Its very clear to me...
The Coronavirus thread
- Thread starter hamster
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 10,128
- Reaction score
- 13,556
- Points
- 113
More good news!!
The CEO of Pfizer says that folks may need an annual Covid booster!
We can all feel good that the guys making the no liability vaccine have no idea about what happens in 6-12 months, but are confident that they will be here to "help", because they have no product liability. Its a vaccine, not a drug!
Buy stock in Big Pharma.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 10,128
- Reaction score
- 13,556
- Points
- 113
Soma, by Pfizer
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 10,128
- Reaction score
- 13,556
- Points
- 113
Tibs and Floggy are in the camp that thinks Black Men are more often shot to death by white police officers than they die in traffic accidents, and likewise they believe 7 in 10 people who get COVID are hospitalized and 3 of 10 who contract it be dying from it.
This is what you learn with Liberals. They ask for abortion...it's a slippery slope...it becomes abortions at 8.5 months later. They ask for gun control...they won't stop till there is a ban on guns. Now there's talk about masks forever.
It never stops with the fix it crowd.
dailycaller.com
It never stops with the fix it crowd.
The ‘Masks Forever’ Crowd Is Real. Here’s What They Want
Though it's unclear when COVID-19 restrictions on normal gatherings and businesses will be lifted, Americans might need masks until 2022.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,205
- Reaction score
- 7,926
- Points
- 113
It's a virus with different strains, so boosters might be needed if it's determined that there are strains that don't respond to this one. I mean that is totally logical from a scientific perspective, but if you actually believe that this is all a big conspiracy to make money for Big Pharma on needless vaccines I probably can't convince you otherwise.
I don't know how we got to the point where so many people are so skeptical of medical science. It really makes no sense if you look at the trajectory of medical development and innovation and how many lives have been extended and saved by it. It's a real head scratcher for me.
It’s simple, really. Not all of us are sheep.
Here's what I KNOW that I know:
The "500,000+ death count" is a LIE.
"Masks work" is a LIE.
"Lockdowns work" is a LIE.
"Healthy people under 30 should get vaccinated" is a LIE.
"This vaccine has undergone all the same testing as every other medication approved by the FDA" is a LIE.
They lie to us with such calm and ease, the fact that anyone would not question EVERYTHING that we're being told is a head-scratcher to me.
What I DO BELIEVE is that the vaccine appears to be effective enough that if you're over 65-70 years old, or have an existing health condition that puts you at higher risk, than the potential unknown risks of getting this EXPERIMENTAL vaccine are worth it. Get it.
The "500,000+ death count" is a LIE.
"Masks work" is a LIE.
"Lockdowns work" is a LIE.
"Healthy people under 30 should get vaccinated" is a LIE.
"This vaccine has undergone all the same testing as every other medication approved by the FDA" is a LIE.
They lie to us with such calm and ease, the fact that anyone would not question EVERYTHING that we're being told is a head-scratcher to me.
What I DO BELIEVE is that the vaccine appears to be effective enough that if you're over 65-70 years old, or have an existing health condition that puts you at higher risk, than the potential unknown risks of getting this EXPERIMENTAL vaccine are worth it. Get it.
Here's what you can't have: "Masks / lockdowns work" AND "500,000+ deaths / 100s of millions of infections"
Are we to believe we were facing the possible extinction of the human race if we hadn't subjected ourselves to all this nonsense?
Saying that healthy people under 30 should get vaccinated is like saying that people who travel to India are at risk of contracting malaria, so all American should be vaccinated.
Are we to believe we were facing the possible extinction of the human race if we hadn't subjected ourselves to all this nonsense?
Saying that healthy people under 30 should get vaccinated is like saying that people who travel to India are at risk of contracting malaria, so all American should be vaccinated.
A year of our smartest, brightest leaders waffling and lying in their messaging to us.
A year of our leading medical organizations playing politics is another. The WHO especially, involving China. The CDC also, but to a lesser degree.
Major cases against big pharma is another, like cases against J&J and Purdue.
The over-prescription of anti-depressants in the past 30 years and the financial link back to pharmas and how they leverage doctors to push these drugs.
250,000 people in the U.S. die every year from medical errors and negligence. This makes medical malpractice the third-leading cause of death in the United States.
Not a head scratcher for me. There's a lot of mistrust of the medical community in some camps. This past year, they eroded their credibility severely. COVID was NOT good for improving mankind's faith in medical science.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,205
- Reaction score
- 7,926
- Points
- 113
LOL.
Yeah people who make their decisions based on actual clinical trial data and historic safety and efficacy of vaccines are sheep. People who believe wild conspiracy theories with no basis in facts or data are not.
Got it.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,515
- Reaction score
- 6,188
- Points
- 113
Like when they’re being airlifted from the White House to Walter Reed?
Let's spray some context on your attempt to spin.
The man contracted COVID. The most powerful man in the world. They aren't going to stick him in an SUV and take him to NNMC (Walter Reed). In fact, and I can't verify this, but I believe all Presidents who visit NNMC do so via a helicopter.
Yet the man worked while there, suffered mild symptoms no worse than those who get their second vaccine shot, and reemerged healthy and resumed his job duties.
"But he was airlifted!!!! Egadsssss!!!"
He probably had two scoops of ice cream while there too. THE HORROR!!!
Well isn't this also an interesting study that goes against the "consensus". Fully expect that this study, from MIT, shall too also be quashed and these professors will be ridiculed and silenced because they dare to question "the science." It also turns out the idea of social distancing come from some kid's science fair project.
....From a...science...fair....project.
www.theblaze.com
MIT professors Martin Bazant and John W.M. Bush have published a study arguing that "the current revival of the American economy is being predicated on social distancing, specifically the Six-Foot Rule, a guideline that offers little protection from pathogen-bearing aerosol droplets sufficiently small to be continuously mixed through an indoor space."
They found, in short, as CNBC explains, that "the risk of being exposed to Covid-19 indoors is as great at 60 feet as it is at 6 feet — even when wearing a mask."
"We argue there really isn't much of a benefit to the 6-foot rule, especially when people are wearing masks," Bazant told the outlet. "It really has no physical basis because the air a person is breathing while wearing a mask tends to rise and comes down elsewhere in the room so you're more exposed to the average background than you are to a person at a distance."
"What our analysis continues to show is that many spaces that have been shut down in fact don't need to be," he continued. "Often times the space is large enough, the ventilation is good enough, the amount of time people spend together is such that those spaces can be safely operated even at full capacity and the scientific support for reduced capacity in those spaces is really not very good."
He argued that the mandates implemented across the nation during the pandemic that have shuttered businesses and schools have been unnecessary.
"This emphasis on distancing has been really misplaced from the very beginning," he said. "The CDC or WHO have never really provided justification for it, they've just said this is what you must do and the only justification I'm aware of, is based on studies of coughs and sneezes, where they look at the largest particles that might sediment onto the floor and even then it's very approximate, you can certainly have longer or shorter range, large droplets."
Bazant added, "The distancing isn't helping you that much and it's also giving you a false sense of security because you're as safe at 6 feet as you are at 60 feet if you're indoors. Everyone in that space is at roughly the same risk, actually."
They pointed to a post from the American Instituted for Economic Research that cites a New York Times report from a year ago explaining that the idea for social distancing, indeed, came from a kid during the President George W. Bush administration and "was viewed as impractical, unnecessary and politically infeasible."
The Times reported Apr. 22, 2020:
....From a...science...fair....project.
MIT social distancing study finds 'there really isn't much of a benefit to the 6-foot-rule' indoors
Researchers say 'this emphasis on distancing has been really misplaced from the very beginning'
www.theblaze.com
MIT professors Martin Bazant and John W.M. Bush have published a study arguing that "the current revival of the American economy is being predicated on social distancing, specifically the Six-Foot Rule, a guideline that offers little protection from pathogen-bearing aerosol droplets sufficiently small to be continuously mixed through an indoor space."
They found, in short, as CNBC explains, that "the risk of being exposed to Covid-19 indoors is as great at 60 feet as it is at 6 feet — even when wearing a mask."
"We argue there really isn't much of a benefit to the 6-foot rule, especially when people are wearing masks," Bazant told the outlet. "It really has no physical basis because the air a person is breathing while wearing a mask tends to rise and comes down elsewhere in the room so you're more exposed to the average background than you are to a person at a distance."
"What our analysis continues to show is that many spaces that have been shut down in fact don't need to be," he continued. "Often times the space is large enough, the ventilation is good enough, the amount of time people spend together is such that those spaces can be safely operated even at full capacity and the scientific support for reduced capacity in those spaces is really not very good."
He argued that the mandates implemented across the nation during the pandemic that have shuttered businesses and schools have been unnecessary.
"This emphasis on distancing has been really misplaced from the very beginning," he said. "The CDC or WHO have never really provided justification for it, they've just said this is what you must do and the only justification I'm aware of, is based on studies of coughs and sneezes, where they look at the largest particles that might sediment onto the floor and even then it's very approximate, you can certainly have longer or shorter range, large droplets."
Bazant added, "The distancing isn't helping you that much and it's also giving you a false sense of security because you're as safe at 6 feet as you are at 60 feet if you're indoors. Everyone in that space is at roughly the same risk, actually."
Anything else?
Upon seeing CNBC's report, a Twitter user identifying themselves as a "politically neutral social scientist" wrote: "It took experts an entire year to discover that a 14 year old's science project should not be used to guide a pandemic response plan. Social distancing is bad science."They pointed to a post from the American Instituted for Economic Research that cites a New York Times report from a year ago explaining that the idea for social distancing, indeed, came from a kid during the President George W. Bush administration and "was viewed as impractical, unnecessary and politically infeasible."
The Times reported Apr. 22, 2020:
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 15,515
- Reaction score
- 6,188
- Points
- 113
Sure, Tim. The whole thing was a good look for Trump.
We'll see how Joe gets to the hospital the next time he breaks a bone petting his dog.
That wasn't the point. You tried to make it look like Trump was airlifted to NNMC because he got COVID and practically died because of his utter recklessness and arrrrghhhhhhh rhhheeeeeeee.
Bullshit.
Or the next time he tries to ascend the steps into Air Force One and tumbles backwards.
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 10,128
- Reaction score
- 13,556
- Points
- 113
Which clinical trials, for any approved drug, considered the cocktail of other drugs that many people feel compelled to take on the advice of doctors?
And if there is one drug class like this, what of the long term effects? For the negatives like Vioxx and the opioids, there must surely be one that has had a "better than expected" outcome. Maybe aspirin, but there must be more.
Round Up is also perfectly safe based on clinical studies, when used as labeled.....but that is not the reality faced by the average user......so we know that human condition, other forces, choices makes the segmented and sectioned off clinical trials unlikely to be representative of the actual experience.....
Since there is almost zero risk of Covid issues to people/kids under 20, why would any even be considered for vaccination? To make the old people marginally safer? Without knowing the longer term cost, who gets to play God and decide who takes risks for whom?
We should take all of the at risk older, sick people and ship them to New Zealand to ride this out, so the rest of society can get back to living
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2014
- Messages
- 8,205
- Reaction score
- 7,926
- Points
- 113
I'm guessing among the tens of thousands who participated in these clinical trials, some were taking other drugs. I didn't delve into that since I don't take anything else but ibuprofen myself.
A vaccine, as I mentioned before, is a miniscule amount of a substance and not something that sticks around in your body for years or that you take long term so it's extremely unlikely to have effects that don't show up relatively soon after being vaccinated. Adverse events from these vaccines are in line with those from placebo (the J & J clotting risk might be slightly higher but then again there are some pretty significant clotting risks from getting covid).
Many of you keep talking about "almost zero risk" for young people and that is true of the risk of death, it's not true of the risk of hospitalization, ICU admission or long term effects from covid. Measles is unlikely to kill most people but we vaccinate against it because it can put people in the hospital and cause some nasty long term effects. Those things are worth preventing.
you forgot to tie in that lockdowns do not effect the economy at all, not in any fashion whatsoever.