The barebones of COVID: do you agree with this?

[ThinPicking]

The WHO changed the definition of the word pandemic to mean something completely devoid of practical meaning. Virtually anything can be called a pandemic now.

If you think that makes the essence of his point valid god help you too staltic.

 

[Perry Staltic]

If you think that makes the essence of his point valid god help you too staltic.

I was addressing your comment, not his.

 

[ThinPicking]

I was addressing your comment, not his.

Which was addressing his.

 

[Perry Staltic]

Which was addressing his.

Then that's your problem, not mine.

 

[Jam]

The troll must have his panties in a knot yet again, judging from your replies, Perry.

 

[Vesi]

I dont know what the truth is, but i think that some elites believe that over 95% depopulation is the only way forward. Hence what has happened. If i had to guess why they believe it, i would guess that there are several mechanism that will lead to fall of civilization when there are 7+ billion people here, and they dont want that. Resource use has risen almost exponentially for the past 150 years.

Most immediate problem, in my view is going to be 'net energy cliff'. More precisely, fall of cheap diesel production, as diesel is needed to produce, mill and distribute grain. Saudi Aramco inventory being the likely canary in coal mine. But even without that, net energy cliff would crush us eventually. If they succeed with 95% reduction, i think that will give humanity few hundred years to figure out how to sustain the engine.

What i believe is going to happen: some variant will kill most of vaccinated population through ADE or 'original antigenic sin'. That will collapse commerce and through that for example African population who are depending on 1st world grain.

It could be omicron (extremely contagious, possibly causes ADE, possibly more serious than delta), check few latest posts from this one: Igor’s Newsletter

 

[ThinPicking]

The troll must have his panties in a knot yet again, judging from your replies, Perry.

Unconscious irony

 

[Hugh Johnson]

Most people are so knee-deep in their own theories that they are no longer open to other theories. To remedy this, I think it's useful to distill our theories down to the basic, most barebone assumptions to find common ground. Here are mine, and I want you to post whether or not you agree with each one.

- In 2019, the US government (and possibly other international actors) were either testing, or had accidentally released, a new "agent" or "technology" that causes (but is not necessarily limited to) pneumonia-like illness.
- This novel "agent" or "technology" became present in greater numbers/intensity in March 2020 in the USA.
- This caused an abnormally large number of people to become abnormally sick.
- The government-proposed solution to this sickness is the "vaccine", which also contains the aforementioned agent, or at least something that produces similar effects.
- Being vaccinated causes one to shed the agent onto others and make them sick.

This is the stuff that I know to be 100% true--basically if there is heavy disagreement on any of these statements, I don't think any further discussion is possible. I am open to various theories on the cause of the these things, like whether it was viral or not, or caused by 5G, or something else still, but what I'm not open to is the suggestion that "nothing happened".

How would you possibly know any of that for sure?

 

[ThinPicking]

I dont know what the truth is, but i think that some elites believe that over 95% depopulation is the only way forward. Hence what has happened. If i had to guess why they believe it, i would guess that there are several mechanism that will lead to fall of civilization when there are 7+ billion people here, and they dont want that. Resource use has risen almost exponentially for the past 150 years.

Most immediate problem, in my view is going to be 'net energy cliff'. More precisely, fall of cheap diesel production, as diesel is needed to produce, mill and distribute grain. Saudi Aramco inventory being the likely canary in coal mine. But even without that, net energy cliff would crush us eventually. If they succeed with 95% reduction, i think that will give humanity few hundred years to figure out how to sustain the engine.

What i believe is going to happen: some variant will kill most of vaccinated population through ADE or 'original antigenic sin'. That will collapse commerce and through that for example African population who are depending on 1st world grain.

It could be omicron (extremely contagious, possibly causes ADE, possibly more serious than delta), check few latest posts from this one: Igor’s Newsletter

The only thing that could collapse civilisation is the weight of doomful people who believe ***t like this.

 

[Vesi]

The only thing that could collapse civilisation is the weight of doomful people who believe ***t like this.

I live in a country that is 60% reliant on foreign energy, with all oil and half of food imported. If, as a thought exercise, our borders were to close completely, in 2-3 years most alive here would be cannibals. I am alive because of diesel.

Ok, net energy cliff is somewhat hard concept to understand, i do not disparage your comment. And i am pessimist, for sure, when i think these things. Usually i dont, and my life is joyful. Still, i believe what i believe.

 

[tankasnowgod]

You confuse "working" with "effective". The flu shots just aren't proven to be effective at all, but they are definitely not saline are do illicit an immune response.

I don't even know what you mean here. There is no proof the Covid shots are effective, either. They were given EUA based on 2 months interim trial data.

As for "definitely not saline," that wasn't part of my argument, but how do you know for sure? There have already been reports of people getting pure diluent or saline injections when they thought they were getting the Covid shots.

Even a "saline injection" could trigger an immune response, if there are additional contaminants present. Bloomberg reported on quality control issues within one of Pfizer's manufactering plants, for example.

Pfizer Plant Boosting Vaccines Has Repeat Quality Offenses

The factory that Pfizer Inc. plans to use to boost production of its Covid-19 vaccine for the massive U.S. inoculation effort was cited by federal inspectors last year for repeated quality-control violations.

www.bloomberg.com

Food and Drug Administration inspectors visited the McPherson, Kansas, plant at the end of 2019 into January 2020, according to an inspection report obtained by Bloomberg via a Freedom of Information request. They found the drug giant released medications for sale after failing to thoroughly review quality issues that arose in routine testing, the report shows.

Additionally, the report says inspectors found bacteria and mold in supposedly sterile areas, an issue seen in previous visits to the facility by regulators. And the plant failed to properly sample drug products to ensure they didn’t have excessive levels of certain toxins, the inspectors wrote.

This has been amply proven since around June: First case of postmortem study in a patient vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2

Abstract​

A previously symptomless 86-year-old man received the first dose of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine. He died 4 weeks later from acute renal and respiratory failure. Although he did not present with any COVID-19-specific symptoms, he tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 before he died. Spike protein (S1) antigen-binding showed significant levels for immunoglobulin (Ig) G, while nucleocapsid IgG/IgM was not elicited. Acute bronchopneumonia and tubular failure were assigned as the cause of death at autopsy; however, we did not observe any characteristic morphological features of COVID-19. Postmortem molecular mapping by real-time polymerase chain reaction revealed relevant SARS-CoV-2 cycle threshold values in all organs examined (oropharynx, olfactory mucosa, trachea, lungs, heart, kidney and cerebrum) except for the liver and olfactory bulb. These results might suggest that the first vaccination induces immunogenicity but not sterile immunity.

How does one single case study in an 86 year old man offer proof? Especially when there are no baseline tests in this subject prior to the first dose?

There's still the possibility of lab error, or the possibility that he picked up the spike protein or virus (or whatever they are testing for) from his environment, independent of the shot. Even the last line of the abstract doesn't go so far to call this "proof," they use the words "might suggest."

And any tests detecting "Spike Protein" or "Spike Protein Antibodies" would have many of the same types of issues that the PCR test has. They didn't exist prior to December, 2019, so once again, we have something that has been rushed to market, and

See above.

Again, one case study isn't proof. I talked earlier about studies involving 16 healthcare workers.

Even studies that helped to get these drugs EUA involved tens of thousands of participants.

No, it is an educated guess based on solid science.

Nothing you posted seems all that "solid," in this regard. I agree that it's a guess.

If anyone from the corrupt Scientism cult cared an iota about the precautionary principle, the mass vaccination campaign would have been halted immediately after the first few hundred deaths early this year.

True. Other drugs and vaccines have been pulled from the market after far fewer deaths and incident reports. An EUA drug should have a much shorter leash (something I have posted on this forum dozens of times).

Yet, after tens of thousands of deaths (which are underreported by a factor of 4-5x) they are now pushing these gene therapies on children and seducing them on Sesame Street to get the shot. Equally, people like you would do well to eat a bit more humble of that humble pie instead of sticking your head under the sand.

Why would I have to eat any "humble pie?" I am 100% against these shots. Just because I don't want your fantasy of millions of dead children to come true this winter (and I don't think it will) does NOT mean that I in any way think these shots are "safe and effective." They are the most poorly tested, rushed to market drugs in history. They are made by organized criminal organization with a pathetic 1.3% Absolute Risk Reduction or less against the common cold.

Just because I don't believe in your unproven concept, or doomsday predictions, does not mean I am in any way for these drugs, or the clear experiment that is being run at a large scale.

 

[Jam]

Why would I have to eat any "humble pie?" I am 100% against these shots. Just because I don't want your fantasy of millions of dead children to come true this winter (and I don't think it will) does NOT mean that I in any way think these shots are "safe and effective." They are the most poorly tested, rushed to market drugs in history. They are made by organized criminal organization with a pathetic 1.3% Absolute Risk Reduction or less against the common cold.

Just because I don't believe in your unproven concept, or doomsday predictions, does not mean I am in any way for these drugs, or the clear experiment that is being run at a large scale.

Nice strawman. You're putting words in my mouth. as I never predicted millions of deaths this winter. I am simply concerned that millions of children may have their immune systems crippled for life. To what extent, I don't know, but the possibility is clearly there, even if the OAS hypothesis turns out to be a minor factor.

When confronted with a subject you obviously know little about, it may be worth taking a more humble approach.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Nice strawman. You're putting words in my mouth. as I never predicted millions of deaths this winter. I am simply concerned that millions of children may have their immune systems crippled for life. To what extent, I don't know, but the possibility is clearly there, even if the OAS hypothesis turns out to be a minor factor.

I'm concerned with the same thing, but I don't think the OAS hypothesis is necessary. Based on what you've said here, I don't think it's that well founded, either.

This all started because you said, with seeming certainty, that this whole thing "will be particularly deadly in children."

When confronted with a subject you obviously know little about, it may be worth taking a more humble approach.

Which subject is it, exactly, that you think I know little about?

 

[Jam]

I'm concerned with the same thing, but I don't think the OAS hypothesis is necessary. Based on what you've said here, I don't think it's that well founded, either.

This all started because you said, with seeming certainty, that this whole thing "will be particularly deadly in children."

Which subject is it, exactly, that you think I know little about?

Yes, "deadly" in the way the term is normally used when referring to the effects of a pharmaceutical product. Wouldn't you say that Vioxx was deadly? I would, although it didn't kill millions of people. You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not sure you're in a position to judge whether the OAS hypothesis is well founded or not.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Yes, "deadly" in the way the term is normally used when referring to the effects of a pharmaceutical product. Wouldn't you say that Vioxx was deadly? I would, although it didn't kill millions of people.

Sure, but you said 'particularly deadly in children," which itself suggests that it going to be more deadly for children than in adults. The VAERS trends so far do nothing to suggest this-

Mortality - OpenVAERS

openvaers.com

While far fewer 5-11 year olds have received this (a blessing so far), and have only been eligible to receive it for about two months, the trend is clear that the higher the age, the more likely death is to occur. Even in February, VAERS deaths were close to 1,000, if not already over that number. The 12-25 and 25-50 are the two groups with fewest deaths among adults, and both have been able to get the vaccine since the rollout (at least, anyone above 16+ has). It's deadliest among 81+, which is a group that is far smaller in total than the other groups listed.

And, Vioxx was a drug that was taken chronically, everyday. Initially, this was only sold as a one or two shot series, although boosters are now being recommended every 3-6 months. The more "boosters" taken, the more the risk.

You're entitled to your opinion, but I'm not sure you're in a position to judge whether the OAS hypothesis is well founded or not.

Of course I'm in a position to judge. Anyone can read the hypothesis on it's face, and make a decision.

Since it clearly refers to the "first infection" of life, I don't think it applies. It's obviously not going to be the first infection for anyone 5+, probably not even one of the first 10. When I pointed this out, you are the one who had to jump through all sorts of hoops to make the hypothesis even potentially relevant, discounting all prior colds and flus that a five year old had, discounting all previous flu shots, and all previous vaccines. Nothing about that suggests "first infection," really, it is probably something like 20-50 or so down the line. The hypothesis you seem to be suggesting is more along the lines of "Original mRNA Injection Sin." Of course, I am sure this isn't well documented in the literature at the moment.

 

[Jam]

So, let's hope for the best and quit wasting time with mental masturbations then. I think that we can at least agree that the shots should be avoided like the plague.

 

[Jam]

is original antigenic sin starting to dominate covid?

the data looks increasingly alarming

boriquagato.substack.com

 

[ThinPicking]

is original antigenic sin starting to dominate covid?

the data looks increasingly alarming

boriquagato.substack.com

?

 

[Peatness]

.

is original antigenic sin starting to dominate covid?

the data looks increasingly alarming

boriquagato.substack.com

Thanks interesting read