This is great news! Unfortunately the dislike ratio is unjust because YouTube is an alt-right cesspool.
This is great news! Unfortunately the dislike ratio is unjust because YouTube is an alt-right cesspool.
How is that efficacy measured when kids that age are already 99.99999% protected by the fact they are that age?
This is the same vaccine, Pfizer, that they ordered to stop administering to young males because it caused heart issues such as myocarditis and pericarditis amongst them. Pfizer making 160 million dollars per day and can't be sued for adverse effects because they don't actually care about your health. Many boosters coming (more money for Pfizer). Time to wake up.
ertwr wrote:
How is that efficacy measured when kids that age are already 99.99999% protected by the fact they are that age?
1 in 10,000,000 risk of infection in kids, you heard it here first.
Stunning math from the "geniuses"
2600 bro wrote:
ertwr wrote:
How is that efficacy measured when kids that age are already 99.99999% protected by the fact they are that age?
1 in 10,000,000 risk of infection in kids, you heard it here first.
Stunning math from the "geniuses"
Math? What math?
You vaccinate people who have basically no risk of getting the illness and then claim "LO AND BEHOLD!!!! THEY ARE PROTECTED NOW!"
Stunning fearmongering, vaxxplaining from the chief covidiot.
Fantastic news, thank you science 👏🏼
What does 90% efficacy mean?
2600 bro wrote:
ertwr wrote:
How is that efficacy measured when kids that age are already 99.99999% protected by the fact they are that age?
1 in 10,000,000 risk of infection in kids, you heard it here first.
Stunning math from the "geniuses"
This.
ertwr wrote:
2600 bro wrote:
1 in 10,000,000 risk of infection in kids, you heard it here first.
Stunning math from the "geniuses"
Math? What math?
You vaccinate people who have basically no risk of getting the illness and then claim "LO AND BEHOLD!!!! THEY ARE PROTECTED NOW!"
Stunning fearmongering, vaxxplaining from the chief covidiot.
I was making fun of you for being stupid. Keep up.
The Unkle wrote:
What does 90% efficacy mean?
Means you can 100% get, transmit and die from covid all while being vaccinated. And also potentially have your heart inflamed from getting the vaccine.
jamb innn wrote:
The Unkle wrote:
What does 90% efficacy mean?
Means you can 100% get, transmit and die from covid all while being vaccinated. And also potentially have your heart inflamed from getting the vaccine.
This Jamin parody account is good content. Thank you.
jamb innn wrote:
The Unkle wrote:
What does 90% efficacy mean?
Means you can 100% get, transmit and die from covid all while being vaccinated. And also potentially have your heart inflamed from getting the vaccine.
If you look into the alleged trials that Pfizer performed to get that original 95% "efficacy" claim, you will see that those not vaxxed were said to be 19 times as likely to get Covid as those who had been vaxxed --over a two month period. 19/20 = 95%.
So they claimed the vaxx stopped the spread.
Earlier this year it became clear lots of vaxxed people were getting Covid and the claim then morphed away from prevention to lessened severity of symptoms. A total reversal of what they had been saying.
But the vaxxers never even questioned this.
So now I assume they are making the same prevent transmission claim. What else could 90% mean? But they themselves are saying their vax does not prevent transmission.
They have told so many lies that they consistently contradict themselves.
It quickly faded and no one looked back, it just became widely accepted.
Now they are advocating a "mix n match" booster approach which assuredly has NOT been tested. Especially when just weeks ago the CDC/FDA was advocating NOT to administer boosters.
Biden publically advocated for boosters, and now the CDC magically flip flops.
What am I missing here? The current rate of kids in hospitals with COVID is trending around 0.7 per 100,000 for 5-17 yr olds right now.
2600 bro wrote:
ertwr wrote:
Math? What math?
You vaccinate people who have basically no risk of getting the illness and then claim "LO AND BEHOLD!!!! THEY ARE PROTECTED NOW!"
Stunning fearmongering, vaxxplaining from the chief covidiot.
I was making fun of you for being stupid. Keep up.
It's OK. Plenty of people make fun of you daily for being stupid and writing under your many different handles.
ertwr wrote:
It's OK. Plenty of people make fun of you daily for being stupid and writing under your many different handles.
You wrote that only one in 10 million kids 5-11 will contract COVID. That's dumber than anythign 2600 bro/Harambe has ever written.
Imagine taking two shots to prevent COVID, catching COVID anyway, recovering with natural immunity, and then being mandated to take a third shot. This is coming unless people come to their senses.
UnbiasedOhioVoter wrote:
ertwr wrote:
It's OK. Plenty of people make fun of you daily for being stupid and writing under your many different handles.
You wrote that only one in 10 million kids 5-11 will contract COVID. That's dumber than anythign 2600 bro/Harambe has ever written.
While true, it’s fun to let them think they are on equal footing. It makes them more brazen and feeds me my daily moron diet.
ertwr wrote:
How is that efficacy measured when kids that age are already 99.99999% protected by the fact they are that age?
Exactly.
Which means the vaccine actually hurts children.
dmagic17 wrote:
What am I missing here? The current rate of kids in hospitals with COVID is trending around 0.7 per 100,000 for 5-17 yr olds right now.
I think it's pretty obvious what you're mi$$ing.