- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 3,701
- Reaction score
- 6,955
- Points
- 113
Because there is a 100% chance that he didn't even read what he posted.
Covid Vaccine
- Thread starter jitter77
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
Why not start a new thread arguing that people shouldn’t wear seatbelts or football players shouldn’t wear helmets? It would be equally as pointless as your question.
well, no, dipshit.
seatbelts have been proven over time to prevent someone from being injured in an auto/truck accident. yet, I'm not wearing my seatbelt when I take a shower or swim in my pool or cut my yard or walk around the block or go to the gym or watch tv or jerk off or ... well, I'm wearing it now since it's preventing me from sustaining the same head injury you must have.
football helmets are ... get this ****! ... constantly being revised and studied to help prevent head injuries. Yet, they do not always prevent concussions. Are you wearing yours now?
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
How has life not returned to normal? Packed football stadiums and restaurants, no masks. What’s different than September 2019?
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
Why was CDC enforcing anything? Who gave the CDC the authority to enforce anything? Additionally, why was the CDC selective in their enforcement? Why are you ok with a governmental group telling you what you can and cannot do while they do not adhere to those themselves? Were people wearing masks of any kind on public transportation prior to September 2019? Were those people being required to do so by a governmental agency?
I don’t know how you have time for this. That’s why I pretty much ignore him.
Absolutely, but at least his initial plan had multiple layers of vaccines… there were well over a dozen different types of vaccines for covid. The MRNA ones were only supposed to be the fast and dirty ones… not the standard bearer… I'm guessing the Trump administration on some levels had to know of the safety issues and ineffectiveness of current mrna processes, but they needed a quick vaccine before the election for the most at risk…
It was the Biden administration that sunk so many of the follow up vaccines by forcing them to undergo longer clinical trials
Which made zero sense really… outside of tge J&J adenovirus version, niether the moderna nor the pfizer technique had successfully passed any clinical trials ever… but they got a billion dollars start up cash and expedited clinical trials that is usually only reserved for much more proven methods, while other proven methods are still in clinical trials…
Thats all at least partially on trump…though he certainly wasnt the administration that held all the secondary vaccines back.. all the fucktardery with mandates and general population mrna vaccines and pushing it on pregnant women and children… thats on the Biden administration… which was definitely influenced by pfizer spending more money on lobbyists in 2021 than any single company ever had… they supposedly outspent the entire military industry on lobbyists.. a feat once thought to be preposterous
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
Was, were. Past tense. Try again.
Why was CDC enforcing anything? Who gave the CDC the authority to enforce anything? Additionally, why was the CDC selective in their enforcement? Why are you ok with a governmental group telling you what you can and cannot do while they do not adhere to those themselves? Were people wearing masks of any kind on public transportation prior to September 2019? Were those people being required to do so by a governmental agency?
"back to normal"
beckernews.com
The results of the accepted scientific study confirm that the concerns that many patients had about the mRNA vaccines were well-founded.
“In the Moderna trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs (15.1 per 10,000 participants) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (6.4 per 10,000 participants),” the study found.
“In the Pfizer trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs (10.1 per 10,000) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (2.3 per 10,000 participants),” the study added.
The study was published on ScienceDirect on August 31, 2022. The authors include researchers from Stanford University, the University of Maryland, and UCLA. The study provides the following list of confirmed adverse events (or side effects) of the respective mRNA vaccines. It also provides the risk ratios versus Covid-19 (over 1 is a factor increase, under 1 is a factor decrease). This is the list for Pfizer:
BREAKING: Landmark First Peer-Reviewed Study on Pfizer and Moderna Covid Vaccines Confirms 'Excess Risk' of Adverse Side Effects
A landmark peer-reviewed study appears to be the first of its kind to provide hard data on the “excess risk” of adverse side effects of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines in an independent “randomized clinical trial.” The results of the accepted scientific study confirm that the concerns...
beckernews.com
Landmark First Peer-Reviewed Study on Pfizer and Moderna Covid Vaccines Confirms ‘Excess Risk’ of Adverse Side Effects
- by Kyle Becker
- September 2, 2022
The results of the accepted scientific study confirm that the concerns that many patients had about the mRNA vaccines were well-founded.
“In the Moderna trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs (15.1 per 10,000 participants) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (6.4 per 10,000 participants),” the study found.
“In the Pfizer trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs (10.1 per 10,000) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (2.3 per 10,000 participants),” the study added.
The study was published on ScienceDirect on August 31, 2022. The authors include researchers from Stanford University, the University of Maryland, and UCLA. The study provides the following list of confirmed adverse events (or side effects) of the respective mRNA vaccines. It also provides the risk ratios versus Covid-19 (over 1 is a factor increase, under 1 is a factor decrease). This is the list for Pfizer:
CDC continues to recommend that people wear high-quality masks in indoor public transportation settings at this time.
continues - present tense. as in current. as in now. as in today, tomorrow and likely days after that.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
RECOMMEND! Mother *******! Who do they think they are? Some waiter at a restaurant?
If you take a commercial flight, there’s likely going to be several people on it with Covid that you might sit beside for several hours. It’s not a bad recommendation.
and we're back to square 1 with you and masks
I had an appointment before work this morning at Aspen Dental for a buff and polish. I had to put a mask on when I entered the office. How dumb is that?
Besides being dense and mentally handicapped, you're proving yourself to be blind too.
Life has not returned to normal. I was forced to wear a mask this morning at a Dr.s office. Berkeley is mandating students to mask up for the flu. Certain organizations are still mandating vaccinations of their constituents.
Second, they have just approved another vaccine. That should scare the **** out of every rational being. Not one human has it been tested on. Not one.
You cheer, I'm sure, and will sprint to get yours. Good luck.
You do realize that isn't the point and you're trying to change it...right?
I type 60+ words a minute, and find little breaks like this from work or play to be enjoyable. No...really. I enjoy this.
He drives everyone else nuts. This is pure entertainment to me at this point.
"back to normal"
BREAKING: Landmark First Peer-Reviewed Study on Pfizer and Moderna Covid Vaccines Confirms 'Excess Risk' of Adverse Side Effects
A landmark peer-reviewed study appears to be the first of its kind to provide hard data on the “excess risk” of adverse side effects of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines in an independent “randomized clinical trial.” The results of the accepted scientific study confirm that the concerns...
Landmark First Peer-Reviewed Study on Pfizer and Moderna Covid Vaccines Confirms ‘Excess Risk’ of Adverse Side Effects
A landmark peer-reviewed study appears to be the first of its kind to provide hard data on the “excess risk” of adverse side effects of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines in an independent randomized control trial.
- by Kyle Becker
- September 2, 2022
The results of the accepted scientific study confirm that the concerns that many patients had about the mRNA vaccines were well-founded.
“In the Moderna trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs (15.1 per 10,000 participants) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (6.4 per 10,000 participants),” the study found.
“In the Pfizer trial, the excess risk of serious AESIs (10.1 per 10,000) was higher than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group (2.3 per 10,000 participants),” the study added.
The study was published on ScienceDirect on August 31, 2022. The authors include researchers from Stanford University, the University of Maryland, and UCLA. The study provides the following list of confirmed adverse events (or side effects) of the respective mRNA vaccines. It also provides the risk ratios versus Covid-19 (over 1 is a factor increase, under 1 is a factor decrease). This is the list for Pfizer:
View attachment 9384
That's pretty damning stuff. It's scientific. It's PEER REVIEWED.
Go on, just post one study from one reputable organization!! JFC!! /Floggy
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
Again, it’s not me, is it? It’s MEDICAL DOCTORS you disagree with.
Jill is a doctor and I will vehemently disagree with her on 99.9% of everything.
Which, I'm sure, is a stark contrast to your own views. No surprise there.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
Beckernews.com? And you accuse me of having confirmation bias. Post the actual study at least.
And what’s this “first time” ****? You’ve been telling me that you’ve posted hundreds of studies showing the same thing. Guess not, right?
did you read the thing? quite obviously not.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,407
- Reaction score
- 5,477
- Points
- 113
18.0 and 7.1 per 10,000 over placebo. Notice they don’t conclude that the vaccine should be discontinued immediately.
Similar threads
