If it has to do with COVID, it goes HERE!'

[popper]

My kids and their kids got it. Tested Pos, go home take an aspirin for the fever and it's gone in 2 days. Navy ship 100% vaxxed, got it and sidelined. Now they want rDNA fix for all diseases. I see that as a problem. Factually, covid death rate at peak was 1% and flu/pneumonia was also 1% annually. We have working drugs for pneumonia.

 

[TX oddball]

In contrast to Hoji's pic a few pages back, this Tweet made me smile.

 

[gll]

From one of the comments to that video...

 

[jrbfishn]

One response to that video was that they hope those kids can forget and get over what was done to them.
No! They should remember the evil some will perpetrate on them if given the chance.
I hope they ever forget.

Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[Brains]

That appears to be a cumulative graph. It’ll always go up.

New variant, slope increases.

It also does not account for the rate of testing or not testing.

The statistic you need to show if a vaccine work: compare vaccination rate to hospitalization rate. If an area is 40% vaxxed and the admitted population is 10% vaxxed, then the vaccine kept a lot of people out of the hospital.

Similarly compare vax rate and death rate. If the population is 60% vaxxed and the death vaxxed rate is 30% then the vaccine saved lives.

We know some vaccines lose their effectiveness so we have to account for time. Vaccine durability over time. If the vaccinated hospitalization and vaccinated death rates return to reflect the unvaccinated rate then we know the effect is not durable. Hence boosters.

The we get into psychosocial effects. Vaccinated people start to change their behaviors. And as a huge populations (vaxxed and unvaxxed) engage is riskier behavior (not staying distanced, distanced, bars, restaurants, Working in person) so does transmissions in the community and total deaths.

TLDR. Your graph does not help interpret whether vaccines work.

I see. Can you show me?

The cumulative slope remained the same since the beginning. The same despite introducing a vaccine that was sold as 98% effective. Now again, I'm no statistician, but preventing all but 98% of the 67% vaccinated from adding to the cumulative totals would have made A BIG F'N CHANGE to that trend line.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Except it didn't.

 

[easy rider]

That seems to be the problem, for many have blocked out the dissenting voices.

 

[glenbo]

"Just 2 weeks to stop the spread..."

 

[Grumps21]

I would say the "problem" lies in people refusing to blindly accept the narrative, and self appointed experts taking offense to their noncompliance. Well, that's a problem for the self appointed experts.

Now I'm no statistician, but the claim the covid vax "may" prevent deaths doesn't appear to be well supported by the trend line of deaths over time:

View attachment 304863


Doesn't appear to have done anything to slow the spread either:
View attachment 304864

So if all you've got is "well it may/might/could" what do you have? Nothing. You've got nothing. You want people to believe you? Show them how something does/did work.

Haha, how would they take it if we say we might pay taxes

 

[Grumps21]

Listen to your arguements. They are ludicrous.
You can't prove you are right, but you are a Doctor and therefore smarter than us and we should do what you reccomend without arguement.
It MIGHT, MAYBE save some from death. Ok, prove it. The truth is, you can't. It is 98% survivable either way.
What can be shown, is that the vaccines are causing more harm than they are doing good. But that is hard to quantify because those that should be doing studies on that refuse to investigate it.
So,,,,when did the part of your oath that says "do no harm" get stricken from your oath?
With a real vaccine, smallpox, mumps, rubella and others, there is always a chance of adverse reaction or even some deaths. But they have quantifiable health benefits.
The Covid "vaccines" have NONE.




Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Right? Why mandate a vax for something that is close to 100% survivable? Especially a vax for which we do not know the long term affects. To those who say they are safe, then show me the 20 year safety study. Heck just show me the five year study. Three years? Two years?

 

[easy rider]

Right? Why mandate a vax for something that is close to 100% survivable? Especially a vax for which we do not know the long term affects. To those who say they are safe, then show me the 20 year safety study. Heck just show me the five year study. Three years? Two years?

If you can trust any studies now days. Hard to gain trust of those whom lied to us.

 

[leVieux]

"May." And may have long term side effects, no one knows. Certainly has been causing cardiac issues in some.

It is very difficult to evaluate most of the reported "complications", as we are never told sample sizes or numbers in at-risk populations.

On the few I've been able to run down, they were likely unrelated events, but can't be sure.

We know that ALL vaccines have some serious but rare complications, and would like to know the exact details on the COVID vaccines.

We are being lied-to from every direction.

leVieux
.

 

[leVieux]

If you can trust any studies now days. Hard to gain trust of those whom lied to us.

This is worse than ever now.

 

[leVieux]

I wonder if his definition of a vaccine, as a dr., ever included "MAY lessen symptoms"?

I didn't "block" you.

Problem is that we usually have some validated information to make judgements on; but this time we can't trust much of anything.

I'm not exactly advocating here, just trying to make sense of it all, and to point-out known errors.

Since I brought this up, I've tried to reply with answers as best as possible, but some just have to start arguments; that won't help with this.

As to basics: in general, vaccines do work. For decision making, one must do some sort of a risk/benefit "analysis" in each case.

Sorry, no "magic" answer here. . . . .

 

[kbaxter60]

Right? Why mandate a vax for something that is close to 100% survivable? Especially a vax for which we do not know the long term affects. To those who say they are safe, then show me the 20 year safety study. Heck just show me the five year study. Three years? Two years?

Why, indeed?
A friend of ours, a college professor, said to me when this stuff first appeared in 2020: "It feels like we're being tested."
And I fear we have badly failed.
Just listen to this insufferable a-hole:

Depopulationist Bill Gates Hints at Next Evil Plan: "We’ll Have Another Pandemic - It Will Be a Different Pathogen Next Time" - The Liberty Daily

If you love the news, check out The Liberty Daily's homepage. There’s a mental disorder called “Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy” in which a caregiver, such as a parent, fakes illness in others so they can be treated even when they’re not sick. I’ve heard this term used to reference people like...

thelibertydaily.com

 

[gll]

New study: 133x risk of myocarditis after COVID vaccination
Comparisons with myocarditis rates following infection now irrelevant as vaccination no longer prevents infection.

New study: 133x risk of myocarditis after COVID vaccination

Comparisons with myocarditis rates following infection now irrelevant as vaccination no longer prevents infection.

www.israelnationalnews.com

Myocarditis Cases Reported After mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination in the US From December 2020 to August 2021

Myocarditis Cases Reported After mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination in the US From December 2020 to August 2021

This descriptive study compares the effect of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vs mRNA-1273 (Moderna) on the reported cases of myocarditis in the US after each vaccination dose.

jamanetwork.com

 

[jrbfishn]

Then why in the hell would a sane person be defending the vax push or recommending the vaccination?


Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[Axxe55]

Is it just me, or does the posts of the good doctor seem confusing and all over the place? Says one thing, then changes and says something different!

 

[msharley]

Is it just me, or does the posts of the good doctor seem confusing and all over the place? Says one thing, then changes and says something different!

Hey Axxe,

Made that statement several pages back.....

Later, Mark

 

[benenglish]

New study: 133x risk of myocarditis after COVID vaccination
Comparisons with myocarditis rates following infection now irrelevant as vaccination no longer prevents infection.

New study: 133x risk of myocarditis after COVID vaccination

Comparisons with myocarditis rates following infection now irrelevant as vaccination no longer prevents infection.

www.israelnationalnews.com

Myocarditis Cases Reported After mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination in the US From December 2020 to August 2021

Myocarditis Cases Reported After mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccination in the US From December 2020 to August 2021

This descriptive study compares the effect of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccination with BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vs mRNA-1273 (Moderna) on the reported cases of myocarditis in the US after each vaccination dose.

jamanetwork.com

A year ago we didn't know this. Then my sis got the jab and we found out. Boy, did we find out.

 

[mongoose]

Be careful getting the Flu shot this year if you are so inclined. My sister got one and ended up in the hospital for three days due to fluid on the lungs and around her heart. She was given an additional prescription of two weeks bed rest at home. She later enrolled in a TU study for Covid antibodies. After her first blood draw she showed both " natural " and "vaccine " anti bodies. Same with the second blood draw. She has never knowingly had the Covid vax nor has she ever shown any symptoms of having Covid. Wonder what was in that Flu shot?