|
|
|
Picking Names
- Thread starter ToSlow
- Start date
ScorpionT16
Well-known member
The list of variant names is here...
As for the Polio talk, Vaccines didn't fix it, it was actually heavily caused by pesticides and DDT. Once they stopped using those, cases declined, and they praised the vaccines as working. Many doctors/scientists brought it up at the time, however governments were in bed with pharma and the pesticide companies, alongside wanting to avoid liabilities so found a scape goat.
For medical info, use DuckDuckGo, not Google. Google owns a few Pharma's through Alphabet, and as such, is biased toward the info they show.
As for the Polio talk, Vaccines didn't fix it, it was actually heavily caused by pesticides and DDT. Once they stopped using those, cases declined, and they praised the vaccines as working. Many doctors/scientists brought it up at the time, however governments were in bed with pharma and the pesticide companies, alongside wanting to avoid liabilities so found a scape goat.
For medical info, use DuckDuckGo, not Google. Google owns a few Pharma's through Alphabet, and as such, is biased toward the info they show.
That's not proving correct in the States. 99.99% of folks in the hospitals are non vaxed. Just like about 99.9% of deaths are nonvaxxers. The shot gives you immunity so you don't die waiting to build it up yourself.
ScorpionT16
Well-known member
On whose Data? Because I've spoken to a few nurses, and part of a group from the US who speak anonymously, and they have stated that they are told to test the unvaxxed only, and report those figures. So yes, if all your data is from the unvaxxed, then that's all you will see. Where are you getting you 99.99% figures?
And some people know how to live a lifestyle to create their own immunity, just as they know how to avoid diabetes and heart stroke as to many people's shock. So giving them insulin or Lipitor when they are fine, shouldn't be forced. Look at the top ten causes of death, if creating a healthy society was paramount, we'd be stopping the use of refined sugars and processed meat/foods, vs line ups at Krispy kreme.
Just look at the links to lifestyle an obesity, to C19 fatalities. Factor in age, medical issues, and it apparent the jab is not the golden goose that's needed, it's a worldwide shift in how we view immunity and cultivate our own immunity, vs suppress it and not make any changes while blaming our neighbors for their choices.
Yale University Epidemiologist: 60% of new COVID cases are in vaccinated people
Alvaro Colombres Garmendia | TheBL 04/27/21 Dr. Harvey Risch Yale University Epidemiologist ,April 19, 2021 (screenshot Steve Bannon chanel in Rumble) In an interview with Steve Bannon on…
rightsfreedoms.wordpress.com
Vaccinated people now make up almost 47% of all new Covid cases
King's College London scientists estimated 33,118 people were catching the virus daily in the week ending July 10 - compared to 33,723 in the previous seven-day spell.
yes, read to the end. Context is key.
The list of variant names is here...
As for the Polio talk, Vaccines didn't fix it, it was actually heavily caused by pesticides and DDT. Once they stopped using those, cases declined, and they praised the vaccines as working. Many doctors/scientists brought it up at the time, however governments were in bed with pharma and the pesticide companies, alongside wanting to avoid liabilities so found a scape goat.
For medical info, use DuckDuckGo, not Google. Google owns a few Pharma's through Alphabet, and as such, is biased toward the info they show.
Nearly every infectious disease expert and virologist would disagree with you, but what do they know?
so who do you trust?
Not many. But most family members
I know we have been here before but can you tell me, what reason a scientist might have to lie to you on this particular topic?
I promise I won’t go off the deep end if we see this logical reasoning through.
Last edited:
Not saying they lied, just didn’t or don’t tell the whole story
OK, I trust family members too on certain things. Anything related to my family basically, as they are experts in that area.
So, naturally, you probably wouldn’t take a scientists advice on whether uncle Bob will get drunk and embarrass you at auntie Maude‘s wedding for example (names changed to protect the innocent…this is actually my family). However, why would you take, presumably unqualified, family‘s advice on some scientific matters?
Didn‘t tell the whole story? Or didn’t tell you the story you wanted to hear?
You have seen the same as everyone else. How can you say it is 100% solid facts?
I did and it doesn't disagree.
Risk of rapid evolutionary escape from biomedical interventions targeting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein
The spike protein receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2 is the molecular target for many vaccines and antibody-based prophylactics aimed at bringing COVID-19 under control. Such a narrow molecular focus raises the specter of viral immune evasion as a potential failure mode for these...
journals.plos.org
COVID - 1x10-3
Smallpox - 1x10−6
So again, if COVID is diverging every 6 months to a year, like we saw last December. It's about a 500 to a thousand years for Smallpox.
Which agrees with historical record.
Smallpox and other viruses plagued humans much earlier than suspected
Genetic research is rewriting the history of diseases.
www.nature.com
So with a vaccine, there is plenty of time to eradicate smallpox. Not so much with COVID.
Comparing the two would fall under academic dishonesty if a student omitted relevant mutation rates and passed them off as one and the same to make their point on a topic. You should know that.
What I do for a living we have to look at the available “facts” and use some deduction and extrapolation to separate the wheat from the chaff. Try to look at what is being presented in an unbiased way and see if there’s logic there.
So, the basic question starts with “is COVID a threat?”. If right now you answer no, then you can’t proceed any further and anything you are presented from this point onwards becomes a story you don’t want to hear. That’s what we have seen from a minority this past year and a bit.
If you answer “maybe” then we can move on and look at other evidence.
If you answer “yes” then most likely you’ve already looked. The next question then becomes “to what degree is it a threat?”. Etc.
COVID is a threat especially to certain demographics. My toddlers have nearly zero threat to it, myself a tad more. Others are not so lucky.
Have I convinced people to get their shots? Absolutely. Have I also decided even if the vaccine is available to my kids I'd pass? You can bet the farm on it. Do my kids get their other shots where their risk is high absolutely.
Passing off people who feel it's not a threat based on real world data about themselves isn't productive. That is in essence what the problem is with these discussions.
|
|
|
|
|