Yahoo - anti-vax piece - what is missing here?

[Jon2547]

Please take a look at this and tell me what is missing.

The public has been led to believe that anti-vaxxers are stupid stereotypes that should have no credibility.

The image of the anti-vaxxer is supposed to be either whacky mommy bloggers or tinfoil hat crackpots.

But if you read that hit piece article, it is right there: Doctors are also anti-vaxxers!

Among the anti-vaxxers there are Doctors, nurses, physicians assistants, former CDC scientists, college professors, laymen, etc.

The takeaway is that anti-vaxxers have credentials and that the vaccine fanatics are engaged in egregious cherry picking.

 

[Ben.]

The takeaway is that anti-vaxxers have credentials and that the vaccine fanatics are engaged in egregious cherry picking.

Exactly this.

This article was awful to read. Attacks on the unjabbed in every other sentence which just reeks of being biased and spiteful.

“You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

Such a stupid argument considering the chemical is the same in the human version and has shown, altough maybe not 100% and perhaps with potential damage in long term use, it does help against viral replication.

"There is no evidence the vaccine is unsafe..."

Uhhh ... tell this to the countless people who suffer or died from it.

"CDC data released on Monday indicates that the unvaccinated have a six times greater chance of becoming infected with COVID and a 14 times greater chance of dying than those who got the shot."

Not even a link to it. And how are these numbers assesed? 6 times greater chance of infection based on what?

14 times greater chance of dying? How was that study done? Did they inject vaxxed and unvaxxed people with the real deal and drank coffe while watching who drops dead? Did they have them have a sex orgy with a infected person? Did they just compare antibodies (which they do not accept as a factor for immunity anymore ofcourse because of the holy juice that is the pfizer innoculation) and pcr tests? Both of which do not mean alot considering their defectiveness are their very nature?

“Millions of people in the United States have received COVID-19 vaccines under the most intense safety monitoring in U.S. history.”

What the ... intense safety monitoring? I dont know about the US but here people get the jab and are sent home after 15 mins. What a joke.

 

[Perry Staltic]

6 out of 900 tested positive lol. Testing positive is not disease, but that's what they're trying to turn it into.

 

[Jon2547]

The needle-jabbers are trying too hard. That which proves too much proves nothing at all.

 

[Rafe]

“They are among us.”

 

[Kayaker]

What the ... intense safety monitoring? I dont know about the US but here people get the jab and are sent home after 15 mins. What a joke.

"The most intense safety monitoring in U.S. history."

Sounds like wordplay, unless someone knows a vaccine that was released under clearly higher safety monitoring.

It's so outlandish that it sounds like a sarcastic joke, anyway.

 

[Daft]

"The most intense safety monitoring in U.S. history."

Sounds like wordplay, unless someone knows a vaccine that was released under clearly higher safety monitoring.

It's so outlandish that it sounds like a sarcastic joke, anyway.

Sounds as propagandistic as you can get: make the strongest possible statement without backing it up at all.

Didn't even monitor a ton of inflammatory markers that I read other researchers were dumbfounded they hadn't, and now it came out that some cardiologists have found those elevated.