29 said:


> Your pointing it out is precious.


I think you meant prescient.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I don't think that word means what you think it means.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Danaus29 said:


> I don't think that word means what you think it means.


I appreciate ya!


----------



## boatswain2PA (Feb 13, 2020)

Re the OP: I don't think the "get vaccinated to protect others" was necessarily a lie, but rather propaganda. Not all propaganda is false, but usually pretty "dumbed down".

In reality, the vaccine seemed to have prevented a lot of morbidity and mortality, and common sense suggests that it would reduce transmission. However, to my knowledge, there were no STUDIES about transmission reduction, and that would be a very hard study to produce as we had so many other interventions in place.

The government, in it's infinitesimal wisdom, screwed up just about everything about the response to this pandemic.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> Bureaucrats are generally career employees.


That are exceptionally useless at what they do!
Fauci is a prime example. So is Dr. Barbara Ferrer, the health director in LA. Her PhD is in....
Social welfare....lol


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Holding a silver dollar and calling it a diamond.
The media does it, and so do we.
Someone no one has ever heard of is cast in a blockbuster hollywood movie, or they become a rookie sports sensation, or they do important work in a specific scientific or medical field. Soon they are being asked, or just speaking out, on issues for which they have no more grasp that you or I.
We have all known someone with a brilliant mind when it comes to a specific field, who is a complete idiot at everything else.


----------



## mamagoose (Nov 28, 2003)

HDRider said:


> The vaccines were a bust. That is settled science.
> 
> The question is:
> A) Did the government partner with pharma to do the best they could to fight a new unknown?
> ...


The chinavirus and experimental injection are only a part of the $$$ making/power scheme. Some of us will live long enough to fully experience more of what's involved.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

boatswain2PA said:


> Re the OP: I don't think the "get vaccinated to protect others" was necessarily a lie, but rather propaganda. Not all propaganda is false, but usually pretty "dumbed down".
> 
> In reality, the vaccine seemed to have prevented a lot of morbidity and mortality, and common sense suggests that it would reduce transmission. However, to my knowledge, there were no STUDIES about transmission reduction, and that would be a very hard study to produce as we had so many other interventions in place.
> 
> The government, in it's infinitesimal wisdom, screwed up just about everything about the response to this pandemic.


Actually, we now know that 'get vaccinated to protect others' was, in fact, a lie. They never ran trials to see if it prevented transmission, and in fact it didn't. They recently admitted this. The bottom line is that the drawbacks of the jabs outweigh the benefits, IMHO, and in the HO of many others.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Orchardsmith said:


> They never ran trials to see if it prevented transmission


What would that trial look like? Would they monitor people who don't have covid?


----------



## boatswain2PA (Feb 13, 2020)

Orchardsmith said:


> Actually, we now know that 'get vaccinated to protect others' was, in fact, a lie. They never ran trials to see if it prevented transmission, and in fact it didn't. They recently admitted this. The bottom line is that the drawbacks of the jabs outweigh the benefits, IMHO, and in the HO of many others.


That is what I said, except for it being a lie.

Virtually impossible to design a study about transmissibility effects of a vaccine when we were concurrently using a wide range of other methods to reduce transmission.

But the vaccines certainly reduced M&M, and we can reasonably infer that less sick = less virions = less transmissibility. That's an assumption, but reasonable.

The "get vaxed for others" was not a lie, it was propaganda.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1580905408163561472


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Not sure why but my health insurance application a couple weeks ago had a whole section asking if I ever had covid, diagnosed for covid, and similar questions.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> What would that trial look like? Would they monitor people who don't have covid?


Well, don't ask them, because they didn't bother to find out. They said it would stop the transmission. They lied.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Redlands Okie said:


> Not sure why but my health insurance application a couple weeks ago had a whole section asking if I ever had covid, diagnosed for covid, and similar questions.


Interesting. That is an opposite of what SA is saying.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

boatswain2PA said:


> That is what I said, except for it being a lie.
> 
> Virtually impossible to design a study about transmissibility effects of a vaccine when we were concurrently using a wide range of other methods to reduce transmission.
> 
> ...


One of the most famous purveyors of propaganda of all time based his propaganda on the Big Lie. Look it up. You're talking about a difference without a distinction. They pushed the line and they knew it wasn't true. We call that a lie where I come from.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Orchardsmith said:


> Well, don't ask them, because they didn't bother to find out. They said it would stop the transmission. They lied.


I am not defending anyone involved, but we do need to keep in mind that health officials were facing a big unknown and running scared. Add that to the fact they saw that big money could be made. Bam! We got what we got.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

If they were really scared and doing their best to help people, many of the early treatments and options other than the mRNA vax would have been considered.


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Pony said:


> Last year, I acquired a copy of a 1990's era Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, in case I ever needed to look up a word when I did not have access to anything online.
> 
> Little did I know that I would need it to be able to back up the true meaning of words.
> [/QUO





HDRider said:


> I am not defending anyone involved, but we do need to keep in mind that health officials were facing a big unknown and running scared. Add that to the fact they saw that big money could be made. Bam! We got what we got.



There are professionals who know how to do studies and do them correctly

The trials that were done were truncated, and, making things worse (research wise), the placebo folks were given the jab when the trial was called off.
this is a big deal. If you want to know more, look up Dr John Campbell. He is on You Tube, excellent researcher.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

HDRider said:


> I am not defending anyone involved, but we do need to keep in mind that health officials were facing a big unknown and running scared. Add that to the fact they saw that big money could be made. Bam! We got what we got.


I agree that it was a huge unknown and I also remember health officials stating that the vaccines were the best option at that time and while not perfect, they were a useful tool until something better came along. 

Then came Bam, we got what we got.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> If they were really scared and doing their best to help people, many of the early treatments and options other than the mRNA vax would have been considered.


You forgot what else I said


HDRider said:


> Add that to the fact they saw that big money could be made


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

wr said:


> I agree that it was a huge unknown and I also remember health officials stating that the vaccines were the best option at that time and while not perfect, they were a useful tool until something better came along.
> 
> Then came Bam, we got what we got.


We have chronic Bam here in Suckistan


----------



## boatswain2PA (Feb 13, 2020)

Orchardsmith said:


> You're talking about a difference without a distinction


There is a big distinction between a lie and being (possibly) wrong.

I'm wrong all the time, but I never lie.

In this regard, "we" made reasonable assumption that decreased M&M = decreased virion numbers = decreased transmissibility. This equation is generally true for every other virus, and is likely true for covid.

Is it proven true? No, we don't have any studies showing Vax decreases transmission. But on the other hand, none of you with pitchforks in hand have any studies that show it does not!

But it makes sense that it does, and that common sense made it into the propaganda the government fed its minions.

Some people can understand that nuance. Some wont be able to.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

boatswain2PA said:


> There is a big distinction between a lie and being (possibly) wrong.
> 
> I'm wrong all the time, but I never lie.
> 
> ...


I understand it, and it's still a distinction without a difference. I also know that you can't prove a negative, so just don't even go there.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

wr said:


> I agree that it was a huge unknown and I also remember health officials stating that the vaccines were the best option at that time and while not perfect, they were a useful tool until something better came along.
> 
> Then came Bam, we got what we got.


In addition, they didn't let anything better come along. They undermined and sabotaged every other option. They lied about those, too. Look, they're thugs. It's what thugs do.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

Orchardsmith said:


> No kidding. Even the CDC admitted it's only 6%. They're probably still exaggerating the numbers. All of these turkeys have destroyed their own credibility.* Who is goofy enough to believe anything they say now?*


Well....

Nope. Nope....

But...

Well. You know.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Orchardsmith said:


> In addition, they didn't let anything better come along. They undermined and sabotaged every other option. They lied about those, too. Look, they're thugs. It's what thugs do.


And THAT is precisely the point. They _could_ have just been wrong about the vaccine (they weren’t, but they could have been), but it’s all the other lies that tell us the truth.

They spiked everything else that could have been helpful. That is not the action of a health service that is in a scared panic. They colluded with social media to silence anyone that anything less than 100% behind the thing they _may have_ been wrong about. They told the truth about the masks… before they started the lie about the masks. They flat out refused to entertain talk about natural and herd immunity. You couldn’t shop at the local hardware store, but Walmart and Home Depot were safe. You could catch Covid-aids walking through a restaurant, but not at your table. You could catch Covid in church, but not at a BLM riot. They fed us death-counts inflated to include everyone who died of literally ANYTHING within two months of having maybe had Covid-aids, while intentionally downplaying and outright hiding the deaths from the “vaccine”. Hell, they even tried to cast the “vaccine” as ineffective and dangerous until a change in political power took place.

They may have been innocently wrong about any one of those things, but not all of them. They weren’t just wrong about any of them, though. Everything they did was 100% political and intentional, and went 100% according to plan.

And, they handed us the bill.


----------



## boatswain2PA (Feb 13, 2020)

I think the biggest damage they did was ruining the trust in medicine, as is evident in these boards.

I tell my patients all the time that "I don't know". 
The idjits in charge of the federal (and most state) responses never had that conversation.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

HDRider said:


> You forgot what else I said


I haven't forgot about the money and profit. That kicked into high gear about the time we were finding out the shot wasn't as good as they claimed. The profit aspect is why expensive, yet not helpful, treatments were still being pushed as the only treatment. Profit is why the vaccines were mandated. Profit is why hospitals laid off employees just before the real surge began.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

boatswain2PA said:


> I think the biggest damage they did was ruining the trust in medicine, as is evident in these boards.
> 
> I tell my patients all the time that "I don't know".
> The idjits in charge of the federal (and most state) responses never had that conversation.


I agree. I realize there was genuine fear when covid was discovered but I have issues with how lines were blurred, and hypothesis were stated as facts but I also blame the media for their need to spin and bold claims.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

wr said:


> I agree. I realize there was genuine fear when covid was discovered but I have issues with how lines were blurred, and hypothesis were stated as facts but I also blame the media for their need to spin and bold claims.


The media and government were herding us


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> And THAT is precisely the point. They _could_ have just been wrong about the vaccine (they weren’t, but they could have been), but it’s all the other lies that tell us the truth.
> 
> They spiked everything else that could have been helpful. That is not the action of a health service that is in a scared panic. They colluded with social media to silence anyone that anything less than 100% behind the thing they _may have_ been wrong about. They told the truth about the masks… before they started the lie about the masks. They flat out refused to entertain talk about natural and herd immunity. You couldn’t shop at the local hardware store, but Walmart and Home Depot were safe. You could catch Covid-aids walking through a restaurant, but not at your table. You could catch Covid in church, but not at a BLM riot. They fed us death-counts inflated to include everyone who died of literally ANYTHING within two months of having maybe had Covid-aids, while intentionally downplaying and outright hiding the deaths from the “vaccine”. Hell, they even tried to cast the “vaccine” as ineffective and dangerous until a change in political power took place.
> 
> ...


These are excellent points. So from the start we had to figure out what was going on ourselves and put together a strategy for self-protection. We learned there were certain vitamins and certain other things, that helped. I like the taste of tonic water! I know what minerals and vitamins to take and I have supplies of them. And above all, all throughout the scamdemic, I kept reminding myself that it's a cold virus, and we've had those before. We discovered from other countries that there were drugs that have been used for a long time that worked. I have a list of those. So let the liars and progressives and self-important officials keep lecturing everybody. I'm not listening to them any more or to their pathetic followers.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> And THAT is precisely the point. They _could_ have just been wrong about the vaccine (they weren’t, but they could have been), but it’s all the other lies that tell us the truth.
> 
> They spiked everything else that could have been helpful. That is not the action of a health service that is in a scared panic. They colluded with social media to silence anyone that anything less than 100% behind the thing they _may have_ been wrong about. They told the truth about the masks… before they started the lie about the masks. They flat out refused to entertain talk about natural and herd immunity. You couldn’t shop at the local hardware store, but Walmart and Home Depot were safe. You could catch Covid-aids walking through a restaurant, but not at your table. You could catch Covid in church, but not at a BLM riot. They fed us death-counts inflated to include everyone who died of literally ANYTHING within two months of having maybe had Covid-aids, while intentionally downplaying and outright hiding the deaths from the “vaccine”. Hell, they even tried to cast the “vaccine” as ineffective and dangerous until a change in political power took place.
> 
> ...


I am still waiting on the "medical professionals" that intentionally overdosed their test subjects with hydroxychloroquine that had a known toxicity to be held accountable (lined up to a wall). 

Once again:


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)




----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Hiro said:


> I am still waiting on the "medical professionals" that intentionally overdosed their test subjects with hydroxychloroquine that had a known toxicity to be held accountable (lined up to a wall).


I don’t know that one. What’s that about? I thought they did everything they could to hydroxychloroquine out of the discourse.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Hiro said:


> I am still waiting on the "medical professionals" that intentionally overdosed their test subjects with hydroxychloroquine that had a known toxicity to be held accountable (lined up to a wall).
> 
> Once again:
> 
> View attachment 115046


How about a reliable source for that?


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

wr said:


> I agree that it was a huge unknown and I also remember health officials stating that the vaccines were the best option at that time and while not perfect, they were a useful tool until something better came along.
> 
> Then came Bam, we got what we got.



Some health workers said the vaccine was good. 
There was Ivermectin, it was and is good against the wuhan virus.(actually the CDC now recomendds IVR for treatment against covid now. Go figure)

The jab was pushed down on US


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> Some health workers said the vaccine was good.
> There was Ivermectin, it was and is good against the wuhan virus.(actually the CDC now recomendds IVR for treatment against covid now. Go figure)
> 
> The jab was pushed down on US


_*Ivermectin Products are Not Approved by FDA to Prevent or Treat COVID-19*_
https://emergency.cdc.gov/newsletters/coca/020122.htm 

Why is it so important to you to spread information that you know is false? What outcome are you hoping for?

Is it simply to discredit the CDC? Are you suggesting that the vaccines aren't necessary because if someone gets covid he can be cured with Ivermectin?

Strangely, the belief that Ivermectin can cure covid runs along political ines. Why is that? Do some people really seek medical advice from politicians?








Study shows political affiliation drove use of ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine


The use of two unproven COVID-19 treatments was higher in counties with a larger share of Republican voters in late 2020, according to a study released Friday, suggesting stark political difference…




thehill.com


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Nevada said:


> _*Ivermectin Products are Not Approved by FDA to Prevent or Treat COVID-19*_
> https://emergency.cdc.gov/newsletters/coca/020122.htm
> 
> Why is it so important to you to spread information that you know is false? What outcome are you hoping for?
> ...


The CDC discredited themselves. HCQ or ivermectin plus zinc work to reduce the symptoms and dangers of the Wuflu.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Let's put the numbers in perspective.

"According to the National Poison Data System (NPDS), which collects information from the nation's 55 poison control centers, there was a 245% jump in reported exposure cases from July to August — from 133 to 459.

The troubling trend has been on the rise since the start of 2021 — despite warnings from state health officials and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention against taking ivermectin. The NPDS says 1,143 ivermectin exposure cases were reported between Jan. 1 and Aug. 31. That marks an increase of 163% over the same period last year."









Poison Control Centers Are Fielding A Surge Of Ivermectin Overdose Calls


The nation's poison control centers saw a 245% jump in reported exposure cases from July to August as more people take the anti-parasite drug that some falsely claim treats COVID-19.




www.npr.org





In some cases where people needed ivermectin, they couldn't get it because of CDC interference.

In contrast, how many people had serious adverse reactions to the vaccine? We'll never know because the CDC and other agencies have refused to publish that information. In cases where there were severe reactions, and sometimes death, the agency in charge of investigating it just says "it's not vaccine related".

How many of those ivermectin overdose symptoms were caused by another condition? We will never know because "ivermectin=BAD" was the mantra of the pandemic.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Nevada said:


> _*Ivermectin Products are Not Approved by FDA to Prevent or Treat COVID-19*_
> https://emergency.cdc.gov/newsletters/coca/020122.htm
> 
> Why is it so important to you to spread information that you know is false? What outcome are you hoping for?
> ...


I think a lot of misinformation is spread on both sides and I would suggest you have been pushing the political narrative harder than most. 

I recall you offering insulting people who were undecided, have said multiple times that the vaccine would eradicate covid, just like polio and you were quite elated when people lost their jobs.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

wr said:


> I recall you offering insulting people who were undecided, have said multiple times that the vaccine would eradicate covid, just like polio and you were quite elated when people lost their jobs.


He had plenty of like minded. The divide was not made less wide.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> _*Ivermectin Products are Not Approved by FDA to Prevent or Treat COVID-19*_
> https://emergency.cdc.gov/newsletters/coca/020122.htm
> 
> Why is it so important to you to spread information that you know is false? What outcome are you hoping for?
> ...


While we’re flogging misinformation:


Nevada said:


> You didn't know that near-zero prime rates for 4 years would be inflationary? If we pump that much money into the economy it's going to catch up with us sooner or later.


Have you figured out which 4 years of near-zero rates you were thinking of? The 8 years of “4 years of near zero rates” under Obama, or the 1 year of “4 years of near zero rates” under Trump?

Or was that just a drive-by, and you weren’t expecting to be called out on repeating what you were told to say?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Nevada wasn't the only one pushing the ills of the world on the unvaccinated. IIRC his comments were pretty much on the mild side. There was a poster who wished a miserable, lingering death on the unvaccinated. I know who it was but I don't think that post exists so I won't name names, they know who they are. I can never forget that comment. Maybe some day when I am old and senile, but not any time soon.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> Nevada wasn't the only one pushing the ills of the world on the unvaccinated. IIRC his comments were pretty much on the mild side. There was a poster who wished a miserable, lingering death on the unvaccinated. I know who it was but I don't think that post exists so I won't name names, they know who they are. I can never forget that comment. Maybe some day when I am old and senile, but not any time soon.


We all recall who the demon was. I pushed her hard so that her position was crystal clear and no mistakes could be made on where she stood. She had no mercy. She only had contempt. Mental illness overcame her and she is no longer with us.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Hiro said:


> The CDC discredited themselves. HCQ or ivermectin plus zinc work to reduce the symptoms and dangers of the Wuflu.


Some time back I read an article that claimed an increased survival rate among covid patients who were given ivermectin. It turned out to be true. But the thing was that the data was obtained from third world countries, such as undeveloped African countries, Bangladesh, etc.

Many of those covid patients arrived at hospitals with a family of parasites living in their digestive tracts. Patients who were given ivermectin did better because the parasites were making them unhealthy. Knowing that, you can't expect similar results here in North America.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

HDRider said:


> We all recall who the demon was. I pushed her hard so that her position was crystal clear and no mistakes could be made on where she stood. She had no mercy. She only had contempt. Mental illness overcame her and she is no longer with us.


Not the one you are thinking of. I was shocked when I read it because it was made by someone I would never expect it from.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> Not the one you are thinking of. I was shocked when I read it because it was made by someone I would never expect it from.


They were legion


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Hmmm, back in 2014 the CDC said internal parasites were quite common in the US.









CDC warns of common parasites plaguing millions in U.S.


The CDC says Americans are at risk for acquiring illnesses associated with these creepy microscopic organisms




www.cbsnews.com


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Danaus29 said:


> Hmmm, back in 2014 the CDC said internal parasites were quite common in the US.


Sure, Americans get parasites. But it depends on what "quite common" means. Access to medical care is much better here. When we visit our doctors and complain of symptoms of parasites. Third world countries have less access to medical care, so they often learn to live with the symptoms.

But if a covid patient shows up at an American hospital with intestinal parasites, I'm sure they would do better with ivermectin or some other dewormer.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Danaus29 said:


> Nevada wasn't the only one pushing the ills of the world on the unvaccinated. IIRC his comments were pretty much on the mild side. There was a poster who wished a miserable, lingering death on the unvaccinated. I know who it was but I don't think that post exists so I won't name names, they know who they are. I can never forget that comment. Maybe some day when I am old and senile, but not any time soon.


I honestly had faith in humanity until covid and if we are talking about the same people, the thing I found most shocking was they present them to the world as Christians. No Christian I've know would ever heap hate and misery on others.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Danaus29 said:


> Not the one you are thinking of. I was shocked when I read it because it was made by someone I would never expect it from.


I can recall at least current 3 members who shared such gleeful contempt. It is stunning, in a time when one ideological group claims to own compassion.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

HDRider said:


> We all recall who the demon was. I pushed her hard so that her position was crystal clear and no mistakes could be made on where she stood. She had no mercy. She only had contempt. Mental illness overcame her and she is no longer with us.


The great 1918 flu pandemic was frequently brought up and claimed that it would be only a mere shadow of the dark winter that was to come, thanks to "antivaxxers".


----------



## CC Pereira (9 mo ago)

Nevada said:


> _*Ivermectin Products are Not Approved by FDA to Prevent or Treat COVID-19*_
> https://emergency.cdc.gov/newsletters/coca/020122.htm
> 
> Why is it so important to you to spread information that you know is false? What outcome are you hoping for?
> ...


The covid 'vaccines' do not prevent or treat anything, but they can cause temporary or permanent injuries (such as myocarditis, pericarditis, heart attack, SADS, covid, death, etc.), so obviously the covid shots have always been and continue to be unnecessary, experimental, and potentially dangerous. 

Ivermectin also actually does help to treat covid, but that information (as well as the ineffective or dangerous nature of the covid shots, masks, and PCR tests) was suppressed and censored, for political and $$ reasons. Evidently, a lot of people fall for the lies, pushed by much of the MSM, politicians, and pharma, rather than learning about reality, from people who do not benefit politically or financially from others taking experimental shots, wearing ineffective masks, and getting PCR tests.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

The ones I can't understand is those that seemed so pleased when essential workers were punished for not vaccinating. 

We were the same people that were expected to suck it up and make the world turn when there were no vaccinations but all that changed the second they became available and those same people celebrated the dismissal of so many. 

I watched one member who spewed ugliness about the filthy unvaccinated, howl when their mail was not delivered promptly, with absolutely no comprehension that those unemployeed people could have that much impact on their small little world. 

There was no kindness, no empathy, no desire to understand. Just ugliness fuelled by propeganda.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

Danaus29 said:


> Not the one you are thinking of. I was shocked when I read it because it was made by someone I would never expect it from.


Yeah, I think I know the one you're thinking of. Asserting her "Christianity" whilst calling down the worst kind of death and horror upon people. Still does it, though not as overtly. 

Disappointing and sad.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Son of a bull! I just lost a post and had closed the link I had put in the post!

Anyway, pertaining to this thread, the New York state supreme court recently ruled that city employees who were fired for not getting the shot should be reinstated with back pay because the shots do not prevent one from contracting or spreading covid.









New York Supreme Court reinstates all employees fired for being unvaccinated, orders backpay


The New York state Supreme Court reinstated all state employees fired for being unvaccinated during the pandemic Monday, saying the government violated their rights.




www.foxnews.com


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Nevada said:


> _*Ivermectin Products are Not Approved by FDA to Prevent or Treat COVID-19*_
> https://emergency.cdc.gov/newsletters/coca/020122.htm
> 
> Why is it so important to you to spread information that you know is false? What outcome are you hoping for?
> ...


Just to be clear IVERMECTIN WORKS, IS SAFE, AND IS COST EFFECTIVE.

The JAB is none of these things. The jab does not slow spread, does not stop covaids, and is ridiculously expensive.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa said:


> Just to be clear IVERMECTIN WORKS, IS SAFE, AND IS COST EFFECTIVE.
> 
> The JAB is none of these things. The jab does not slow spread, does not stop covaids, and is ridiculously expensive.


I'm always open to hearing new information. Where did you learn those things?


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Nevada said:


> I'm always open to hearing new information. Where did you learn those things?


I learned something new. I didn't think you had a sense of humor...


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Hiro said:


> I learned something new. I didn't think you had a sense of humor...


It looks more like medical advice than humor.


----------



## JeffreyD (Dec 27, 2006)

Nevada said:


> It looks more like medical advice than humor.


Looks like an invitation to investigate for your biased self. I didn't take it as medical advice. Ymmv


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Hiro said:
> 
> 
> > I learned something new. I didn't think you had a sense of humor...
> ...


If there’s one thing that 4 years of near-zero interest rates will teach you…


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> If there’s one thing that 4 years of near-zero interest rates will teach you…


@Nevada doesn't remember.

Heck, he doesn't remember bragging around here for years about how he was able to retire early from the oil business. And then it didn't work out like his mentor said so now he claims differently.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I do remember him saying he left the oil business and went into business for himself. I guess a lot of people consider that to be retiring early.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Danaus29 said:


> I do remember him saying he left the oil business and went into business for himself. I guess a lot of people consider that to be retiring early.


My objective wasn't to be independently wealthy, it was to earn a good living from home. I was able to accomplish that. It wasn't always easy though. During the 20 years I worked from home I had to completely change what I was doing several times. Business conditions change, and opportunities come & go. There were times that I was considering going back to oil.

But it wasn't all from home. Some might recall that I had an opportunity to do asset recovery work on Navy ships. I really enjoyed it. Ships became available on & off for about 10 years. I never passed-up an opportunity to go to the shipyard.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> I do remember him saying he left the oil business and went into business for himself. I guess a lot of people consider that to be retiring early.


His words. Not mine.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

nchobbyfarm said:


> His words. Not mine.


I retired from the oil business but I still had to work.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Nevada said:


> I retired from the oil business


That's what I said 12 days ago but you claimed you didn't......


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> My objective wasn't to be independently wealthy, it was to earn a good living from home. I was able to accomplish that. It wasn't always easy though. During the 20 years I worked from home I had to completely change what I was doing several times. Business conditions change, and opportunities come & go. There were times that I was considering going back to oil.
> 
> But it wasn't all from home. Some might recall that I had an opportunity to do asset recovery work on Navy ships. I really enjoyed it. Ships became available on & off for about 10 years. I never passed-up an opportunity to go to the shipyard.


Dang, just think where you’d be if it wasn’t for those “4 years of near-zero interest rates”.

Now…which four years was that? The eight years of near-zero rates from 2008-2016, or that one year of near zero-rates in 2020?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Maybe the mods should lock this thread now before the petty bickering gets bad enough to require a clean-up.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Danaus29 said:


> Maybe the mods should lock this thread now before the petty bickering gets bad enough to require a clean-up.


No reason to lock a thread because some people have a recollection...imho.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Hiro said:


> No reason to lock a thread because some people have a recollection...imho.


Arguments, name calling and nastiness (hasn't gone that far yet) can get threads locked or tossed completely. Just an FYI.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Danaus29 said:


> Arguments, name calling and nastiness (hasn't gone that far yet) can get threads locked or tossed completely. Just an FYI.


No doubt. But, the moderators can decide and if you think they need a heads up, PM them. I don't get the post of telling them what they should do preemptively....ymmv.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Hiro said:


> No doubt. But, the moderators can decide and if you think they need a heads up, PM them. I don't get the post of telling them what they should do preemptively....ymmv.


Carry on then, nothing to see here.

Would it be so difficult to roll all your arguments into one thread so those who don't want to read about it can follow the topic without the bickering? It is pretty annoying.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Danaus29 said:


> Carry on then, nothing to see here.
> 
> Would it be so difficult to roll all your arguments into one thread so those who don't want to read about it can follow the topic without the bickering? It is pretty annoying.


I don't disagree with that sentiment. But, that is different than asking the mods to intervene, imho. To requote you, carry on...


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Danaus29 said:


> Arguments, name calling and nastiness (hasn't gone that far yet) can get threads locked or tossed completely. Just an FYI.


If you’re really tracing the smell back to the source, there’s probably a lot of threads that would have survived a lot longer if certain people had the intellectual integrity to be able to engage in discourse without having to shamefully-yet-shamelessly drop giant steaming logs of needlessly political gaslighting on the table, just because their TV sounded really clever when it said it, and then conveniently lose the intellectual fortitude to acknowledge that they just pooped their pants in public.

…but seriously, I really do want to know which “4 years of near-zero interest rates” that caused all our woes that @Nevada was talking about.

…or if he can admit that he was just trying to stir up politics because he can’t help himself but to repeat what his TV tells him to say.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

@GunMonkeyIntl, gotcha. I understand the question and why you asked it. I'm just in a bit of a mood tonight and tired of the fighting.


----------



## karlsout067 (6 mo ago)

.....was all a lie. No doubt whatsoever.


----------



## nchobbyfarm (Apr 10, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> Maybe the mods should lock this thread now before the petty bickering gets bad enough to require a clean-up.





Danaus29 said:


> I like how you have special rules for my comments, not. 🙄


Really????


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

nchobbyfarm said:


> Really????


Say it like you mean it. But seriously, do you have any posters on ignore?


----------



## bman (Jan 3, 2022)

LOL


----------



## homesteadforty (Dec 4, 2007)

bman said:


> ...it begs the question... why the heck are govts pushing mRNA experimental vaccines...


That was the question that first didn't pass my smell test. Why are they pushing all this so hard??? My next questions were... why no work to make a traditional style vaccine and why no major efforts to find and supply effective treatments.

Covid is really just a minor blip in the course of human events... why are they still pushing so hard?



> Controlled depopulation is the answer.


I'm not so sure about all that... but if it is, it's one of the most inefficient ways of doing it.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

homesteadforty said:


> That was the question that first didn't pass my smell test. Why are they pushing all this so hard??? My next questions were... why no work to make a traditional style vaccine and why no major efforts to find and supply effective treatments.
> 
> Covid is really just a minor blip in the course of human events... why are they still pushing so hard?
> 
> ...


Isn't the J&J covid vaccine a traditional vaccine?


----------



## homesteadforty (Dec 4, 2007)

Nevada said:


> Isn't the J&J covid vaccine a traditional vaccine?


Somewhat, but it still has/had its own issues.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> Isn't the J&J covid vaccine a traditional vaccine?


No.

Traditional vaccines work.

Also, they aren’t forced on a populace in order to transfer wealth from that populace to their ruling class and their donors.


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

GunMonkeyIntl said:


> Also, they aren’t forced on a populace in order to transfer wealth from that populace to their ruling class and their donors.


My next door neighbors never got vaccinated. I'm not aware of any force to make them get vaccinated.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Nevada said:


> My next door neighbors never got vaccinated. I'm not aware of any force to make them get vaccinated.


The same force that made you say something as stupid as 


Nevada said:


> You didn't know that near-zero prime rates for 4 years would be inflationary?


You ready to share which four years you were talking about yet? Or is this going to stay a gaslight-driveby directed by the Marxist corporate media?

Here’s a chart to help you pick your “4 years”:


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Nevada said:


> My next door neighbors never got vaccinated. I'm not aware of any force to make them get vaccinated.


Thousands of people were FORCED to get vaccinated. College students, nursing home residents and thier visitors, federal employees, contractors and subcontractors working on federal projects, military personnel, child care personnel, medical personnel and some others I have forgotten. You can argue that they weren't really forced but when your choice is get the shot or lose your job some people were left with no option but get the shot.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Nevada said:


> Isn't the J&J covid vaccine a traditional vaccine?



No it isn't.

"Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) viral vector COVID-19 vaccine
Viral vector vaccines use a harmless, modified version of a different virus (a vector virus), and not the virus that causes COVID-19. The vector virus delivers important instructions to our cells on how to recognize and fight the virus that causes COVID-19"









COVID-19 Vaccination


COVID-19 vaccines protect against COVID-19. Get safety info and more.




www.cdc.gov


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Danaus29 said:


> No it isn't.
> 
> "Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) viral vector COVID-19 vaccine
> Viral vector vaccines use a harmless, modified version of a different virus (a vector virus), and not the virus that causes COVID-19. The vector virus delivers important instructions to our cells on how to recognize and fight the virus that causes COVID-19"
> ...


All the vaccines jabs, instruct cells in your own body to manufacture the spike protein which is proven to damage your organs. The theory of programming your own body to make a damaging protein, so that then your immune system would recognize the spike protein is not good medical practice. It is medical malpractice. Mengele only dreamed of access to such a large swath of test subjects, whether willing, under duress or unaware.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

The CDC is still spreading misinformation about getting vaccinated to protect others.

"COVID-19 vaccination helps protect adults and children ages 6 months and older from getting severely ill with COVID-19 and helps protect those around them."









COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness


Learn how the CDC and FDA assess COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness.




www.cdc.gov


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

Center for Disinformation and Confusion (CDC).


----------



## bman (Jan 3, 2022)

LOL


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

Danaus29 said:


> The CDC is still spreading misinformation about getting vaccinated to protect others.
> 
> "COVID-19 vaccination helps protect adults and children ages 6 months and older from getting severely ill with COVID-19 and helps protect those around them."
> 
> ...


Heck, the Walgreens commercials on tv are REALLY pushing it, especially for children and pregnant (real) women.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I posted before about that commercial thinking it was about CVS. Now that flu season is here and it is running on every channel at least every half hour I have seen it enough to know it's Walgreens. They hint that the covid vax keeps you from getting sick.


----------



## wr (Aug 10, 2003)

Nevada said:


> My next door neighbors never got vaccinated. I'm not aware of any force to make them get vaccinated.


I guess you didn't check the news for a while because I would suggest that firing someone for being hesitant about the vaccines seems a bit like force to me. 

I can't speak for the US but Canada seemed to fire a lot of nurses and EMT's because they were reluctant to vaccinate, which is unfortunate because we seem to have a shortage of both.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Nevada said:


> My next door neighbors never got vaccinated. I'm not aware of any force to make them get vaccinated.


And yet we were at that point.
Biden introduces door-to-door vaccination effort


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

GTX63 said:


> And yet we were at that point.
> Biden introduces door-to-door vaccination effort


We should NEVER FORGET about that!


----------



## B&L Chicken Ranch and Spa (Jan 4, 2019)

Hiro said:


> All the vaccines jabs, instruct cells in your own body to manufacture the spike protein which is proven to damage your organs. The theory of programming your own body to make a damaging protein, so that then your immune system would recognize the spike protein is not good medical practice. It is medical malpractice. Mengele only dreamed of access to such a large swath of test subjects, whether willing, under duress or unaware.



A vaccine is one thing, the jab is the fake covid injection, you are causing confusion (but you know that, right?) The JAB IS NOT A VACCINE. Vaccines present a forign body into your body. Your body discovers it and creates defenses against it. The jab modifies your body and does sh1t  things we do not know nor understand.


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

Danaus29 said:


> I posted before about that commercial thinking it was about CVS. Now that flu season is here and it is running on every channel at least every half hour I have seen it enough to know it's Walgreens. They hint that the covid vax keeps you from getting sick.


There are a gazillion reasons to avoid patronizing CVS or Walgreens. The COVID vaccine isn't one of them.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

thesedays said:


> There are a gazillion reasons to avoid patronizing CVS or Walgreens. The COVID vaccine isn't one of them.


Any time I have had to get a medication at CVS I count the pills at the counter. The first time I got a scrip filled at CVS (only because it was the only pharmacy that had the stuff) I was shorted 20 pills! When they took over Target pharmacies they started shorting my daughter's scrips and never noted it on the label or in the records. I don't shop at either store unless there is no other option.


----------



## muleskinner2 (Oct 7, 2007)

Everything after the story about the bat and the wet market was a lie. It was a test, and the world population was and still are the lab rats.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)




----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

thesedays said:


> There are a gazillion reasons to avoid patronizing CVS or Walgreens. The COVID vaccine isn't one of them.


I disagree. IMO, the Covid JAB (NOT a vaccine) is most certainly one of the reasons to avoid big chain pharma pushers.

Their commercial shows a child saying that he got the jab to keep his baby sister from getting sick. Even the CDC has admitted this isn't true.

The commercial shows a pregnant woman getting jabbed. The jab has been unequivocally shown to threaten pregnancies, cause serious reproductive issues, and adversely affect infants.

Why do they keep pushing the jab?


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Pony said:


> Why do they keep pushing the jab?


Because of the misinformation presented by the White House and the CDC. If they admit they were wrong then there is no basis for the executive orders mandating vaccination.

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) within the Department of Health and Human Services has determined that the best way to slow the spread of COVID-19 and to prevent infection by the Delta variant or other variants is to be vaccinated."









Executive Order on Requiring Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination for Federal Employees | The White House


By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 3301, 3302, and 7301




www.whitehouse.gov


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1593978508845383680


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

Australias and New Zealands numbers look really great and they locked down it a comprehensive way.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

painterswife said:


> Australias and New Zealands numbers look really great and they locked down it a comprehensive way.


You are still pro lockdown after all we have been through. Amazing


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

I think most of us know how we will handle things the next time big brother decides they want their citizens to hunker in place.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

HDRider said:


> You are still pro lockdown after all we have been through. Amazing


I am pro looking at the numbers. Looks like Australia did lockdowns much better than many other countries.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

This exercise should show us why some people hold onto the socialist ideal even though it has proven that it fails every time.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

This exercise shows us that certain groups want to use the numbers that back only their view and throw out the numbers that don't and then label others socialists as a lame attempt at put downs.


----------



## HDRider (Jul 21, 2011)

painterswife said:


> This exercise shows us that certain groups want to use the numbers that back only their view and throw out the numbers that don't and then label others socialists as a lame attempt at put downs.


Some places that lockdown did well. Some places that did not lock down did well.

The numbers show that lockdowns had no effect, yet you still advocate for them.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

HDRider said:


> Some places that lockdown did well. Some places that did not lock down did well.
> 
> The numbers show that lockdowns had no effect, yet you still advocate for them.


I am not advocating for anything. I am pointing out that some places did comprehensive lockdowns and did better than Sweden. So the graph would indicate that lockdowns did work in some places.


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

I will state quite clearly New Zealand and Australia governments are dystopian, authoritarian, corrupt, fascists and contemptible to anyone that cherishes liberty and freedom that should be overthrown by their citizens subjects.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

painterswife said:


> I am pro looking at the numbers. Looks like Australia did lockdowns much better than many other countries.


Easy to do for island countries. Close all airports and no sick people bring in the virus. Do you remember the news calling Trump racist for stopping flights from China? Australia avoided the first wave because they closed the entire country down to outsiders, but they only delayed it. They had massive cases after COVID declined in other countries. BTW, numbers lady, Australia is only 14th from the highest number of cases in all world countries and their death rate per million is worse than many other countries.


----------



## painterswife (Jun 7, 2004)

poppy said:


> Easy to do for island countries. Close all airports and no sick people bring in the virus. Do you remember the news calling Trump racist for stopping flights from China? Australia avoided the first wave because they closed the entire country down to outsiders, but they only delayed it. They had massive cases after COVID declined in other countries. BTW, numbers lady, Australia is only 14th from the highest number of cases in all world countries and their death rate per million is worse than many other countries.


Massive cases after the medical community had found ways to lessen the numbers of deaths and hospilizations for those infected. That is a good outcome.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

Cherry picking does little to support your pov. Memories of the event won't fade.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

painterswife said:


> Australias and New Zealands numbers look really great and they locked down it a comprehensive way.


No they don’t. The two sides of the graph are not complimentary. They tell two completely different stories. 

The right side indicates how many deaths that country attributed to Covid which, as we encountered in that thread where your own link proved that the US counted everyone who died of anything within two months of a positive Covid test as a “Covid death” (_after which you immediately went crickets because CNN didn’t prepare you with a response to that inconvenient truth_), the “Covid death” numbers are completely meaningless.

That’s exactly why the left side of the graph is there. Assuming everything else in 2020 and 2021 was normal, excess deaths represent the above-normal death rate, and Australia and New Zealand came into it well ahead of deplorable Sweden.

Now, we don’t know exactly why NewZealand and Australia had about 10% more excess deaths than Sweden, only that that’s where the sum totaled out. Those excess deaths could have been unreported Covid deaths, or they could have been a rash of elderly folks and children dying from asphyxiation at the hands of cops choking them out for not wearing Fauci’s sacred rainments. It could have been a bunch of people whose hearts exploded from taking the profit shot, or it could have been mass suicides at the cancellation of CNN+ and the firing of Brian Stelter.

All we do know is that, after all the lies were told, retold, and then repeated by you and your fellow Tinmen, New Zealand and Australia had more extra deaths than doody-head Sweden during the Scamdemic.


----------



## poppy (Feb 21, 2008)

painterswife said:


> Massive cases after the medical community had found ways to lessen the numbers of deaths and hospilizations for those infected. That is a good outcome.


Does that also explain why their death numbers population wise was worse than many other countries? I will admit they were forunate that there big wave came after the deadly first wave had passed and every variant after that got less dangerous.


----------



## Redlands Okie (Nov 28, 2017)

Covid was only a part of the problems. How the numbers were calculated, manipulated and presented was, and seems to still be, a huge part of the problems we are still dealing with.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

The "Who", and I don't mean the World Health Organization, though they are a part, ie CDC, Fauci, the media, the pharmaceuticals, were organizations that were supposed to be trusted. They are liars.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1595136780948291584


----------



## Hiro (Feb 14, 2016)

GTX63 said:


> The "Who", and I don't mean the World Health Organization, though they are a part, ie CDC, Fauci, the media, the pharmaceuticals, were organizations that were supposed to be trusted. They are liars.


There have always been a plethora of liars. The numbers of NPC's that are enslaved enforcers of untruths is somewhat discomforting.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

I'll add this guy too.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1595168715481485316


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Those idiots can't even look at their own information.





__





COVID Data Tracker


CDC’s home for COVID-19 data. Visualizations, graphs, and data in one easy-to-use website.



covid.cdc.gov





Don't forget that you can still be flattened by a bus but if you had a positive covid test within the past 30 days you could be counted as a covid death.

What the guidelines really say is that if a person had a covid diagnosis within and including 30 days prior to death and then died of natural causes, it is to be reported as a covid death if the person was unvaccinated.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

Danaus29 said:


> Those idiots can't even look at their own information.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But if the person was "vaccinated"... SMH

Elderly neighbors down the road are in line for every flu or cerveza jab out there. One of them is now terribly ill, but hey! You know it would have been much worse if he didn't have the jab! /s

People don't even get it when you try to explain to them that that is a patent lie. I just deliver chicken soup on their doorstep and walk away.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Pony said:


> Danaus29 said:
> 
> 
> > Those idiots can't even look at their own information.
> ...


But, see, that’s where they’re playing the numbers game. If they die within 30 days of a diagnosis, AND within 15 days of the jab, they’re an “unvaccinated Covid death”. 

The Covidians are casino veterans.


----------



## Max Overhead (Feb 22, 2021)

Things are definitely getting bleaker on the medscape thread for adverse events: How concerned are you about adverse events related to the vaccines?

"Yes, I am deeply concerned. I have been in intensive care unit nurse for over 25 years. I have seen such an increase in the number of patients coming in with cardiac issues which typically involve thrombus and bleeding. For example, I had two patients with mild cardiac symptoms, and when labs were assessed they had markers that indicated blood clots. Ultrasound revealed thrombus in the lower extremities that extended from the knee to the groin. both of these patients were taken to the Cath Lab emergently and filters were placed. I've never seen people with blood clots that big that were relatively asymptomatic. Other patients were having bleeding issues while at the same time had lab values that indicated that they had blood clots. All of these patients had had at least three COVID-19 vaccine injections. I am not sure why people can't see what's going on. Other nurses and doctors just shake their head and are baffled at his cases, but never question whether it can be related to the vaccine. I questioned it a couple of times, and I could tell that several of the providers were not pleased with my questioning."


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Pop has been sick and in bed since yesterday. He got his omicron booster the day before.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

Danaus29 said:


> Pop has been sick and in bed since yesterday. He got his omicron booster the day before.


I'm sorry. 

May God bless him with healing.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

Pony said:


> I'm sorry.
> 
> May God bless him with healing.


Thanks. He was feeling much better today.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

While looking for something else I ran across this misinformation put out by the CDC. 

"For reusable cloth masks
If your cloth mask is wet or dirty, put it in a sealed plastic bag until you can wash it. This will keep it from getting moldy."









Masks and Respirators


Wear a mask with the best fit, protection, and comfort for you.




www.cdc.gov





Can the person who wrote that article really be that ignorant or are they just seeing how many lies the public will believe?


----------



## Paumon (Jul 12, 2007)

Danaus29 said:


> Can the person who wrote that article really be that ignorant or are they just seeing how many lies the public will believe?


The person who wrote it might be ignorant or worse yet might have known better before but isn't thinking straight anymore. Whether people have been vaccinated or not, if they wear masks or not, I think everyone everywhere has come into contact with the virus in the past 3 years and I'm convinced that it has been effecting the minds and dulling the cognitive faculties of many people around the world. 

There is evidence everywhere of people's sensibilities having become effected to their own detriment and with disastrous consequences for other people. A lot of people aren't making sense now, making really bad decisions, certain people either becoming enraged or trivializing everything beyond understanding, many have gone off the deep end. If it's proven to be the case that people's minds have been / are being effected by the virus it doesn't bode well for societies anywhere.

.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

It's a scary sentiment but I agree with you. People have gone nuts in the past couple years. Not all people but it seems quite a few have lost their empathy and concern for their fellow human beings.


----------



## Max Overhead (Feb 22, 2021)

I like that now I can activate bluetooth and find out how many people are in the building I'm at. I think these shots are great for locating people. I don't think any virus is affecting people's minds unless it's some kind of computer virus because from my perspective transhumanism is not an idea sitting on a shelf but one being implemented right now. The preliminary was the masses addicted to their smart phones. 1st phase is people becoming smart phones. Not sure about second phase but that's why I don't get paid the big bucks..


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

painterswife said:


> Australias and New Zealands numbers look really great and they locked down it a comprehensive way.


Being island nations, it was a lot easier for them to do that than it would be for most other areas.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

thesedays said:


> Being island nations, it was a lot easier for them to do that than it would be for most other areas.


But at what cost? When other nations didn't lock down at all and came through fine, then the loss of freedoms becomes enormous, in my way of thinking.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Orchardsmith said:


> But at what cost? When other nations didn't lock down at all and came through fine, then the loss of freedoms becomes enormous, in my way of thinking.


The value of Freedom, like the value of human life, is subjective to culture.

I’ve been lots of places in the world where neither is perceived as being worth as much as it is here.

I’ve been places where human life is perceived as even more valuable, but I’ve never been anywhere where the value of Freedom is as high as it is here.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

For that reason and many others, may God bless America.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)




----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

GTX63 said:


> View attachment 116380


Does that mean the CDC is allowed to post on Twitter now? They were and are one of the biggest perpetrators of covid misinformation.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

Hilarious. Now we should go to the CDC or other agencies to get the truth about anything!


----------



## thesedays (Feb 25, 2011)

GTX63 said:


> View attachment 116380


FYI: You're posting a Canadian link.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

It was about the same all over.


----------



## wiscto (Nov 24, 2014)

Scientists mystified, wary, as Africa avoids COVID disaster


HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP) — At a busy market in a poor township outside Harare this week, Nyasha Ndou kept his mask in his pocket, as hundreds of other people, mostly unmasked, jostled to buy and sell fruit and vegetables displayed on wooden tables and plastic sheets.




apnews.com


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

I would like an explanation of why the US, with supposedly the best health care system in the world, has the largest ratio of covid deaths. None of it makes any sense.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

It has been 2 years. It all makes sense.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

Danaus29 said:


> I would like an explanation of why the US, with supposedly the best health care system in the world, has the largest ratio of covid deaths. None of it makes any sense.


Every country had exactly as many “Covid deaths” as they wanted, and adjusted their respective counting methodologies to suit.

The US wanted Covid particularly badly, as it was their pharmaceutical companies (and invested politicians) who stood to profit the most, and they needed to make some inconvenient changes in their government, so they needed high numbers. That’s why they counted everyone who died of anything within two months of a Covid diagnosis, and did their damndest to count “vaccine” deaths as unvaccinated Covid deaths.


----------



## GunMonkeyIntl (May 13, 2013)

GTX63 said:


> It has been 2 years. It all makes sense.


It made sense on Week 3 of “Two weeks to flatten the curve”.


----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

The CDC said twice that 6% of "covid deaths" were actually due to covid. It's all a numbers game now.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)




----------



## Orchardsmith (5 mo ago)

LOL. Nothing to see here! Move along!


----------



## Nevada (Sep 9, 2004)

Danaus29 said:


> I would like an explanation of why the US, with supposedly the best health care system in the world, has the largest ratio of covid deaths. None of it makes any sense.


It's an interesting article about an interesting observation. There's more at play there than the effectiveness of modern medicine, but the medical community doesn't know precisely what it is. It could be that the medical community will learn from African resistance to covid. But it's too early to say that the public would be better off ignoring modern medicine.


----------



## GTX63 (Dec 13, 2016)

What we experienced wasn't modern medicine.


----------



## Pony (Jan 6, 2003)

GTX63 said:


> What we experienced wasn't modern medicine.


Nope, it was good old fashioned evil.


----------



## Danaus29 (Sep 12, 2005)

If locking people away from the family who is providing most of their care is "modern medicine" God help us all!


----------

