Why jab if it does not work

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
It's like when they vaccinated against measles. People still got measles, but fewer and fewer as the campaign went on, and people stopped dying of measles and being permanently maimed.

Yeah... except the number of people who died and or had serious problems with the measles was miniscule... like, a tiny tiny fraction of those who got it.

So miniscule that most parents simply waited for someone to get it and they held parties so their kids could get it early - because it is usually only serious in those who don't get it as children but get it as adults - oh, and those who got crappy partial immunity by getting the jab instead of the real deal.

Prior to vaccination in 1963, there were about 500,000 cases reported to the CDC. Of those, there were 300 to 400 deaths.

Worldwide, in 1985, there was an estimated 1.2 million deaths from measles. They were predominantly of young children.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Sorry, that is just MSM/talking head propaganda BS. If it does work at all,

False.

CDC

Data from randomized clinical trials and real-world observational studies show that all three COVID-19 vaccines currently authorized for emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration* are safe and highly effective for preventing COVID-19–related serious illness, hospitalization, and death (1,2)

the Delta variant’s increase from 80% in the U.S. region that includes New York and relaxation of masking and physical distancing recommendations. To reduce new COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations, these findings support the implementation of a layered approach centered on vaccination, as well as other prevention strategies such as masking and physical distancing.

And one is FDA authorized.

So yeah:

What is already known about this topic?

The incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalization, and death is higher in unvaccinated than vaccinated persons, and the incidence rate ratios are related to vaccine effectiveness.

What is added by this report?

Across 13 U.S. jurisdictions, incidence rate ratios for hospitalization and death changed relatively little after the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant reached predominance, suggesting high, continued vaccine effectiveness against severe COVID-19. Case IRRs decreased, suggesting reduced vaccine effectiveness for prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infections.

In 13 U.S. jurisdictions, rates of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths were substantially higher in persons not fully vaccinated compared with those in fully vaccinated persons, similar to findings in other reports (2,3).

CDC

So yeah.


But continue to push your antivax, anti mask BS.

These charts show that COVID-19 vaccines are doing their job

The blood-clotting after the jab is real.
ewwwww
> "cupping after the jab"

a reply to: anonentity

Baaaahcuase it's science.

originally posted by: chr0naut
Prior to vaccination in 1963, there were about 500,000 cases reported to the CDC. Of those, there were 300 to 400 deaths.

Yes, and there were likely at least 3 or 4 if not 10+ times as many cases that went unreported, but, I'll guarantee you that virtually every death was reported (and likely some of those were misreported).

As I said. Miniscule.

Worldwide, in 1985, there was an estimated 1.2 million deaths from measles. They were predominantly of young children.

Yes - because the high risk category are those suffering from chronic malnutrition and/or live in extremely unsanitary conditions (poor or no sanitation, contaminated water, crap for food, etc)... those are the ones that have serious problems, and why the 'worldwide' figures are so much higher than in the States.

This same statistics game is played will all diseases for which there are jabs available. When you mix in populations that have serious chronic malnutrition and sanitation problems with 1st world populations, it makes the percentages look much much worse than they really are.

originally posted by: SirHardHarry
a reply to: tanstaafl
"Sorry, that is just MSM/talking head propaganda BS. If it does work at all,"

False.

CDC

CDC? FDA? You mean, those lying POS that have lied to us ever since they came into being?

No, but... by all means, you do you.

Former Notre Dame Professor Who Said, “Damn the Unvaccinated” Dies Two Weeks After Receiving 3rd Covid Shot

Orlando, Florida – A former Notre Dame professor who routinely attacked unvaccinated people as “selfish” passed away after she received her 3rd Covid vaccine.

67-year-old Karen Croake Heisler received her first Pfizer Covid jab on January 13, 2021.......

What's more to be said ?

Just say No

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: SirHardHarry
a reply to: tanstaafl
"Sorry, that is just MSM/talking head propaganda BS. If it does work at all,"

False.

CDC

CDC? FDA? You mean, those lying POS that have lied to us ever since they came into being?

No, but... by all means, you do you.

The CDC have not lied. They have presented changing information as they have learnt of it.

originally posted by: MetalThunder
Former Notre Dame Professor Who Said, “Damn the Unvaccinated” Dies Two Weeks After Receiving 3rd Covid Shot

Orlando, Florida – A former Notre Dame professor who routinely attacked unvaccinated people as “selfish” passed away after she received her 3rd Covid vaccine.

67-year-old Karen Croake Heisler received her first Pfizer Covid jab on January 13, 2021.......

What's more to be said ?

Just say No

What's more to be said? Cause of death? Perhaps?

A link to that cause and the vaccine, maybe?

Do you have either?

originally posted by: MetalThunder
Former Notre Dame Professor Who Said, “Damn the Unvaccinated” Dies Two Weeks After Receiving 3rd Covid Shot

Orlando, Florida – A former Notre Dame professor who routinely attacked unvaccinated people as “selfish” passed away after she received her 3rd Covid vaccine.

67-year-old Karen Croake Heisler received her first Pfizer Covid jab on January 13, 2021.......

What's more to be said ?

Just say No

She died of cancer.

And of the the inability to get urgent medical care because of the hospital wards being full of those with COVID-19.

This whole article was a 'spin' piece.

originally posted by: chr0naut
The CDC have not lied. They have presented changing information as they have learnt of it.

Nope. They've been lying ever since they created.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
The CDC have not lied. They have presented changing information as they have learnt of it.

Nope. They've been lying ever since they created.

Well, I think that statement is a lie.

Motivated by adherence to the uncritical belief that nearly everything in the world is part of a giant and highly implausible conspiracy theory.

a reply to: SirHardHarry

Ah yes CDC/FDA the voice of reason and truth like how they are shifting gear to gun crisis right?

originally posted by: HawkEyi
a reply to: SirHardHarry

Ah yes CDC/FDA the voice of reason and truth like how they are shifting gear to gun crisis right?

Ah yes. And that nonsense about the "former Notre Dame Professor" who supposedly died of the vaccine was a shining example of reason and truth?

originally posted by: chr0naut
Well, I think that statement is a lie.

We all know you do. We all know you are a jab/great reset proponent/apologist.

Motivated by adherence to the uncritical belief that nearly everything in the world is part of a giant and highly implausible conspiracy theory.

No... simply a realist, understanding that liars lie, and big pharma does not now and never has had anyone's best interest at heart, only their bottom line.

Just look at their history. Look at all of the drugs they have gotten approved by their puppets in the FDA, made billions - trillions in some cases - on, and then had to recall them and paid out millions - maybe hundreds of millions - in damages at most.

Conspiracy? No. Fact.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
Well, I think that statement is a lie.

We all know you do. We all know you are a jab/great reset proponent/apologist.

Motivated by adherence to the uncritical belief that nearly everything in the world is part of a giant and highly implausible conspiracy theory.

No... simply a realist, understanding that liars lie, and big pharma does not now and never has had anyone's best interest at heart, only their bottom line.

Just look at their history. Look at all of the drugs they have gotten approved by their puppets in the FDA, made billions - trillions in some cases - on, and then had to recall them and paid out millions - maybe hundreds of millions - in damages at most.

Conspiracy? No. Fact.

The fact that they have had to recall drugs that are profitable to them, and that they are doing ongoing testing and watching for adverse reactions, as are the FDA, shows that they aren't simply about profit.

If they wanted to cover up a bad drug, they could simply imply that the sufferers condition was unrelated.

But there are databases, and people looking out for adverse reactions, who do it for their job. They are funded by big pharma, the CDC, the WHO, all sorts of PHO's, and the FDA.

a reply to: chr0naut

This is an experimental vaccine with absolutely no history. You can feel as good as you like about this but you have to understand, it is not only the fact that this all happened so fast, it is also the fact that those who don't believe the "science" do NOT want to be told what to do.

Have you seen the German video about microbiologists yet? You really should check that out.

Edit: odysee.com...@en:a5/PK_Tot-durch-Impfung_english:a

After ! hour 27 minutes it starts to get really scary.





httpsdysee.com/ followed by this @en:a5/PK_Tot-durch-Impfung_english:a

This site doesn't allow the link



# that. H T T P S/O D Y SE E.C O M/ @en:a5/ PK_Tot-durch-Impfung_english:a


edit: all caps and all gaps to be removed.

originally posted by: chr0naut
The fact that they have had to recall drugs that are profitable to them, and that they are doing ongoing testing and watching for adverse reactions, as are the FDA, shows that they aren't simply about profit.

Rotflmao!!!!!!

The fact that there is a revolving door between the FDA leadership/decision makers and the Boards of all of the big Pharma companies the FDA is supposed to be regulating - and has been for the last 80 years - shows that the only purpose of the FDA is as a tool of big pharma, to do their bidding, and insure massive profits at the expense of the people they are supposed to be protecting.

If they wanted to cover up a bad drug, they could simply imply that the sufferers condition was unrelated.

You mean... like they are doing now, and have been doing for the last 80 years?

But there are databases, and people looking out for adverse reactions, who do it for their job. They are funded by big pharma, the CDC, the WHO, all sorts of PHO's, and the FDA.

Exactly.

Thank you for making my point for me.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: chr0naut
The fact that they have had to recall drugs that are profitable to them, and that they are doing ongoing testing and watching for adverse reactions, as are the FDA, shows that they aren't simply about profit.

Rotflmao!!!!!!

The fact that there is a revolving door between the FDA leadership/decision makers and the Boards of all of the big Pharma companies the FDA is supposed to be regulating - and has been for the last 80 years - shows that the only purpose of the FDA is as a tool of big pharma, to do their bidding, and insure massive profits at the expense of the people they are supposed to be protecting.

Then why do the FDA rule against the drug companies product lines?

... and, perhaps the reason people move between drug companies and the FDA has to do with the academic and experiential qualifications to do the jobs?

Would you rather that the people who are supposed to make complex decisions in regard to your health, are just clerical workers?

If they wanted to cover up a bad drug, they could simply imply that the sufferers condition was unrelated.

You mean... like they are doing now, and have been doing for the last 80 years?

But there are databases, and people looking out for adverse reactions, who do it for their job. They are funded by big pharma, the CDC, the WHO, all sorts of PHO's, and the FDA.

Exactly.

Thank you for making my point for me.

The point is, no-one else is funding this. All the naysayers don't put any money down, and don't actually give a damn for anyone but their own ill-informed opinion.

originally posted by: chr0naut
Then why do the FDA rule against the drug companies product lines?

Sometimes - until they don't.

... and, perhaps the reason people move between drug companies and the FDA has to do with the academic and experiential qualifications to do the jobs?

Rotflmao! Yeah, you would believe that whopper.

These are the same people that have pushed the saturated fat lie/myth and other whoppers that are the direct result of the obesity and metabolic dysfunction epidemic in our country and the rest of the 'modern' world.

Would you rather that the people who are supposed to make complex decisions in regard to your health, are just clerical workers?

I'd rather they simply publish their studies, methodologies, data and findings, in easily understandable terms, and let people make their own decisions.

The point is, no-one else is funding this. All the naysayers don't put any money down, and don't actually give a damn for anyone but their own ill-informed opinion.

Ummm... that is because the entire allopathic paradigm is corrupt at its core.

There is no money in natural, safe and cheap/free cures for diseases. Well, at least not the kind of money that supports spending hundreds of millions of dollars to prove something works.