My son is injected and manifesting "vaccine adverse events'

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

What are the names of these companies so i can do my own homework?

My bet is this is simply more doom porn and or misinformation and you are talking out your arse once again.

a reply to: incoserv

Hey im real sorry to hear what your having to go through with your son, ive not had the blessing of being a father as of yet but as an older man i can understand that it must be very difficult. I appreciate that you let him do his own thing as a young man and not trying to put your ideas on him.

I would not be surprised if the vaccine is causing some troubles but to keep things anchored to reality it may not be the only factor. I think the best approach is to encourage your son to live a healthy life and to eat well which may be easier said than done but as a parent its good for your kids to hear. He may or may not be interested in something called liposomal vitamin c, my father takes it. Vitamin c powder mixed up with a little rum he's one of the fittest men around for his age. To those that know about the benefits of using alcohol in medicine would have some understanding of why and how this works. bioartsociety.fi...



Prayer also helps and ive witnessed many times the lord helping when there's no where else to turn too.

a reply to: incoserv

How's your son incoserv, any change in the situation or have his symptoms abated at all?

All the best to the boy.

originally posted by: wearefree4
a reply to: Dfairlite

Delta and Omicron are basically the vaxx damage. I've not had any nor has my family and none of us has had covid, also we do not go into the hospital to take the useless test.

My home town had a delta outbreak really early on when vax numbers were still low.

How can it be a side effect if you've not been vaxxed yet.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Sworn statements from people who do have access to DMED are not hearsay. What a lame way to get around data you don't have an alternative explanation for.

DMED actually shows that there was a backlog in the system during the pandemic so cases that should have been dispersed over two years are being reported all at once.

LOL sure it does. So why did those two years when data wasn't being properly entered (or was backlogged for some other reason) line up with the data from the prior two years?

And that's not even the official story. The official story is that there was a glitch in the system for 5 years that they magically only discovered once the whistleblowers came forward with the data. A glitch, that somehow fixed itself and gave the whistleblowers the data. It's a festivus miracle.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Delta was more dangerous not less dangerous

Incorrect:
"The estimated CFR of non-Delta gradually decreased from 0.57% to 0.20% with interquartile range (IQR) of (0.39% − 0.23% =) 0.16%, whereas the CFR of Delta appears relatively stable at 0.19%."

Put simply it killed more people in 2021 because during 2020 it hadn't yet reached a lot of small communities.

I'm sure you have some data to back this up. No?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Sworn statements from people who do have access to DMED are not hearsay. What a lame way to get around data you don't have an alternative explanation for.

DMED actually shows that there was a backlog in the system during the pandemic so cases that should have been dispersed over two years are being reported all at once.

LOL sure it does. So why did those two years when data wasn't being properly entered (or was backlogged for some other reason) line up with the data from the prior two years?

And that's not even the official story. The official story is that there was a glitch in the system for 5 years that they magically only discovered once the whistleblowers came forward with the data. A glitch, that somehow fixed itself and gave the whistleblowers the data. It's a festivus miracle.

Show me evidence that these statements were sworn by real people who would have access to DMED. All I've see so far are anonymous claims made on anti vax channel.

And a sworn statement is proof that a claim was made, not proof that the statement is true.

Names, ranks and duty stations please.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Delta was more dangerous not less dangerous

Incorrect:
"The estimated CFR of non-Delta gradually decreased from 0.57% to 0.20% with interquartile range (IQR) of (0.39% − 0.23% =) 0.16%, whereas the CFR of Delta appears relatively stable at 0.19%."

Put simply it killed more people in 2021 because during 2020 it hadn't yet reached a lot of small communities.

I'm sure you have some data to back this up. No?

You copied and pasted those numbers without actually understanding what the meant, didn't you. Go back and read them again. Now factor in natural immunity, preceeding mortality rates in vulnerable communities, vaxxing, mask wearing, and increased awareness.

Now tell me if delta is less dangerous or if people are better prepared, or already dead.

Check the distribution maps of covid cases, in 2020 it was all coastal cities and hubs. In 2021 it was endemic in small towns too.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

I may be a simple man but I definitely understand that a case fatality rate of 0.57%-0.2% is greater than 0.19%.

Now tell me if delta is less dangerous or if people are better prepared, or already dead.

This seems like a fancy way of saying it killed fewer people... which is contrary to every point you're arguing so far.

Check the distribution maps of covid cases, in 2020 it was all coastal cities and hubs. In 2021 it was endemic in small towns too.

It's not on me to prove your argument. Go ahead and give me the link.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Show me evidence that these statements were sworn by real people who would have access to DMED.

ok it's at the 1:10 minute mark.

And a sworn statement is proof that a claim was made, not proof that the statement is true.

The DoD has confirmed the data was accurate by trying to pretend it was just a glitch. But you're free to pretend you know more than them.

Names, ranks and duty stations please.

See prior link

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Delta was more dangerous not less dangerous

Incorrect:
"The estimated CFR of non-Delta gradually decreased from 0.57% to 0.20% with interquartile range (IQR) of (0.39% − 0.23% =) 0.16%, whereas the CFR of Delta appears relatively stable at 0.19%."

Put simply it killed more people in 2021 because during 2020 it hadn't yet reached a lot of small communities.

I'm sure you have some data to back this up. No?

You copied and pasted those numbers without actually understanding what the meant, didn't you. Go back and read them again. Now factor in natural immunity, preceeding mortality rates in vulnerable communities, vaxxing, mask wearing, and increased awareness.

Now tell me if delta is less dangerous or if people are better prepared, or already dead.

Check the distribution maps of covid cases, in 2020 it was all coastal cities and hubs. In 2021 it was endemic in small towns too.

Who are you going to try to dox next?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: AaarghZombies

I may be a simple man but I definitely understand that a case fatality rate of 0.57%-0.2% is greater than 0.19%.

Now tell me if delta is less dangerous or if people are better prepared, or already dead.

This seems like a fancy way of saying it killed fewer people... which is contrary to every point you're arguing so far.

Check the distribution maps of covid cases, in 2020 it was all coastal cities and hubs. In 2021 it was endemic in small towns too.

It's not on me to prove your argument. Go ahead and give me the link.

Delta killed more people because it was more transmissible, the case fatality rate was lower because people were better prepared.

You will automatically claim any map that I present to you as being fake or manipulated. If you find the map yourself than you know for certain that I didn't mislead you.

If you really want me to hold your hand on this and you promise not to scream and shout that it's fake you can use this link click on each state. They are broken down by country or region and have a graph showing cases over time.

Notice how rural areas spike much later than urban and inner-city ones. This is because covid barely touched smaller towns until 2021 by which time it had become endemic.

Most viruses (not all) mutate to more transmissable, yet less lethal. This is an evolutionary survival mechanism.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: AaarghZombies

I may be a simple man but I definitely understand that a case fatality rate of 0.57%-0.2% is greater than 0.19%.

Now tell me if delta is less dangerous or if people are better prepared, or already dead.

This seems like a fancy way of saying it killed fewer people... which is contrary to every point you're arguing so far.

Check the distribution maps of covid cases, in 2020 it was all coastal cities and hubs. In 2021 it was endemic in small towns too.

It's not on me to prove your argument. Go ahead and give me the link.

Delta killed more people because it was more transmissible, the case fatality rate was lower because people were better prepared.

You will automatically claim any map that I present to you as being fake or manipulated. If you find the map yourself than you know for certain that I didn't mislead you.

If you really want me to hold your hand on this and you promise not to scream and shout that it's fake you can use this link click on each state. They are broken down by country or region and have a graph showing cases over time.

Notice how rural areas spike much later than urban and inner-city ones. This is because covid barely touched smaller towns until 2021 by which time it had become endemic.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

It's cute that you think you know how I'll respond when you have failed so miserably at predicting it so far.

I don't think your data is fake or manipulated. But it doesn't show what you claimed it did. For example, fairfax virginia is the most populated county in virginia and yet it's cases and deaths peaked in Delta. Meanwhile the lower population counties are showing basically constant deaths through original covid and delta/omicron while it's obvious the cases have increased in those areas.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: AaarghZombies

I may be a simple man but I definitely understand that a case fatality rate of 0.57%-0.2% is greater than 0.19%.

Now tell me if delta is less dangerous or if people are better prepared, or already dead.

This seems like a fancy way of saying it killed fewer people... which is contrary to every point you're arguing so far.

Check the distribution maps of covid cases, in 2020 it was all coastal cities and hubs. In 2021 it was endemic in small towns too.

It's not on me to prove your argument. Go ahead and give me the link.

Delta killed more people because it was more transmissible, the case fatality rate was lower because people were better prepared.

You will automatically claim any map that I present to you as being fake or manipulated. If you find the map yourself than you know for certain that I didn't mislead you.

If you really want me to hold your hand on this and you promise not to scream and shout that it's fake you can use this link click on each state. They are broken down by country or region and have a graph showing cases over time.

Notice how rural areas spike much later than urban and inner-city ones. This is because covid barely touched smaller towns until 2021 by which time it had become endemic.

If this mutation theory was true, then all viruses would be more lethal because there was more cases, but that isn't the case.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Generally the way it works is that virus become less potent but more transmissible with each iteration of mutation.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: v1rtu0s0

Generally the way it works is that virus become less potent but more transmissible with each iteration of mutation.

Correct. So if more cases still meant more deaths because there was more cases then every virus would get worse every time. They don't, and neither does this one.

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

There are acceptations to the rule all the same.

Take the second wave of Spanish flu for instance.

The death toll is more to do with more people becoming infected, hence more people die, some of which will have pre-existing conditions that also contributed to their demise.

Just because Omicron is less potent don't mean it cannot hurt people who are susceptible to disease.

a reply to: andy06shake

but the stats show more cases of omicron and less deaths from it than the original strain. so the excess deaths can't be attributed to covid.