Jump to content
Guests feel free to register and post ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS FEEL FREE TO REGISTER AND POST ×
WELCOME NEW MEMBERS AND GUESTS ×

NY TIMES ADMITS PFIZER VACCINE FAILING IN ISRAEL


Recommended Posts

19 minutes ago, McRocket said:

Here we go again folks - watch the coward avoid the question yet again:

 

So - from your OWN SOURCE - you completely prove that the vaccines are killing only a person in 733,352 people.

 

Is this number from your own source you posted - true or false?

 

And here is the source - the chart in this post:

 

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346038-ny-times-admits-pfizer-vaccine-failing-in-israel/?do=findComment&comment=1062613313

 

I did not read anything past the first word of your latest mess of a post.

 

And until your first word in a reply to me is either 'yes' or 'no' (in answer to my question over YOUR source) - I will read nothing more of the low IQ, unsubstantiated-by-unbiased-factual-proof, garbage that you are posting on this.

 

Have a nice day.

And folks that have been following this thread and see your repeated what to a sane person would be embarrassingly-childish responses to my answering you 4 times, can perhaps remember that this is actually your ongoing cowardly dodging of your abject failure altogether, to provide even the slightest answer to the question I asked of you:

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346038-ny-times-admits-pfizer-vaccine-failing-in-israel/?do=findComment&comment=1062616807

 

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, freeman said:

And folks that have been following this thread and see your repeated what to a sane person would be embarrassingly-childish responses to my answering you 4 times, can perhaps remember that this is actually your ongoing cowardly dodging of your abject failure altogether, to provide even the slightest answer to the question I asked of you:

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346038-ny-times-admits-pfizer-vaccine-failing-in-israel/?do=findComment&comment=1062616807

 

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

 

Here we go again folks - watch him avoid the question yet again:

 

So - from your OWN SOURCE - you completely prove that the vaccines are killing only a person in 733,352 people.

 

Is this number from your own source you posted - true or false?

 

And here is the source - the chart in this post:

 

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346038-ny-times-admits-pfizer-vaccine-failing-in-israel/?do=findComment&comment=1062613313

 

 

Why is he SO afraid to answer this question?


All he has to type is 'yes' or 'no'.

But he won't.

Why?

🤔

 

 

Have a nice day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, McRocket said:

Here we go again folks - watch him avoid the question yet again:

 

So - from your OWN SOURCE - you completely prove that the vaccines are killing only a person in 733,352 people.

 

Is this number from your own source you posted - true or false?

 

And here is the source - the chart in this post:

 

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346038-ny-times-admits-pfizer-vaccine-failing-in-israel/?do=findComment&comment=1062613313

 

 

Why is he SO afraid to answer this question?


All he has to type is 'yes' or 'no'.

But he won't.

Why?

🤔

 

 

Have a nice day.

Answered 4 times your moronically, abjectly stupidly framed as "yes or no", question, that suggests that posters are required to agree with every word and every number in every link that they post. I gave you your answer 4 times. Which I indeed basically agreed to nearly-same-number in my response. But your once again terrifically wanton math "skills" were again on display instead.

 

But you didn't even hint at the slightest answer to my question.

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

What would you recommend?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2021 at 2:39 PM, freeman said:

Answered 4 times your moronically, abjectly stupidly framed as "yes or no", question, that suggests that posters are required to agree with every word and every number in every link that they post. I gave you your answer 4 times. Which I indeed basically agreed to nearly-same-number in my response. But your once again terrifically wanton math "skills" were again on display instead.

 

But you didn't even hint at the slightest answer to my question.

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

What would you recommend?

 

mistake - nest post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2021 at 2:39 PM, freeman said:

Answered 4 times your moronically, abjectly stupidly framed as "yes or no", question, that suggests that posters are required to agree with every word and every number in every link that they post. I gave you your answer 4 times. Which I indeed basically agreed to nearly-same-number in my response. But your once again terrifically wanton math "skills" were again on display instead.

 

But you didn't even hint at the slightest answer to my question.

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

What would you recommend?

 

Let's try something else.

This is from the VAERS website your chart is from

(for once - read the data from the source you post from):

 

'DISCLAIMER:  

VAERS accepts reports of adverse events and reactions that occur following vaccination. Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to VAERS. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.'

 

https://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/vaers.html

 

This means that the data you are using from VAERS means NOTHING.

ANY idiot can send in data to VAERS claiming his mother died from a Covid-19 vaccine.

The data is worthless.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2021 at 2:39 PM, freeman said:

Answered 4 times your moronically, abjectly stupidly framed as "yes or no", question, that suggests that posters are required to agree with every word and every number in every link that they post. I gave you your answer 4 times. Which I indeed basically agreed to nearly-same-number in my response. But your once again terrifically wanton math "skills" were again on display instead.

 

But you didn't even hint at the slightest answer to my question.

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

What would you recommend?

 

This is the Covid-19 vaccine stats from Canada.

scroll down to 'deaths' for that stat.

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#seriousNonSerious

 

Of over 53.5 million doses given so far in Canada?

Only 115 people died after a Covid-19 vaccine that have not been ruled out as having been caused by the vaccine.

Of those 115:

'71 deaths could not be assessed due to insufficient information

38 deaths are still under investigation

6 deaths followed a diagnosis of TTS (refer to the TTS bullet above)'

 

At most, according to the Canadian government, 115 Canadians (out of over 53.5 million vaccinations administered) might have died from the Covid-19 vaccine?

True or False?

 

 

Again - I will read NOTHING past the first word of your reply to this post if it is anything other than 'true' or 'false'.

 I have already wasted too much time on your paranoid nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, McRocket said:

Let's try something else.

This is from the VAERS website your chart is from

(for once - read the data from the source you post from):

 

'DISCLAIMER:  

VAERS accepts reports of adverse events and reactions that occur following vaccination. Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to VAERS. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.'

 

https://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/vaers.html

 

This means that the data you are using from VAERS means NOTHING.

ANY idiot can send in data to VAERS claiming his mother died from a Covid-19 vaccine.

The data is worthless.

I think you meant "Let's try to change the subject" from:

But you didn't even hint at the slightest answer to my question.

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

What would you recommend?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, McRocket said:

Let's try something else.

This is from the VAERS website your chart is from

(for once - read the data from the source you post from):

 

'DISCLAIMER:  

VAERS accepts reports of adverse events and reactions that occur following vaccination. Healthcare providers, vaccine manufacturers, and the public can submit reports to VAERS. While very important in monitoring vaccine safety, VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable. Most reports to VAERS are voluntary, which means they are subject to biases. This creates specific limitations on how the data can be used scientifically. Data from VAERS reports should always be interpreted with these limitations in mind.'

 

https://wonder.cdc.gov/wonder/help/vaers.html

 

This means that the data you are using from VAERS means NOTHING.

ANY idiot can send in data to VAERS claiming his mother died from a Covid-19 vaccine.

The data is worthless.

There is no longer the slightest lingering doubt in my mind that you are a Big Pharma mole, or work out of a bureaucrat's office.

Your vacuous post would be easy for someone to write who survived the vax without requiring a lifetime of followup visits within the Illness Industry.

https://www.bitchute.com/search/?query=vaccine injury&kind=video

 

Let alone your abject ignorance about subjects you act as though you know something about. A VAERS report takes about a half hour to fill out with repeated warnings that it is a federal offense punishable by fines and imprisonment to include false or misleading information. Here's a scientist/practicing physician that has had 650 peer reviewed published papers that broaches the subject.

https://rumble.com/vlqdpo-dr-peter-mccullough-lecture-on-the-state-of-covid-treatment..html

 

The fact is that adverse events in the U.S. are under-reported by a factor of 10 to 100. According to CDC whistleblowers that testified under oath even deaths are under reported by a factor of 5.

Dr. McCullough: ‘whistleblowers’ inside CDC claim vaxx already killed 45,000

 

The EU is a bit more formal in their reporting but there is the same atmosphere of denial that adverse reactions are vaccine related.

 

Everybody is trying to cover their ass even as they are injecting with a "vaccine" that they know is only 39% effective, when the FDA requires 50% to even get EUA. How do you explain that?


The CDC are just big pharma's sales department

 

Only reported, 20,000 dead, 2 million injured, efficacy at 39%, what's not to like about these "safe" vaccines?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, McRocket said:

This is the Covid-19 vaccine stats from Canada.

scroll down to 'deaths' for that stat.

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#seriousNonSerious

 

Of over 53.5 million doses given so far in Canada?

Only 115 people died after a Covid-19 vaccine that have not been ruled out as having been caused by the vaccine.

Of those 115:

'71 deaths could not be assessed due to insufficient information

38 deaths are still under investigation

6 deaths followed a diagnosis of TTS (refer to the TTS bullet above)'

 

At most, according to the Canadian government, 115 Canadians (out of over 53.5 million vaccinations administered) might have died from the Covid-19 vaccine?

True or False?

 

 

Again - I will read NOTHING past the first word of your reply to this post if it is anything other than 'true' or 'false'.

 I have already wasted too much time on your paranoid nonsense.

Obviously as false as all other adverse event reporting and outright stupid to ignore the vested interests involved. Because it is dependent on reporting and because it is collected by the Illness Industry and governments that have agendas to advance Big Pharma's and their own profits and suppress truth.

https://remnant-tv.com/video/world-vaccination-michael-matt-on-the-kennedy-connection

 

Until a disinterested party actually does a canvasing vaccine recipients - the way things used to be done - the numbers will never be known.

Until the profiteering parties quit denying vaccine injury further out than an hour or two from vaxxing (which they also deny) it will all be irrelevant.

But as a mole for Big Pharma I've no doubt you will pretend to not see the sound reasoning in that.

 

The CDC are just big pharma's sales department

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/the-cdc-are-just-big-pharma-039-s-sales-department_gT4grNpImQQoKd7.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, freeman said:

I think you meant "Let's try to change the subject" from:

But you didn't even hint at the slightest answer to my question.

"So rather than recommend nothing, until an individual needs oxygen in a hospital - and even then only next to worthless Remdesivir - what should Fauci and the NIH have recommended?

What would you recommend?

If you had read my posts lately to you?

You would see that I have not read ANY OF THEM past the first word if you did not answer my 'yes' or 'no' question.

 

Fauci is a scumbag. I would never pay attention to ANYTHING he says except for a laugh..

I have already said - if people want to try all these other things?

Go ahead.

Knock themselves out.

I am not saying don't use them.

 

My problem with what you are saying?

Is that you are basically telling people (in so many words):

'the vaccines will kill you. 

These other treatments are proven to work far better and here is the proof.'

And then you post a trillion links and pretty pictures to try and back it up.

 

There is NO, unbiased, fact-based EVIDENCE whatsoever that the vaccines will kill people en masse. Not the day they take it or years from you. That is just garbage.

All you post is whacko doctors here and their spewing out theories that they cannot even begin to back up.

Like that insane dude in Canada - someone else posted - saying that more than 1/2 of the vaccinated will die. And he is a doctor. Give me a fucking break.

 

Look - you want to post stuff like:

Take the vaccines if you want. But I personally think it's better to try these other things. And here are some links to them?

Then I have NO problem with it.

You have the right to your opinion.

But you are making matter-of-fact claims based on minimal, hard data (much of which I fairly easily, ripped apart when I studied them) and claiming 'vaccines - BAD. These others - good.'.

And you DO NOT KNOW THAT. You are only assuming.

 

That is both erroneous and irresponsible.

For if you talk just ONE, old fart into NOT getting the vaccine...when they had planned to get it previously?

 And they die of Covid-19 - probably/possibly because they did not take the vaccine on your word?

You have done harm to society.

 

We are not talking about religion or politics or sports.

We are talking about people's, fucking lives.

And you are NOT a doctor.

 

Lastly - and for frig sakes?

If you are going to post all these links and scream at people that they are fantastic?

At least have the decency to read the bloody studies that they are based on...because clearly - you aren't.

 

Good day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, freeman said:

Obviously as false as all other adverse event reporting and outright stupid to ignore the vested interests involved. Because it is dependent on reporting and because it is collected by the Illness Industry and governments that have agendas to advance Big Pharma's and their own profits and suppress truth.

https://remnant-tv.com/video/world-vaccination-michael-matt-on-the-kennedy-connection

 

Until a disinterested party actually does a canvasing vaccine recipients - the way things used to be done - the numbers will never be known.

Until the profiteering parties quit denying vaccine injury further out than an hour or two from vaxxing (which they also deny) it will all be irrelevant.

But as a mole for Big Pharma I've no doubt you will pretend to not see the sound reasoning in that.

 

The CDC are just big pharma's sales department

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/the-cdc-are-just-big-pharma-039-s-sales-department_gT4grNpImQQoKd7.html

False?


Are you blind?

 

So you are actually saying that the data in the link I posted (and below) from the Canadian government does not say that only 6 people are confirmed to have probably died from the Covid-19 vaccines out of over 53 million vaccines administered in Canada?

Yes or No?

 

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#seriousNonSerious

 

 

And - here is some free advice.

Ignoring something is not stupid.

Only people can be stupid.

It's a common mistake that un/low educated people (possibly among others) make.

 

 

Have a nice day.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, McRocket said:

False?


Are you blind?

 

So you are actually saying that the data in the link I posted (and below) from the Canadian government does not say that only 6 people are confirmed to have probably died from the Covid-19 vaccines out of over 53 million vaccines administered in Canada?

Yes or No?

 

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#seriousNonSerious

 

 

And - here is some free advice.

Ignoring something is not stupid.

Only people can be stupid.

It's a common mistake that un/low educated people (possibly among others) make.

 

 

Have a nice day.

And so in a further effort to run and hide from my question as to what you would recommend, further confirming that you would indeed follow Fauci's/NIH homicidal advice even as you pretend to not be one of Fauci's bitches, you then choose to reduce your posts to a ridiculously infantile "gotcha"?

You know as well as I that my "no" was directed at not agreeing with the content of the article, as I explained, because anyone who considers government stats as having value at this point in time is not only stupid, but is either a conspicuous victim of government psyops or a perpetrator of them.

To your gotcha, of course YES the article says what it says. That is a given that cannot be argued. That's why a rational person will address the unreliable and propagandistic source and content of the article, like I did, rather that whether or not the article says what it says. Your effort is truly that of an irrational madman, unless you somehow found the good sense to become embarrassed by your moronic exercise. During our conversations I hadn't realized you are still in your teens, and you have my apology for that oversight.

Will address the rest of your nonsense a little later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, McRocket said:

My problem with what you are saying?

Is that you are basically telling people (in so many words):

'the vaccines will kill you. 

These other treatments are proven to work far better and here is the proof.'

And then you post a trillion links and pretty pictures to try and back it up.

Now you reduce yourself to bold faced lying since that is exactly what I do and have done in threads posted, by presenting both sides of the risk VS reward equation repeatedly, whether in the case of kids:

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346741-vaccinate-kids-under-18-years-old-that-have-a-4-in-1-million-chance-of-dying-from-covid/

 

Or whether the risk VS reward for adults which is nearly as skewed.

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/347034-vaccine-hesitant-pragmatic-vs-vaccine-blindly-obedient/

 

So you are either a madman or bold faced liar.

22 hours ago, McRocket said:

There is NO, unbiased, fact-based EVIDENCE whatsoever that the vaccines will kill people en masse. Not the day they take it or years from you. That is just garbage.

And repetition of this stupidity demonstrates raging insanity. NOBODY can present EVIDENCE from the future you idiot. Yet the global psyop was so successful in removing your capacity for critical thought, that you can't even see that even the FDA agrees with that, no matter how many times I have shown it to you:

 

https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download
"8.4. Unknown Risks/Data Gaps"
"Vaccine-enhanced disease

Available data do not indicate a risk of vaccine-enhanced disease, and conversely suggest effectiveness against severe disease within the available follow-up period. However, risk of vaccine-enhanced disease over time, potentially associated with waning immunity, remains unknown and needs to be evaluated further in ongoing clinical trials and in observational studies that could be conducted following authorization and/or licensure."

 

Are you still too stupid to read and comprehend that excerpt from the current FDA paper?

Well that's exactly what killed the ferrets in prior mRNA animal trials, the difference this time being that YOU ARE the animal testing phase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2021 at 10:11 AM, McRocket said:

If you had read my posts lately to you?

You would see that I have not read ANY OF THEM past the first word if you did not answer my 'yes' or 'no' question.

 

Fauci is a scumbag. I would never pay attention to ANYTHING he says except for a laugh..

I have already said - if people want to try all these other things?

Go ahead.

Knock themselves out.

I am not saying don't use them.

 

My problem with what you are saying?

Is that you are basically telling people (in so many words):

'the vaccines will kill you. 

These other treatments are proven to work far better and here is the proof.'

And then you post a trillion links and pretty pictures to try and back it up.

 

There is NO, unbiased, fact-based EVIDENCE whatsoever that the vaccines will kill people en masse. Not the day they take it or years from you. That is just garbage.

All you post is whacko doctors here and their spewing out theories that they cannot even begin to back up.

Like that insane dude in Canada - someone else posted - saying that more than 1/2 of the vaccinated will die. And he is a doctor. Give me a fucking break.

 

Look - you want to post stuff like:

Take the vaccines if you want. But I personally think it's better to try these other things. And here are some links to them?

Then I have NO problem with it.

You have the right to your opinion.

But you are making matter-of-fact claims based on minimal, hard data (much of which I fairly easily, ripped apart when I studied them) and claiming 'vaccines - BAD. These others - good.'.

And you DO NOT KNOW THAT. You are only assuming.

And now a person that posts as moronically as yourself claims to know better than not only the scientist/doctors that designed and ran the study, but the peer reviewers as well.

With a prior claim of, what was it? Oh yea, the doctor/study was motivated by plans to profit from writing prescriptions for a drug that costs $4.76 per course of treatment.

On 9/17/2021 at 10:11 AM, McRocket said:

That is both erroneous and irresponsible.

For if you talk just ONE, old fart into NOT getting the vaccine...when they had planned to get it previously?

 And they die of Covid-19 - probably/possibly because they did not take the vaccine on your word?

You have done harm to society.

 

We are not talking about religion or politics or sports.

We are talking about people's, fucking lives.

And you are NOT a doctor.

It is you that are doing harm to society by parroting that Big Pharma and their leaky, rapidly failing, 39% effective "vaccines" are the only answer to COVID, but more importantly your evil is most manifest in denying the 99+% effective treatment protocols as delivered successfully by tens of thousands of physicians throughout the pandemic, that if one is prepared for treatment in advance, preclude the need to risk one's health as a test subject for the completely unknown long term harms of these novel, unapproved, experimental, genetically engineered, chemically enhanced, biological agents.

 

Which we find now have prolonged the pandemic by creating hundreds of millions of asymptomatic "Typhoid Marys" of COVID-19.

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/345395-big-pharma-created-hundreds-of-millions-of-asymptomatic-spreaders-of-covid/

 

I'm guessing there's good reason you didn't weigh in on the risk VS reward thread, which wouldn't matter, because the gov psyops have so disconnected you from reality and truth.

 

On 9/17/2021 at 10:11 AM, McRocket said:

Lastly - and for frig sakes?

If you are going to post all these links and scream at people that they are fantastic?

At least have the decency to read the bloody studies that they are based on...because clearly - you aren't.

 

Good day.

Your stupidity is manifest not so much in the confirmation bias of your reading but in the stupidity of your conclusions that are contrary to the study and peer reviewers. But more importantly as I have repeatedly explained, it is not possible to do a study of several drugs/nutraceuticals administered at different times per patient progress, because each element would be an additional confounding factor.

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346782-the-evil-buffoonery-of-demanding-trials-of-generic-drugs-that-in-multi-drugnutraceutical-protocols-have-been-proven-to-be-99-effective-in-treatment-of-elderly-and-high-risk-individuals-for-over-a-year-and-a-half/

 

Your insistence on them, in light of a year and a half of successful early treatment proven over and over even on mass scale - that you laughably refer to as "pretty pictures" (just ask and I will help you learn how to read a graph) - only further proves that Anthony Fauci is your mentor and you are his bitch, while vindicating the moral and ethical standards of scientist/treating physicians like Dr. Valdimir Zelenko.

Why does Fauci insist on an unethical, immoral placebo-controlled study for HCQ?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, freeman said:

And so in a further effort to run and hide from my question as to what you would recommend, further confirming that you would indeed follow Fauci's/NIH homicidal advice even as you pretend to not be one of Fauci's bitches, you then choose to reduce your posts to a ridiculously infantile "gotcha"?

You know as well as I that my "no" was directed at not agreeing with the content of the article, as I explained, because anyone who considers government stats as having value at this point in time is not only stupid, but is either a conspicuous victim of government psyops or a perpetrator of them.

To your gotcha, of course YES the article says what it says. That is a given that cannot be argued. That's why a rational person will address the unreliable and propagandistic source and content of the article, like I did, rather that whether or not the article says what it says. Your effort is truly that of an irrational madman, unless you somehow found the good sense to become embarrassed by your moronic exercise. During our conversations I hadn't realized you are still in your teens, and you have my apology for that oversight.

Will address the rest of your nonsense a little later.

Your first word did not answer my question - so I skipped the rest.

 

Once again:

 

Are you blind?

 

So you are actually saying that the data in the link I posted (and below) from the Canadian government does not say that only 6 people are confirmed to have probably died from the Covid-19 vaccines out of over 53 million vaccines administered in Canada?

Yes or No?

 

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#seriousNonSerious

 

And watch folks - he will chicken out answering this SIMPLE question again.

To be honest?

I really do not think he understands it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, freeman said:

And now a person that posts as moronically as yourself claims to know better than not only the scientist/doctors that designed and ran the study, but the peer reviewers as well.

With a prior claim of, what was it? Oh yea, the doctor/study was motivated by plans to profit from writing prescriptions for a drug that costs $4.76 per course of treatment.

It is you that are doing harm to society by parroting that Big Pharma and their leaky, rapidly failing, 39% effective "vaccines" are the only answer to COVID, but more importantly your evil is most manifest in denying the 99+% effective treatment protocols as delivered successfully by tens of thousands of physicians throughout the pandemic, that if one is prepared for treatment in advance, preclude the need to risk one's health as a test subject for the completely unknown long term harms of these novel, unapproved, experimental, genetically engineered, chemically enhanced, biological agents.

 

Which we find now have prolonged the pandemic by creating hundreds of millions of asymptomatic "Typhoid Marys" of COVID-19.

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/345395-big-pharma-created-hundreds-of-millions-of-asymptomatic-spreaders-of-covid/

 

I'm guessing there's good reason you didn't weigh in on the risk VS reward thread, which wouldn't matter, because the gov psyops have so disconnected you from reality and truth.

 

Your stupidity is manifest not so much in the confirmation bias of your reading but in the stupidity of your conclusions that are contrary to the study and peer reviewers. But more importantly as I have repeatedly explained, it is not possible to do a study of several drugs/nutraceuticals administered at different times per patient progress, because each element would be an additional confounding factor.

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/346782-the-evil-buffoonery-of-demanding-trials-of-generic-drugs-that-in-multi-drugnutraceutical-protocols-have-been-proven-to-be-99-effective-in-treatment-of-elderly-and-high-risk-individuals-for-over-a-year-and-a-half/

 

Your insistence on them, in light of a year and a half of successful early treatment proven over and over even on mass scale - that you laughably refer to as "pretty pictures" (just ask and I will help you learn how to read a graph) - only further proves that Anthony Fauci is your mentor and you are his bitch, while vindicating the moral and ethical standards of scientist/treating physicians like Dr. Valdimir Zelenko.

Why does Fauci insist on an unethical, immoral placebo-controlled study for HCQ?

 

Ummm...you do realize that I read none of that or the post above it (I figured I owed it to you to tell you that)?

 

I gave you my opinion.
Tried to be decent to you - again.

But I guess - judging by the length of your replies - you are BIG time pissed.

Good - I like pissing off online bullies/trolls like you.

 

However, I am not the slightest bit interested in your response.

Why?
Because you are clearly a full-on, whacko anti-vaxxer.

I tried to give you a chance before to be reasonable.

But you just devolved into paranoia.

Why would I waste my time reading your nonsense any longer?

 

I am now just going to point out obvious flaws in your replies and make you look more and more foolish.

It's what I do on chat forums (to trolls/jerks/bullies).

 

Anyway, have a WONDERFUL day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TBHWT said:

Hell it's failed here too. Both my wife and I had the shots and then both got covid, her in Jan and me in May. 

SORRY TO HEAR YOU SUBJECTED YOURSELF TO THE SHOTS. YOUR CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT MY BUSINESS. I RESPECT ONES DECISION BUT WOULD NEVER ENCOURAGE ANYONE TO PUT AN EXPERIMENTAL DRUG IN THEIR BODY.

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, McRocket said:

Ummm...you do realize that I read none of that or the post above it (I figured I owed it to you to tell you that)?

 

I gave you my opinion.
Tried to be decent to you - again.

But I guess - judging by the length of your replies - you are BIG time pissed.

Good - I like pissing off online bullies/trolls like you.

 

However, I am not the slightest bit interested in your response.

Why?
Because you are clearly a full-on, whacko anti-vaxxer.

I tried to give you a chance before to be reasonable.

But you just devolved into paranoia.

Why would I waste my time reading your nonsense any longer?

 

I am now just going to point out obvious flaws in your replies and make you look more and more foolish.

It's what I do on chat forums (to trolls/jerks/bullies).

 

Anyway, have a WONDERFUL day.

And again, I hadn't realized you are still in your teens, and you have my apology for that oversight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, McRocket said:

Ummm...you do realize that I read none of that or the post above it (I figured I owed it to you to tell you that)?

 

I gave you my opinion.
Tried to be decent to you - again.

But I guess - judging by the length of your replies - you are BIG time pissed.

That's ridiculous. I've consistently had the power of truth and reality on my side - just like Dr. Peter McCullough - while you've had nothing but disconnection from truth and reality as your only and personal advocate.

The most important video to date (8-28-21) on vaccines

3 hours ago, McRocket said:

 

Good - I like pissing off online bullies/trolls like you.

 

However, I am not the slightest bit interested in your response.

Why?
Because you are clearly a full-on, whacko anti-vaxxer.

I tried to give you a chance before to be reasonable.

But you just devolved into paranoia.

Why would I waste my time reading your nonsense any longer?

 

I am now just going to point out obvious flaws in your replies and make you look more and more foolish.

It's what I do on chat forums (to trolls/jerks/bullies).

 

Anyway, have a WONDERFUL day.

I don't respond here for the benefit of a person that is disconnected from truth and reality, but for the amusement of others, from the display of your ridiculous and vacuous answers. You merely provide me with the opportunity to do so.

And again, I hadn't realized you are still in your teens - or for some reason haven't been able to mentally advance beyond them - and for that you again have my apology for the oversight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TBHWT said:

Hell it's failed here too. Both my wife and I had the shots and then both got covid, her in Jan and me in May. 

Did you have mild symptoms?

Reduction of symptoms, prior to vaccine efficacy waning, is the only promise Big Pharma made.

My friends mother got COVID just a couple months after her jab and had to get monoclonal antibodies to mitigate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, freeman said:

Did you have mild symptoms?

Reduction of symptoms, prior to vaccine efficacy waning, is the only promise Big Pharma made.

My friends mother got COVID just a couple months after her jab and had to get monoclonal antibodies to mitigate it.

I missed the deadline for that. And no my symptons weren't mild I was down for about 6 weeks, real weak, but never went to the hospital. However my wife did, she thought she wasn't going to make it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, antifakiller said:

SORRY TO HEAR YOU SUBJECTED YOURSELF TO THE SHOTS. YOUR CIRCUMSTANCES ARE NOT MY BUSINESS. I RESPECT ONES DECISION BUT WOULD NEVER ENCOURAGE ANYONE TO PUT AN EXPERIMENTAL DRUG IN THEIR BODY.

   

Hey, we're both getting up there, and didn't want to take a chance. We still don't regret it.

  • Like 1
  • Thumb up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, TBHWT said:

I missed the deadline for that. And no my symptons weren't mild I was down for about 6 weeks, real weak, but never went to the hospital. However my wife did, she thought she wasn't going to make it.

Sorry to hear that! Some promise by Big Pharma criminals you trusted eigh?

I'm presuming you guys got the Pfizer jab since that seems to be failing the worst and earliest (couldn't even get approval for the booster)?

Had you and your wife been taking vitamin D, C, zinc, quercetin or any other nutraceuticals prior to, or once your symptoms began?

Did you have a physician involved in your care?

If so, what did he prescribe?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, freeman said:

Sorry to hear that! Some promise by Big Pharma criminals you trusted eigh?

I'm presuming you guys got the Pfizer jab since that seems to be failing the worst and earliest (couldn't even get approval for the booster)?

Had you and your wife been taking vitamin D, C, zinc, quercetin or any other nutraceuticals prior to, or once your symptoms began?

Did you have a physician involved in your care?

If so, what did he prescribe?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...