- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 19,617
- Reaction score
- 20,761
- Points
- 113
Covid Vaccine
- Thread starter jitter77
- Start date
Dr Flogstain has a perfect explanation.
Elon MuskFlogg: "Covid. Err....Covid caused the 6% increase in deaths!"
Now that it's an 18% rise?
Stephen HawkinFlogg: "COVID AGAIN!"
Normal Peopoze: "Floggy, Covid ain't a thang anymore, ain't harming anyone"
"JFC, shitsandwich, it's still Covid!"
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,069
- Reaction score
- 5,192
- Points
- 113
😂 “Search online for suddenly died headlines…” sounds like your “it’s beginning to look a lot like genocide” nonsense that you tried to walk back.
How’s about you share the data of which she speaks.
Once again, your embarrassing inability to comprehend the English language is on full display. Nothing about her speech is about dying suddenly.
It's about excess mortality.
It's your job to do the homework, not ours. You think she's full of ****, prove it then.
We've shared excess mortality data more frequently than you've eaten Krispy-Kreme donuts slathered in whipped cream.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 3,451
- Reaction score
- 6,349
- Points
- 113
Why? you wouldn't read it. You'd scamper off and Google some key words like "sudden deaths not from covid vaccine" where you'd discover a myriad of disinformation created by big pharma to keep lemmings like you from believing the truth. You'd paste several links that you wouldn't have read and were 2-3 years old with your face adorned with a smug yet delighted look on your face as you aggressively hit the "Enter" key and then lean back into your chair as if you'd accomplished a great feat.
Tim, Supe, and a host of others will point to the links you shared and point out where they actually disprove your point entirely. This will cause you to cherry pick a specific point they will have made, and use that as a deflection to move onto the next time they post the truth.
Rinse/Repeat...Page 843 forthcoming.
Yep.
The State Department has known all along that Covid leaked from an accident at Wuhan Lab, and they have kept it hidden.
<looks at watch - waits for Flogstain in 3...2...1> - "This isn't proof! Do you have 100% proof?! No?! You can't causally link it. So it came from a Pangolin, JFC!!"
The State Department has known all along that Covid leaked from an accident at Wuhan Lab, and they have kept it hidden.
<looks at watch - waits for Flogstain in 3...2...1> - "This isn't proof! Do you have 100% proof?! No?! You can't causally link it. So it came from a Pangolin, JFC!!"
Perhaps the briefest, most accurate portrayal of his behavior summarized here yet.
Last edited:
You may be on to something here.
News date July 14, 2147, US State Department releases an un-redacted account of the origin of the Coronavirus pandemic. In a related story, the CIA in partnership with the KGB, did in fact shoot JFK. Nuclear testing in Mercury, Nevada from 1950 to 1985 apparently wasn't as safe as the public was led to believe. And finally, OJ did it and Epstein did not.
WHAT IN THE EVER LOVING ****?
Chris Cuomo’s stance on Ivermectin as a theraputic drug for COVID-19 has done a complete 180, as the news anchor who once said on CNN that anyone promoting it should be “shamed” now says he’s “taking a regular dose” to deal with his own struggles with long-term effects of an infection.
Cuomo shared in January that he’s suffering from “long COVID,” or the long-term lingering effects of a previous infection. This week on the PBD Podcast, a current-events show hosted by Patrick Bet-David, the NewsNation personality said he’s using the antiviral to help with an ongoing inflammatory response and “brain fog.”
“I’ll tell you something else that’s gonna get you a lot of hits,” Cuomo said. “I am taking … a regular dose of Ivermectin. Ivermectin was a boogeyman during COVID. That was wrong. We were given bad information about Ivermectin. The real question is, why?”
When COVID-19 was peaking in 2020 and 2021, Ivermectin emerged as a fringe remedy, and was instantly denounced as a “horse dewormer” – including a segment that mocked podcaster Joe Rogan for announcing that he had success taking the antiviral drug. Though it was first used in the 1970s as an antiparasitic primarily for animals, Ivermectin’s use in humans had become widespread in later decades, as a malaria prophylaxis and treatment in particular, and is considered very safe.
“Everyone’s going to say ‘Joe Rogan was right,'” Cuomo continued. “No, Joe Rogan was saying – yeah, he was right – that’s not what matters. What matters is, the entire medical community knew that Ivermectin couldn’t hurt you. They knew it … I know they knew it. How do I know? Because now I’m doing nothing but talking to these clinicians, who at the time were overwhelmed by COVID, and they weren’t saying anything!”
When Cuomo was still a CNN anchor, he and colleague Don Lemon ridiculed its use after Rogan’s disclosure:
“People who are getting, injecting, drugs for animals,” Lemon said at the time, “and horse – .”
“And people telling them to!” Cuomo interjected at the time. “What person – you know you talk about cancel culture and who to shame – Ivermectin? A de-wormer? Really? … they need to be shamed. They need to be called out and shamed, brother.”
On the PBD podcast, Cuomo walked that back – way back – suggesting that part of the reason Ivermectin was so vehemently rejected was that there was no profit in a drug that was already inexpensive and widely distributed.
“It’s cheap, it’s not owned by anybody, and it’s used as an anti-microbial, antiviral and has been for all these different ways, and has been for a long time,” Cuomo said. “My doctor was using it during COVID on her family and on her patients, and it was working for them. So. They were wrong to play scared on that. Didn’t know that at the time. Know it now, admit it now, reporting on it now.”
-----
Paging Dr. DedDogDraggur
Chris Cuomo’s stance on Ivermectin as a theraputic drug for COVID-19 has done a complete 180, as the news anchor who once said on CNN that anyone promoting it should be “shamed” now says he’s “taking a regular dose” to deal with his own struggles with long-term effects of an infection.
Cuomo shared in January that he’s suffering from “long COVID,” or the long-term lingering effects of a previous infection. This week on the PBD Podcast, a current-events show hosted by Patrick Bet-David, the NewsNation personality said he’s using the antiviral to help with an ongoing inflammatory response and “brain fog.”
“I’ll tell you something else that’s gonna get you a lot of hits,” Cuomo said. “I am taking … a regular dose of Ivermectin. Ivermectin was a boogeyman during COVID. That was wrong. We were given bad information about Ivermectin. The real question is, why?”
When COVID-19 was peaking in 2020 and 2021, Ivermectin emerged as a fringe remedy, and was instantly denounced as a “horse dewormer” – including a segment that mocked podcaster Joe Rogan for announcing that he had success taking the antiviral drug. Though it was first used in the 1970s as an antiparasitic primarily for animals, Ivermectin’s use in humans had become widespread in later decades, as a malaria prophylaxis and treatment in particular, and is considered very safe.
“Everyone’s going to say ‘Joe Rogan was right,'” Cuomo continued. “No, Joe Rogan was saying – yeah, he was right – that’s not what matters. What matters is, the entire medical community knew that Ivermectin couldn’t hurt you. They knew it … I know they knew it. How do I know? Because now I’m doing nothing but talking to these clinicians, who at the time were overwhelmed by COVID, and they weren’t saying anything!”
When Cuomo was still a CNN anchor, he and colleague Don Lemon ridiculed its use after Rogan’s disclosure:
“People who are getting, injecting, drugs for animals,” Lemon said at the time, “and horse – .”
“And people telling them to!” Cuomo interjected at the time. “What person – you know you talk about cancel culture and who to shame – Ivermectin? A de-wormer? Really? … they need to be shamed. They need to be called out and shamed, brother.”
On the PBD podcast, Cuomo walked that back – way back – suggesting that part of the reason Ivermectin was so vehemently rejected was that there was no profit in a drug that was already inexpensive and widely distributed.
“It’s cheap, it’s not owned by anybody, and it’s used as an anti-microbial, antiviral and has been for all these different ways, and has been for a long time,” Cuomo said. “My doctor was using it during COVID on her family and on her patients, and it was working for them. So. They were wrong to play scared on that. Didn’t know that at the time. Know it now, admit it now, reporting on it now.”
-----
Paging Dr. DedDogDraggur
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,069
- Reaction score
- 5,192
- Points
- 113
😂 So the part of the speech where she challenges people to search online for “died suddenly” has nothing to do with dying suddenly? The world according to Dim.
Is it? Without details and data who’s to say?
“You find the unicorn! We claim they exist, until you can prove they don’t, they do!”
You’re truly pathetic.
And when I humiliated you, you tried to blame drug addiction, suicides, your weight gain, and any number of other things on social distancing and Covid restrictions. You’re just another complaining Karen.We've shared excess mortality data more frequently than you've eaten Krispy-Kreme donuts slathered in whipped cream.
"humiliate"
that's a word you've used a little more often, Flog.
finally accepting that your dad aint never coming back from gettin dat gallon of milk?
or did the wife say "brb" when she went to see her stag last month?
or are you foncusing it with Humily and something you didnt know you ate?
that's a word you've used a little more often, Flog.
finally accepting that your dad aint never coming back from gettin dat gallon of milk?
or did the wife say "brb" when she went to see her stag last month?
or are you foncusing it with Humily and something you didnt know you ate?
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,069
- Reaction score
- 5,192
- Points
- 113
Provide some real life examples of the “truth”. Who do you know that died from the vaccine. Nobody, you just “know”, right?
😂 WTF?
Who’s perpetuating the thread?
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,069
- Reaction score
- 5,192
- Points
- 113
You’re confused, Tim’s dad is the one that took off.
You're confused, your wife took off. Ammirite?
Huh?
Her words...
"Maine has had an 18% increase in all cause deaths in the last 2 years."
What is the normal range? "It's about 1 1/2 percent."
The data? The details? All of which you will obediently ignore or dance around:
Pathetic is persistently denying and obfuscating facts as you do. This is also addressed above.
The day this ever happens is still pending.
That hypocrite takes Ivermectin every day now to address his COVID VACCINE INJURY.
**** you simply can no longer make up.
At least (unlike Dr. FatFlogstain) he has the ability to say "we were wrong."
Last edited:
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2014
- Messages
- 14,069
- Reaction score
- 5,192
- Points
- 113
Someone has SDDS
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,271
- Reaction score
- 29,178
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
Dr. Scarf, who pushed the vax almost as much as Floggy, admits that she always knew the vax was not going to protect against infection and perhaps they "overplayed the vax/shotz."
I believe this now leaves Dr. Flogstain as the ONLY remaining holdout to admitting the vax/shotz was premised on a lie, pushed by liars, and never should have been forced on Americans.
I believe this now leaves Dr. Flogstain as the ONLY remaining holdout to admitting the vax/shotz was premised on a lie, pushed by liars, and never should have been forced on Americans.
@Confluence is gonna love this one.
BMJ: FDA Financial Conflicts of Interest With Drug Industry and Its Leaders Are Common
Anybody who has taken a serious interest in the relationship between the Food and Drug Administration and the pharmaceutical and medical device industries is struck by an obvious fact: the revolving door between the regulators and the regulated is utterly corrupt.
The phenomenon is called regulatory capture. When this happens, as it often does, the regulators see their own interests as more aligned with the industry than with the general public. It happens much more often than you would think or hope. I once heard a story from a friend who worked on Capitol Hill about a Senate researcher who helped write tax laws.
He put in a provision that was so complicated that nobody could make heads or tails of it, then went into business as a consultant who explained what it meant to people.
He made bank.
Regulatory capture is similar to this. The regulators become "experts" on how the system works, making themselves extremely valuable to the regulated. No industry would ignore the value of having especially good relations with the people on the other side of a negotiating table.
It's a match made in heaven, except for you and me. We are the rats experimented upon.
There are, of course, ethics rules that are supposed to prevent conflicts of interest, and when regulators are working in government they are not allowed to invest in companies they regulate.
This happens all the time, and bureaucrats like it that way. And, frankly, so do many lawmakers who can do the same sort of thing--build up good relationships with companies and retire later with a windfall.
In political science we call this the iron triangle, where the regulators, the industries, and the politicians all share a common interest that diverges from the public's.
This is how you get unsafe and/or ineffective drugs through the system and how, I suspect, the jabs got out into the wild. Tens of billions of dollars are made based on these sorts of decisions.
Paxlovid is a great example. It has never been shown to be effective in the least, but the government spent zillions of dollars buying it and promotes the heck out of it as the money rolls into the coffers of Pfizer. It also has a pretty nasty side-effect profile.
This happens all the time, and bureaucrats like it that way. And, frankly, so do many lawmakers who can do the same sort of thing--build up good relationships with companies and retire later with a windfall.
In political science we call this the iron triangle, where the regulators, the industries, and the politicians all share a common interest that diverges from the public's.
This is how you get unsafe and/or ineffective drugs through the system and how, I suspect, the jabs got out into the wild. Tens of billions of dollars are made based on these sorts of decisions.
Paxlovid is a great example. It has never been shown to be effective in the least, but the government spent zillions of dollars buying it and promotes the heck out of it as the money rolls into the coffers of Pfizer. It also has a pretty nasty side-effect profile.
https://x.com/MartyMakary/status/1783255729895538704
This is how it works, folks. Follow the money.
BMJ: FDA Financial Conflicts of Interest With Drug Industry and Its Leaders Are Common
Anybody who has taken a serious interest in the relationship between the Food and Drug Administration and the pharmaceutical and medical device industries is struck by an obvious fact: the revolving door between the regulators and the regulated is utterly corrupt.
The phenomenon is called regulatory capture. When this happens, as it often does, the regulators see their own interests as more aligned with the industry than with the general public. It happens much more often than you would think or hope. I once heard a story from a friend who worked on Capitol Hill about a Senate researcher who helped write tax laws.
He put in a provision that was so complicated that nobody could make heads or tails of it, then went into business as a consultant who explained what it meant to people.
He made bank.
Regulatory capture is similar to this. The regulators become "experts" on how the system works, making themselves extremely valuable to the regulated. No industry would ignore the value of having especially good relations with the people on the other side of a negotiating table.
It's a match made in heaven, except for you and me. We are the rats experimented upon.
There are, of course, ethics rules that are supposed to prevent conflicts of interest, and when regulators are working in government they are not allowed to invest in companies they regulate.
This happens all the time, and bureaucrats like it that way. And, frankly, so do many lawmakers who can do the same sort of thing--build up good relationships with companies and retire later with a windfall.
In political science we call this the iron triangle, where the regulators, the industries, and the politicians all share a common interest that diverges from the public's.
This is how you get unsafe and/or ineffective drugs through the system and how, I suspect, the jabs got out into the wild. Tens of billions of dollars are made based on these sorts of decisions.
Paxlovid is a great example. It has never been shown to be effective in the least, but the government spent zillions of dollars buying it and promotes the heck out of it as the money rolls into the coffers of Pfizer. It also has a pretty nasty side-effect profile.
This happens all the time, and bureaucrats like it that way. And, frankly, so do many lawmakers who can do the same sort of thing--build up good relationships with companies and retire later with a windfall.
In political science we call this the iron triangle, where the regulators, the industries, and the politicians all share a common interest that diverges from the public's.
This is how you get unsafe and/or ineffective drugs through the system and how, I suspect, the jabs got out into the wild. Tens of billions of dollars are made based on these sorts of decisions.
Paxlovid is a great example. It has never been shown to be effective in the least, but the government spent zillions of dollars buying it and promotes the heck out of it as the money rolls into the coffers of Pfizer. It also has a pretty nasty side-effect profile.
https://x.com/MartyMakary/status/1783255729895538704
This is how it works, folks. Follow the money.
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,271
- Reaction score
- 29,178
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
"Goddammit, Tim, stop with the conspiracy theories about our wonderful friends in government and just get in the boxcar."
- Dr. Flogstain von Booster
Covid expert, walking champion, dog killer, Top Chef - Pangolin Edition champion, donut aficionado, Biggest Loser dropout
- Dr. Flogstain von Booster
Covid expert, walking champion, dog killer, Top Chef - Pangolin Edition champion, donut aficionado, Biggest Loser dropout
Dr. Flogstain hated Birx....before he loved her...and now must hate her again because of her changing ideology.
FloggObese: "No one's been injured or died of the VAXX!! She's a misinformation spreader! All major Medical Associations!!"
Us: "Well...she's a doctor."
Flogged: "So is Marty McCary!!"
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2014
- Messages
- 18,271
- Reaction score
- 29,178
- Points
- 113
- Location
- The nearest Steelers bar.
Can anybody cite something the government told us in 2020 or 2021 about Covid that was true? I can't. A short list of lies:
- Covid origin
- The risk to those under 55
- The risk due to obesity
- The necessity of business lockdowns
- The length of business lockdowns
- The necessity of school closures
- The length of school closures
- The risk from attending church
- The lack of risk from BLM riots
- The benefit of closing gyms
- The benefits of keeping pot stores and liquor stores open
- The dangers posed by small businesses remaining open
- The concomitant lack of risk for huge warehouse stores to remain open
- The benefits of cloth masks
- The necessity of wearing cloth masks
- The benefits of "6 feet of separation"
- The benefits of the vax/shotz
- The efficacy of the vax/shotz
- The benefits of mandating vax/shotz to military, police, firefighters
- The benefits of mandating vax/shotz for anyone