UK Official Covid Vaccine Report More Vaxxed Dying of Delta Than Unvaxxed

originally posted by: Brotherman
a reply to: kwakakev

I find it odd third world resort countries like Haiti and the Dominican Republic don’t have issues, lol Haiti is a dumpster fire port au prince literally is a garbage pile and the water running in their water ways is grey with oil slicks on top and people still vacation there to city sol’iel but they don’t have a sniffles issue.


Let the meek inherit the earth

They do have issues corona has made its way into the Caribbean a couple of months ago and Haiti is losing about 10 people a day and it's on the increase. Back in October, there was 1 death in Haiti. What happened is tourism went to zero it's coming back now and people are starting to get sick. By December that total hit 236 deaths. The totals started rising a lot at the end of april.

graphics.reuters.com...

a reply to: EvilAxis

It’s based on the scientific reports and journals pushed by the MSM, anything that doesn’t fit with the agenda is quashed.

As an example, people were banned from social media for legitimately questioning the virus origins, suddenly now the official narrative has changed and the lab theory is recognised as plausible if not probable. So essentially the truth has gatekeepers. If you can’t see the clear filtering and censoring of information with respect to the virus then there’s no hope to illicit any kind of objective opinion from you.

a reply to: Grenade

I'm acutely aware of both the gatekeeping and the surge of duff information. The presence of the former does not prove or imply an absence of the latter.

No disputing that MSM has agendas (sometimes conflicting) which frequently don't coincide with the interests of ordinary folk... but if you're going to dismiss all mainstream science because some of it gets reported in MSM, you're committing to a world of ignorance. That level of paranoia is unwarranted and unhealthy.

a reply to: EvilAxis

I give any and all researched papers equal credence going in, it’s just some studies are more readily available depending on their source, funding and conclusions. If there’s a clear conflict of interest between the papers authors and the pharmaceutical industry then it’s nothing more than a convoluted sales pitch peppered with targeted and purposely deceptive statistics. Academia hijacked real science a long time ago.

originally posted by: Grenade

If there’s a clear conflict of interest between the papers authors and the pharmaceutical industry then it’s nothing more than a sales pitch.

Which is why reputable scientific journals require authors to declare any such possible conflicts.

Your example about the lab theory rather undermines the notion of an omnipotent MSM narrative. Certainly there was a push to quash 'conspiracy theories' about that. However, because credible scientists have said the lab escape theory should be properly assessed, media reporting has followed suit.

a reply to: EvilAxis

Truth is not dependant on perceived authority.

These so called credible scientists now giving weight to the lab theory are the same people vehemently dismissive of the idea only 12 months ago.

a reply to: Grenade

Were these scientists previously dismissive?

In silico comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-ACE2 binding affinities across species and implications for virus origin Nature, 24 June 2021

originally posted by: Grenade

Truth is not dependant on perceived authority.

Perceiving who does or doesn't have authority (i.e., the requisite expertise) to reliably expound on complex matters is rather important though.

a reply to: EvilAxis

Did you read the study you just posted?

It’s entire purpose was to confirm and isolate the zoonotic transmission link, something which it failed to do conclusively.

Many credible scientists still claim on 9/11/01 that 3 skyscrapers in New York exploded into dust due to plane strikes.

Regardless of their peer reviewed scientific analysis my eyes tell me something different.

originally posted by: Grenade

Did you read the study you just posted?

It’s entire purpose was to confirm and isolate the zoonotic transmission link, something which it failed to do conclusively.

That was precisely the significance of the study.

They tried, as you say, to isolate a zoonotic transmission link. Having failed to find one, and being good scientists, they said so. They concluded that the virus is better adapted to infecting humans than any candidate animal they tested. Until or unless other scientists find a better candidate, the study lends some support to the lab theory.

a reply to: EvilAxis

So the zoonotic transmission narrative was simply that, a story to fit the agenda of a natural evolving virus.

I’d assume people would be less likely to listen to Fauci and his cronies if it turns out they funded the research which enabled the gain of function and human transmission.

We created the virus in a lab, don’t worry tho you can trust us, here’s a chemical soup that will sort you right out.

a reply to: EvilAxis

"Anyone who looks closely at the inward nature and essence will find that nobody is further from true wisdom than those people with their grand titles, learned bonnets, splendid sashes and bejeweled rings, who profess to be wisdom’s peak."

Have you considered that the vaccines are a way to infect people with a mutation? When we’re required to get boosters, that’s when people will ‘turn’ and it will be like the walking dead.
a reply to: AaarghZombies

a reply to: Xtrozero
Yes. Their loss of taste and smell came about a week into it with both my daughters. My employer I can't say yet. I've been off for 3 days so I haven't heard any updates.
The difference could be with my jabbed boss she got the Zpack very quickly into her symptoms, only had the cough for 2 days. My one daughter, without the jab, didn't get the Zpack until she was almost 2 weeks into being unwell with the painful cough because she kept testing negative. My other daughter gave up after two negative tests and just rode it out. It took her about 3 weeks to recover.

a reply to: iamlegend

Tbh the vast majority lining up double masking for an experimental vaccine are already brain dead zombies. Dangle a carrot and then beat them with the stick is the idea.

originally posted by: Grenade

So the zoonotic transmission narrative was simply that, a story to fit the agenda of a natural evolving virus.

Nope - wrong. You didn't read the study (you didn't have time). You just jumped to a pre-judged conclusion. Re-read my last post.

originally posted by: Grenade

"Anyone who looks closely at the inward nature and essence will find that nobody is further from true wisdom than those people with their grand titles, learned bonnets, splendid sashes and bejeweled rings, who profess to be wisdom’s peak."

"A little learning is a dangerous thing ;. Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring : There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,. And drinking largely sobers us again."

a reply to: EvilAxis

I read the study, I fail to see what you’re getting at.

The science is pointing to the lab leak theory.

Which means for the last 12 months the truth has been laughed off as a wild conspiracy theory and heavily censored in order to protect the narrative.

It also means we devoted massive resources and time looking in the opposite direction from the obvious source.

I can just imagine the first emergency meeting of the WHO.

“So there’s a new SARS virus, appears to be originating in Wuhan”

“Ok, is there any obvious source for the virus, anything in Wuhan”

“Well sir there’s a
Meat market
Train station
Park
Police station
Hospital
Schools


Oh and eh well err

The Wuhan Institute of Virology, don’t ask what they do there tho”

“Based on the evidence I think a bat population that lives in caves 1000 miles away passed it to another unknown animal which then mutates into a human respiratory virus due to poor hygiene standards at the meat market”

originally posted by: Grenade

So the zoonotic transmission narrative was simply that, a story to fit the agenda of a natural evolving virus.

The study had no agenda.

You think that looking for a zoonotic origin was following an agenda? Why?

Do you already know where the virus came from and have your proof in place?
That sounds very much like an agenda.

a reply to: EvilAxis

It was obvious from early in the pandemic the origins of the virus. I’m not going to regurgitate a year of research for your appeasement, if you haven’t managed to find it on your own that’s your problem. Many of the original threads on the pandemic offered excellent analysis, I’m sure you could look back if it interests you.

The virus originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology as I’ve been saying for over a year. Time will tell if I’m right, till then I’d hold off climbing on your horse.

a reply to: EvilAxis

I’m not referencing your quoted study. I’m referring to the clear governmental agenda to push a false narrative, facilitated by the media which is now falling down like a house of cards.