Coronavirus COVID-19

[Ibanez]

You know, growing up we always had tea in the house. I don't really drink it anymore. I honestly drink water 90% of the time. For me it isn't the caffeine...it's the carbonation.

I thought I would miss the carbonation too, so I went with those flavored seltzers for awhile, but other than the black cherry seltzers, nothing was great to keep having. We didn't have iced tea in the house growing up so it was a pleasant change for me. Once I was a few weeks off carbonation I never looked back.

Dude...black cherry is the best flavor. That's what gets me. La Croix Limoncello is a strong contender

[BDKJMU]

Mask mandates caused MORE China Virus deaths..
https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/26 ... ath-rates/

[UNI88]

Mask mandates caused MORE China Virus deaths..
https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/26 ... ath-rates/

It can be helpful to quote a key point or two from the piece ...

“A rationale for the increased RR by mandating masks is probably that virions that enter or those coughed out in droplets are retained in the facemask tissue, and after quick evaporation of the droplets, hypercondensed droplets or pure virions (virions not inside a droplet) are re-inhaled from a very short distance during inspiration.”

[bobbythekidd]

Mask mandates caused MORE China Virus deaths..
https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/26 ... ath-rates/

It can be helpful to quote a key point or two from the piece ...

“A rationale for the increased RR by mandating masks is probably that virions that enter or those coughed out in droplets are retained in the facemask tissue, and after quick evaporation of the droplets, hypercondensed droplets or pure virions (virions not inside a droplet) are re-inhaled from a very short distance during inspiration.”

He and SD have no idea how to back up their points with worthwhile resources. I'm kind of at a loss how they graduated college with the crap they present as "evidenc/proof". Whatever they post is irrelevant to me and I skim past it to get to something worth reading.

[UNI88]

It can be helpful to quote a key point or two from the piece ...

He and SD have no idea how to back up their points with worthwhile resources. I'm kind of at a loss how they graduated college with the crap they present as "evidenc/proof". Whatever they post is irrelevant to me and I skim past it to get to something worth reading.

So they're kind of like less verbose JSOs?

[SeattleGriz]

Not sure anyone on here is even paying attention, but how do you feel about the COVID vaccine gaining full immunity protection as an EUA drug? If the FDA approves the vaccine for 6months and up, it gets added to the list of vaccines that have full liability. Can't sue the makers.

Can't find the approved Comirnaty, and Pfizer has admitted they aren't going to produce it. Why? Because all the harms would open them up to lawsuits, so they wait until the 6month vaccine gets approved.

They are also trying to pass a future framework that means they get to reformulate every year without clinical trials. They will base it's effectiveness simply on if you make antibodies. Doesn't matter if the virus has mutated and it's effectiveness is 15%.

Everything you were warned about, but called a conspiracy, has happened.

To summarize, are you fine with a vaccine that uses technology that has failed for the last 20 years to come to market due to harm, being added to the vaccine schedule via an EUA?

[SDHornet]

[SDHornet]

[GannonFan]

Eh, I wouldn't worry. Vaccine uptake by the 5 to 12 year old set was pretty small, I imagine this will be even smaller. A lot of parents are sort of nuts when it comes to vaccines (note the contingent that tried to tie vaccines to autism). I don't think parents will be lining up to get toddlers vaccinated in large numbers either.

[SeattleGriz]

Eh, I wouldn't worry. Vaccine uptake by the 5 to 12 year old set was pretty small, I imagine this will be even smaller. A lot of parents are sort of nuts when it comes to vaccines (note the contingent that tried to tie vaccines to autism). I don't think parents will be lining up to get toddlers vaccinated in large numbers either.

That is not the problem. The problem is that if the vaccines are approved, it gives the vaccine makers protection forever from any sort of harm, not to mention if the "future framework" is passed, it allows them to simply reformulate without any clinical trials.

[SeattleGriz]

European Pharma Giant President faking his vaccine status.

[BDKJMU]

Not sure anyone on here is even paying attention, but how do you feel about the COVID vaccine gaining full immunity protection as an EUA drug? If the FDA approves the vaccine for 6months and up, it gets added to the list of vaccines that have full liability. Can't sue the makers.

Can't find the approved Comirnaty, and Pfizer has admitted they aren't going to produce it. Why? Because all the harms would open them up to lawsuits, so they wait until the 6month vaccine gets approved.

They are also trying to pass a future framework that means they get to reformulate every year without clinical trials. They will base it's effectiveness simply on if you make antibodies. Doesn't matter if the virus has mutated and it's effectiveness is 15%.

Everything you were warned about, but called a conspiracy, has happened.

To summarize, are you fine with a vaccine that uses technology that has failed for the last 20 years to come to market due to harm, being added to the vaccine schedule via an EUA?

Complete bs. Vaccines shouldn’t be given immunity from liability, esp ones that people are coreced to take. If the vaccines are safe, they don’t need immunity.

[SeattleGriz]

Not sure anyone on here is even paying attention, but how do you feel about the COVID vaccine gaining full immunity protection as an EUA drug? If the FDA approves the vaccine for 6months and up, it gets added to the list of vaccines that have full liability. Can't sue the makers.

Can't find the approved Comirnaty, and Pfizer has admitted they aren't going to produce it. Why? Because all the harms would open them up to lawsuits, so they wait until the 6month vaccine gets approved.

They are also trying to pass a future framework that means they get to reformulate every year without clinical trials. They will base it's effectiveness simply on if you make antibodies. Doesn't matter if the virus has mutated and it's effectiveness is 15%.

Everything you were warned about, but called a conspiracy, has happened.

To summarize, are you fine with a vaccine that uses technology that has failed for the last 20 years to come to market due to harm, being added to the vaccine schedule via an EUA?

Complete bs. Vaccines shouldn’t be given immunity from liability, esp ones that people are coreced to take. If the vaccines are safe, they don’t need immunity.

I don't mind if a vaccine gets liability, but at least do it through standard protocols. Being able to bring a new style of vaccine to the market under EUA requirements is another matter.

Why do you think they never brought Comirnaty to market? Didn't have the EUA protection.

[SDHornet]

Eh, I wouldn't worry. Vaccine uptake by the 5 to 12 year old set was pretty small, I imagine this will be even smaller. A lot of parents are sort of nuts when it comes to vaccines (note the contingent that tried to tie vaccines to autism). I don't think parents will be lining up to get toddlers vaccinated in large numbers either.

That is not the problem. The problem is that if the vaccines are approved, it gives the vaccine makers protection forever from any sort of harm, not to mention if the "future framework" is passed, it allows them to simply reformulate without any clinical trials.

That and public schools will make it part of the required vaccinations...that is how Big Pharma is going to make their quotas for this age demographic.

[SeattleGriz]

Here ya go folks. This might be all that Pfizer needs to get their vaccine approved and onto the children's schedule, in addition to being able to reformulate without clinical trials.

Take note of the negative or extremely low efficacy up until the 3rd dose. Then notice how that number is based on 10 TOTAL COVID CASES (3% of total positives in study). That's why the confidence intervals are so large.

Are you fucking kidding me? If Pfizer gets approved based on this shitty ass study...

[SeattleGriz]

Wow. Four shots and Fauci is still Covid positive. Harsh outcome for a guy that said vaccines were a dead end for the virus.

Anyone waking up yet to the selective pressure the vaccines placed on the virus? Anyone seen recent stats on vaccinated cases, hospitalizations and deaths? No. Wonder why.

Where's StOnge?

[Winterborn]

That is not the problem. The problem is that if the vaccines are approved, it gives the vaccine makers protection forever from any sort of harm, not to mention if the "future framework" is passed, it allows them to simply reformulate without any clinical trials.

That and public schools will make it part of the required vaccinations...that is how Big Pharma is going to make their quotas for this age demographic.

If they do (and do not make allowances for exemptions) it will be another nail in their coffin and help push more school choice.

[Winterborn]

Wow. Four shots and Fauci is still Covid positive. Harsh outcome for a guy that said vaccines were a dead end for the virus.

Anyone waking up yet to the selective pressure the vaccines placed on the virus? Anyone seen recent stats on vaccinated cases, hospitalizations and deaths? No. Wonder why.

Where's StWronge?

FYP

[UNI88]

Wow. Four shots and Fauci is still Covid positive. Harsh outcome for a guy that said vaccines were a dead end for the virus.

Anyone waking up yet to the selective pressure the vaccines placed on the virus? Anyone seen recent stats on vaccinated cases, hospitalizations and deaths? No. Wonder why.

Where's StOnge?

Didn't the science on the vaccines shift awhile ago? Isn't that what you said science is supposed to do? Or do you want science to be "settled"? C'mon man, make up your mind!

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Wow. Four shots and Fauci is still Covid positive. Harsh outcome for a guy that said vaccines were a dead end for the virus.

Anyone waking up yet to the selective pressure the vaccines placed on the virus? Anyone seen recent stats on vaccinated cases, hospitalizations and deaths? No. Wonder why.

Where's StOnge?

Didn't the science on the vaccines shift awhile ago? Isn't that what you said science is supposed to do? Or do you want science to be "settled"? C'mon man, make up your mind!

Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

[SeattleGriz]

Rand Paul asking Fauci questions about children, booster shots and the lack of studies determining if the vaccines even provided a protective effect.

The group that met yesterday were the "advisers". The FDA still has to make their decision.

[SDHornet]

[SeattleGriz]

The best part is how it seems as if none of them actually had that fact cross their minds.

Of course when Bill Maher steps up and asks for the scaremongering to stop, it shows how bad the gaslighting got on the topic.

[SeattleGriz]

We'll see if this really happens, but I'm not thinking it will. It's something I've pointed out for years on this board. The medical community does not like to be called out on their unsubstantiated claims, but yet, are always unwilling to discuss what EXACTLY is wrong with countering claims.

Dr. Peter McCullough is under fire from the American Board of Internal Medicine (A.B.I.M.), who is threatening his medical license for “providing false and inaccurate information to patients”. Senator Ron Johnson has responded with a call for A.B.I.M. and Dr. McCullough to participate in an open hearing on Capitol Hill, and put it all on the table of public record.

https://thehighwire.com/videos/medical- ... c-hearing/

[JohnStOnge]

Mask mandates caused MORE China Virus deaths..
https://thenationalpulse.com/2022/05/26 ... ath-rates/

It can be helpful to quote a key point or two from the piece ...

“A rationale for the increased RR by mandating masks is probably that virions that enter or those coughed out in droplets are retained in the facemask tissue, and after quick evaporation of the droplets, hypercondensed droplets or pure virions (virions not inside a droplet) are re-inhaled from a very short distance during inspiration.”

Here is a contradictory study: https://news.worcester.edu/moattari-co- ... 19-deaths/

What you should do is just listen to pubic health experts such as those at the CDC. They are aware of all the studies. They are aware of the credibility of the Journals they are published in.

I just looked again at the Google thing and found another one: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/ ... 0for%20all). A quote:

Mask mandates were associated with a 0.7 percentage point decrease (p = 0.03) in daily COVID-19 death growth rates 1–20 days after implementation and decreases of 1.0, 1.4, 1.6, and 1.9 percentage points 21–40, 41–60, 61–80, and 81–100 days, respectively, after implementation (p<0.01 for all).

I suspect what you are going to find if you pursue this is that most studies show a benefit of masking. But the deniers are going to look for outlier studies that flatter their point of view.