Been a lot of sports news lately how they are all getting WuFlu anyway. It couldn't be more clear how little or nothing these "vaccines" work at being an actual vaccine. They just redefined the word vaccine to confuse people. At absolute best it's a prophylactic treatment injection.
We know how it goes though, to any questioning they will just say "These vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective. The best thing you can to protect yourself and others and to end the Covid-19 pandemic is to get vaccinated." Because that's all they ever say. They parrot the same line over and over more reliably than an actual parrot would.
If you point out the inconsistencies like an entire vaccinated cruise ship getting sick they'll try to own you with "NO VACCINE IS 100% EFFECTIVE!"
Which is odd because in my recollection vaccines conferred "immunity" that almost guaranteed you were "immune" to a virus, but I must not have received that NPC update.
If I recall, there was an actual revision in one of the standard dictionaries to the word vaccine to remove a reference to immunity. I'd have to research to find out which and when but it was in the last year.
Once they co-opted the word though, it's made harder to argue with some. I've been told verbatim that "it stops the virus from spreading, because that's the definition of a vaccine" by someone who just assumed the medical treatment being referred to as a vaccine was one.
Then the testing nonsense. I had a mild cold a couple weeks ago. Lasted about 24 hours. Two of the three people I've mentioned it to were all wondering about my Covid test. As if I was supposed to seek out a Covid test for being a little under the weather. I was not in need of medical attention, therefore also not in need of a Covid test. The way people are with their healthcare is mind-boggling to me at times anyway. Like these urgent care places popped up all over the place because if their little kid gets the mild sniffles better run off to the doctor immediately.
If I recall, there was an actual revision in one of the standard dictionaries to the word vaccine to remove a reference to immunity. I'd have to research to find out which and when but it was in the last year.
The word redefiners are exactly what Lewis Carroll was getting at wrt the character of Humpty Dumpty, in Through the Looking Glass. For some reason, that scene has stuck with me for decades, and now I know why. The world is full of Humpty Dumpties.
That's the thing. Go check out the One Bite Pizza Review from yesterday in NYC --- I have half a mind that Dave did some bullshit dollar slice place just to show there's like 200 people in line for a Coof test in NYC where everyone is fully clotshotted.
if you think about it.. if you are vaccinated, that means you are more careless, which means you probably not gonna observe 6feet and all that other bullshit because you are mislead that you are "vaccinated".
Plus, the rich and famous always break more rules anyways..
Not to be 'that guy' but I can think of one reason you'd see something like this that doesn't have anything to do the vaccine - other than the vaccine simply being ineffective.
That reason is the mathematics of exponential, or even percentage based growth. It may take you an entire year to go from one infection to two million, but the following year, you'll go from two million to two hundred million in the same space of time.
So no, the vaccine is not making people more susceptible. However, it simply doesn't work.
No, but occams razor says the simplest explantion is most likely the correct one, and I find the reality of increasing numbers to be the simplest explanation.
Imagine there are 100 infected, and the number increases by 5 percent per day.
One month later, you have 432 infected.
One year later, you have nearly five and a half billion.
No, but occams razor says the simplest explantion is most likely the correct one, and I find the reality of increasing numbers to be the simplest explanation.
That's not how medical science is supposed to work.
We don't guesswork efficacy rates based on hypotheticals and then release the drugs into the public and try to figure it out later.
I can't even believe this has to be explained, but SAFETY COMES FIRST.
That means that no one in their right mind should put anything in their body before control studies are done, placebo studies are done, and longitudinal studies are done.
Hence, Occam's Razor tells us that if you don't have publicly available records for any of the aforementioned studies related to efficacy rates, then you have no argument about efficacy at all.
You can't argue on behalf of efficacy for an untested drug when there are no studies available, especially when the drugs contain graphene oxide and trypanosoma, which can kill you if they get into the venous system:
https://archive.md/Pl7pH
This is part of the problem with today's culture, though. People are indoctrinated to believe disinformation over following through with the basic scientific method: ergo, asking questions first before believing lies.
I shouldn't have had to ask you the question I did, YOU should have asked that first before assuming untested drugs have any efficacy rates at all, or that these drugs aren't actually causing people's immune systems to be lowered so they're more susceptible to mutated variants.
Let me ask you these questions:
In the absence of any publicly available data, why do you believe the efficacy of these drugs at all? Based on what?
How do you know the placebo effect isn't taking place?
How do you know natural immunity isn't simply doing its job?
How do you know other drugs aren't affecting any of the positive/negative rates being reported by the media?
Where are the median data samples for comparative measures?
In fact, have you even bothered to look for placebo results? Do you even care about control samples?
You're defending a position because the media told you to, not because it's the healthy or right thing to do, and not even because there's any hard, factual, or concrete data to back up your position.
You're even defending your position against me asking a basic health question that YOU should have been concerned about asking right from the start.
This is how it is in clown world, though. People are given toxins to inject into their system and then defend their efficacy rates based on unproven and untested claims. How absurd is that?
Been a lot of sports news lately how they are all getting WuFlu anyway. It couldn't be more clear how little or nothing these "vaccines" work at being an actual vaccine. They just redefined the word vaccine to confuse people. At absolute best it's a prophylactic treatment injection.
We know how it goes though, to any questioning they will just say "These vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective. The best thing you can to protect yourself and others and to end the Covid-19 pandemic is to get vaccinated." Because that's all they ever say. They parrot the same line over and over more reliably than an actual parrot would.
If you point out the inconsistencies like an entire vaccinated cruise ship getting sick they'll try to own you with "NO VACCINE IS 100% EFFECTIVE!"
Which is odd because in my recollection vaccines conferred "immunity" that almost guaranteed you were "immune" to a virus, but I must not have received that NPC update.
If I recall, there was an actual revision in one of the standard dictionaries to the word vaccine to remove a reference to immunity. I'd have to research to find out which and when but it was in the last year.
Once they co-opted the word though, it's made harder to argue with some. I've been told verbatim that "it stops the virus from spreading, because that's the definition of a vaccine" by someone who just assumed the medical treatment being referred to as a vaccine was one.
Then the testing nonsense. I had a mild cold a couple weeks ago. Lasted about 24 hours. Two of the three people I've mentioned it to were all wondering about my Covid test. As if I was supposed to seek out a Covid test for being a little under the weather. I was not in need of medical attention, therefore also not in need of a Covid test. The way people are with their healthcare is mind-boggling to me at times anyway. Like these urgent care places popped up all over the place because if their little kid gets the mild sniffles better run off to the doctor immediately.
The CDC itself did that. https://media.kotakuinaction2.win/post/0etPCgXL.jpeg
2016 version: "Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease." https://web.archive.org/web/20160503074221/http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
Now: "Vaccination: The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce protection from a specific disease." https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
The word redefiners are exactly what Lewis Carroll was getting at wrt the character of Humpty Dumpty, in Through the Looking Glass. For some reason, that scene has stuck with me for decades, and now I know why. The world is full of Humpty Dumpties.
they need to have a great fall
Thankfully there is no way for them to 1984 my hardcopy dictionary from 1955.
Until JoePedo signs an executive order banning physical books. It was a pleasure to burn...
That's the thing. Go check out the One Bite Pizza Review from yesterday in NYC --- I have half a mind that Dave did some bullshit dollar slice place just to show there's like 200 people in line for a Coof test in NYC where everyone is fully clotshotted.
It's insanity.
Anyone who believed that is a retard. The plandemic will end when it stops benefiting the people running this shit show. Not a moment before.
if you think about it.. if you are vaccinated, that means you are more careless, which means you probably not gonna observe 6feet and all that other bullshit because you are mislead that you are "vaccinated".
Plus, the rich and famous always break more rules anyways..
Not to be 'that guy' but I can think of one reason you'd see something like this that doesn't have anything to do the vaccine - other than the vaccine simply being ineffective.
That reason is the mathematics of exponential, or even percentage based growth. It may take you an entire year to go from one infection to two million, but the following year, you'll go from two million to two hundred million in the same space of time.
So no, the vaccine is not making people more susceptible. However, it simply doesn't work.
Or the vaccine is the virus.
We don’t get to know anything because actual science has been forbidden.
You've got control group studies proving that?
No, but occams razor says the simplest explantion is most likely the correct one, and I find the reality of increasing numbers to be the simplest explanation.
Imagine there are 100 infected, and the number increases by 5 percent per day.
One month later, you have 432 infected.
One year later, you have nearly five and a half billion.
That's not how medical science is supposed to work.
We don't guesswork efficacy rates based on hypotheticals and then release the drugs into the public and try to figure it out later.
I can't even believe this has to be explained, but SAFETY COMES FIRST.
That means that no one in their right mind should put anything in their body before control studies are done, placebo studies are done, and longitudinal studies are done.
Hence, Occam's Razor tells us that if you don't have publicly available records for any of the aforementioned studies related to efficacy rates, then you have no argument about efficacy at all.
Furthermore, what studies have been done actually tells us that the vaccines can reduce antibodies efficacy against Covid: https://www.cure-hub.com/post/sars-cov-2-vaccines-breakthrough-infections-and-lasting-natural-immunity
You can't argue on behalf of efficacy for an untested drug when there are no studies available, especially when the drugs contain graphene oxide and trypanosoma, which can kill you if they get into the venous system: https://archive.md/Pl7pH
This is part of the problem with today's culture, though. People are indoctrinated to believe disinformation over following through with the basic scientific method: ergo, asking questions first before believing lies.
I shouldn't have had to ask you the question I did, YOU should have asked that first before assuming untested drugs have any efficacy rates at all, or that these drugs aren't actually causing people's immune systems to be lowered so they're more susceptible to mutated variants.
Let me ask you these questions:
In the absence of any publicly available data, why do you believe the efficacy of these drugs at all? Based on what?
How do you know the placebo effect isn't taking place?
How do you know natural immunity isn't simply doing its job?
How do you know other drugs aren't affecting any of the positive/negative rates being reported by the media?
Where are the median data samples for comparative measures?
In fact, have you even bothered to look for placebo results? Do you even care about control samples?
You're defending a position because the media told you to, not because it's the healthy or right thing to do, and not even because there's any hard, factual, or concrete data to back up your position.
You're even defending your position against me asking a basic health question that YOU should have been concerned about asking right from the start.
This is how it is in clown world, though. People are given toxins to inject into their system and then defend their efficacy rates based on unproven and untested claims. How absurd is that?