Noyankee wrote:
“Technically, it's the pandemic of the Unhealthy
Absolutely 100% accurate. These maniacs are trying to force needles into 5 yr olds so some fat dude can eat ice cream all day and he thinks it helps him. If doesn’t help to stick others. It’s fraud.
No.
They are forcing needles into 5 year olds for $$.
Or worse
Noyankee wrote:
These maniacs are trying to force needles into 5 yr olds so some fat dude can eat ice cream all day and he thinks it helps him. If doesn’t help to stick others. It’s fraud.
^^^Raw truth right here
Waning immunity ? What ? From the "vaccines" ?
NAH. No way. Fake news. That's what it is. Just ask Harambe and that 2600 character.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/vaccine-waning-immunity-covid-deaths-b1953158.html
Hmmmmmm. What's going on in those Red States?
Monkeys Skyping wrote:
fisky wrote:
This is an odd study. . . .
Indeed.
As it's come up previously in the thread, here's a well done essay on the issues with the study you link:
https://youcanknowthings.com/2021/11/01/is-there-really-no-correlation-between-vaccination-rate-and-the-spread-of-covid/
Thanks. This is a much better analysis because it actually shows a correlation. In this case, it's a negative correlation between vac rates and covid cases.
However, the second study, while validating the premise that the vaccine is effective, doesn't address my major concerns. Is it safe short term? Is it safe long term? It's apparently not killing large numbers of people in the short term, but the nonfatal adverse effects are my concern and they are not being reported. I've seen whistle-blower reports, anecdotal reports from ER personnel, and reports from people around the medical community that indicate that adverse effects are not being reported. There are just too many of these reports for me to discount them all. It's also unsettling that these voices are being vigorously suppressed.
There is little doubt in my mind that the vaccine is killing some people... somewhere between 1 in 20,000 looking just at VAERS data and maybe 1 in 5,000, considering how badly VAERS is underreporting deaths, but that doesn't include long-term adverse effects. Those are my many concern.
I've been on the wait-and-see fence for a long time, but the more I read, the more I'm moving towards the anti-vaxx camp.
Bad news everywhere for the vax mob mafia.
fisky wrote:
However, the second study, while validating the premise that the vaccine is effective, doesn't address my major concerns. Is it safe short term? Is it safe long term? It's apparently not killing large numbers of people in the short term, but the nonfatal adverse effects are my concern and they are not being reported.
There is summary CDC reporting on serious adverse effects here:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.htmlDanM wrote:
Bad news everywhere for the vax mob mafia.
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/french-health-authority-advises-against-moderna-covid-19-vaccine-under-30s-2021-11-09/
Did you even read the article ?
They recommend Pfizer rather than Moderna, not no vaccine at all.
Even MORE bad news...........
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/09/health/immunocompromised-covid-19-booster-wellness-trnd/index.html
Monkeys Skyping wrote:
fisky wrote:
However, the second study, while validating the premise that the vaccine is effective, doesn't address my major concerns. Is it safe short term? Is it safe long term? It's apparently not killing large numbers of people in the short term, but the nonfatal adverse effects are my concern and they are not being reported.
There is summary CDC reporting on serious adverse effects here:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
Thanks for posting this. Sadly, as long as the CDC is under Rochelle Walensky's leadership, I do not consider the CDC to be a reliable source.
Here is an absolutely verifiable falsehood on that CDC page. "FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause."
This is absolutely not happening. ABSOLUTELY. NOT. HAPPENING.
Since April 2021, about 75% of 12.5 million US age 80+ population... about 9.3 million... have been vaccinated. Annual mortality at 80+ is 5% annually. It's now been six months since April when most of those 9.3 million were vaccinated. That's 9.3 million x 5%/year x 1/2 year = 232,000 deaths.
The 70-79 cohort has only a 2%/year mortality, but it's much larger than the 80+ so the 70-79 cohort would add another 100,000 - 200,000 to the total.
The VAERS all-cause deaths should be well over 300,000. Then, VAERS should sort it out, but that's not happening. Instead, VAERS reports only 9,367 deaths.
Add to that, under oath, Walensky testified that she didn't know how many of her own CDC employees were vaccinated. Really? I'd guess that every larger employer in the US knows within a couple of percentage points how many of their employees are vaccinated.
Until someone explains this, the CDC has no credibility.
DanM wrote:
Even MORE bad news...........
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/09/health/immunocompromised-covid-19-booster-wellness-trnd/index.html
Yes it's good to remind people that those who are immunocompromised will need more help, that's well known all the way through. It's part of their lives. In fact it's even MORE reason people should get vaccinated, so you have less chance of passing it to people like that. So all the unvaccinated killers should take note. Thanks again for the reminder.
I'm sure those of you who want the ability to make your own choices will be fine to pay for COVID treatment should you require it.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/singapore-stop-covering-covid-costs-131616732.html
This coming to an insurance policy near you.
Well..... wrote:
DanM wrote:
Even MORE bad news...........
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/09/health/immunocompromised-covid-19-booster-wellness-trnd/index.htmlYes it's good to remind people that those who are immunocompromised will need more help, that's well known all the way through. It's part of their lives. In fact it's even MORE reason people should get vaccinated, so you have less chance of passing it to people like that. So all the unvaccinated killers should take note. Thanks again for the reminder.
The fact that he is a non-reponder to the vaccine means he likely will not have the cytokine storm that causes issues with COVID. Likewise, HIV / AIDS is not really a pre-existing condition that affects COVID mortality (like previous stroke, cardiac issues, diabetes, etc.). He is actually more likely to have a long term, but largely asymptomatic infection and shed variants. So really, he is more of a threat to others than the unvaccinated. At this point, with waning vaccine immunity, the vaccinated are only slightly less of a threat to others than the unvaccinated, so stop pretending that the unvaccinated are this grave threat towards others. At this point, the vaccinated are almost as much of a threat (especially if they had the J and J or Pfizer shot.
joed|rtay wrote:
Well..... wrote:
Yes it's good to remind people that those who are immunocompromised will need more help, that's well known all the way through. It's part of their lives. In fact it's even MORE reason people should get vaccinated, so you have less chance of passing it to people like that. So all the unvaccinated killers should take note. Thanks again for the reminder.
The fact that he is a non-reponder to the vaccine means he likely will not have the cytokine storm that causes issues with COVID. Likewise, HIV / AIDS is not really a pre-existing condition that affects COVID mortality (like previous stroke, cardiac issues, diabetes, etc.). He is actually more likely to have a long term, but largely asymptomatic infection and shed variants. So really, he is more of a threat to others than the unvaccinated. At this point, with waning vaccine immunity, the vaccinated are only slightly less of a threat to others than the unvaccinated, so stop pretending that the unvaccinated are this grave threat towards others. At this point, the vaccinated are almost as much of a threat (especially if they had the J and J or Pfizer shot.
You aren't really making sense, but you're trying to conflate different things. Studies have been done, they are more likely to die or get seriously ill if they get covid than not. This isn't about whether he is more of a threat to you. Don't be such a weaka$$, they don't have much choice. It's about people trying to prevent them getting ill or dying. You have that choice to help protect them by getting vaccinated which has a 3x reduction on average of passing it on. That figure does vary by age and time since vaccinated, but it's still a significant amount less than if unvaccinated.
fisky wrote:
Thanks for posting this. Sadly, as long as the CDC is under Rochelle Walensky's leadership, I do not consider the CDC to be a reliable source.
Well, that certainly opens up the field to believe one's preferred narrative without interference from objective metrics.
Not entirely germane, but one of the “alternative protocol” hospital studies was just retracted today. The “alternative protocol” patients fared worse than standard protocol.
Zinc and Vitamin C don’t cure COVID….
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0885066620973585
“590 days, $16 trillion, indefinite masks and booster shots, and a permanent two-tier society based on digital proof of compliance with arbitrary health mandates to slow the spread” just didn’t have the same ring to it.
The CDC noted that 25 out of every 100,000 residents in counties that heavily voted for President Donald Trump last November died from COVID in October, which was more than three times higher than the rate in heavily Joe Biden counties (7.8 per 100,000). And October was the fifth straight month when the gap between COVID deaths in Trump and Biden counties widened. Remember during the 220 campaign when Trump preached that we were turning the corner on Covid ? I guess his voters didn't know where the corner was !!!
fisky wrote:
Monkeys Skyping wrote:
There is summary CDC reporting on serious adverse effects here:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.htmlThanks for posting this. Sadly, as long as the CDC is under Rochelle Walensky's leadership, I do not consider the CDC to be a reliable source.
Here is an absolutely verifiable falsehood on that CDC page. "FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause."
This is absolutely not happening. ABSOLUTELY. NOT. HAPPENING.
Since April 2021, about 75% of 12.5 million US age 80+ population... about 9.3 million... have been vaccinated. Annual mortality at 80+ is 5% annually. It's now been six months since April when most of those 9.3 million were vaccinated. That's 9.3 million x 5%/year x 1/2 year = 232,000 deaths.
The 70-79 cohort has only a 2%/year mortality, but it's much larger than the 80+ so the 70-79 cohort would add another 100,000 - 200,000 to the total.
The VAERS all-cause deaths should be well over 300,000. Then, VAERS should sort it out, but that's not happening. Instead, VAERS reports only 9,367 deaths.
Add to that, under oath, Walensky testified that she didn't know how many of her own CDC employees were vaccinated. Really? I'd guess that every larger employer in the US knows within a couple of percentage points how many of their employees are vaccinated.
Until someone explains this, the CDC has no credibility.
You’re right that a HHS requirement isn’t being followed. Not much executive authority there… but I’m sure it led to SOME providers providing some more reports than usual.
Even if it were “business as usual” reporting we’d still see many more deaths in VAERS since we almost never do a full-scale vaccination campaign for adults who simply die more.
Monkeys Skyping wrote:
fisky wrote:
Thanks for posting this. Sadly, as long as the CDC is under Rochelle Walensky's leadership, I do not consider the CDC to be a reliable source.
Well, that certainly opens up the field to believe one's preferred narrative without interference from objective metrics.
One of life's hard lessons I've learned over the years is that when someone lies to you, whether they're selling you a used car or a vaccine, you need to be very careful about trusting anything else you hear from them before you make an irreversible decision.
I've also learned not to trust people who have given me reasons to doubt their competence in an area of expertise. I don't totally discount what they say, but I want to see it independently verified by an objective third party or better yet, see the data and verify it for myself.
So the list of people I do not trust includes Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Tony Fauci, and Rochelle Wolensky.