Coronavirus not very megathread.

Brand new Double bind 6 month study on Pfizer jibjab.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1.full
Cliffs

MASSIVE OOF

During the blinded, controlled period, 15 BNT162b2 and 14 placebo recipients died; during the open-label period, 3 BNT162b2 and 2 original placebo recipients who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were considered related to BNT162b2 by investigators. Causes of death were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).

highly efficacious in preventing COVID-19

22,000 people in each side.. 15 dead with Jib and 14 without.. What a success..!!!!!!

But doesnt stop as many people dieing.. omg this is mental ..

covid is a hoax. its just the flu bros.

people die from flu every year. shit is normal.
 
Brand new Double bind 6 month study on Pfizer jibjab.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1.full
Cliffs

MASSIVE OOF

During the blinded, controlled period, 15 BNT162b2 and 14 placebo recipients died; during the open-label period, 3 BNT162b2 and 2 original placebo recipients who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were considered related to BNT162b2 by investigators. Causes of death were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).

highly efficacious in preventing COVID-19

22,000 people in each side.. 15 dead with Jib and 14 without.. What a success..!!!!!!

But doesnt stop as many people dieing.. omg this is mental ..


During the blinded, controlled period, 15 BNT162b2 and 14 placebo recipients died; during the open-label period, 3 BNT162b2 and 2 original placebo recipients who received BNT162b2 after unblinding died. None of these deaths were considered related to BNT162b2 by investigators. Causes of death were balanced between BNT162b2 and placebo groups (Table S4).
 

This drug isnt savimg you.. The way you think it does.. Poor yu.
 
How is a vaccine that does not stop transmission will stop mutation?

<Huh2>

It will slow down the transmission so that virologists can stay ahead of it like the Flu vaccine. When we played catch-up, we wound up with 600,000+ dead from Covid.
 
my 21 yr old niece just got covid last thursday. tested positive. bad stomach pain and puking. Feeling better today. wasn't vaxxed. but on 4th day, yuk.
Of course my sister gets it too today. stomach pains this morninng and puking too but she better now. she was vaxed . she was scheduled for a test at 3pm but was already feeling better by that time so skipped it so not 100% it was covid. so the vax probably did it's job with her.
brother-in law against vaccine. I told him he probably already had it and didn't even know it and is now immune.

strange symptoms for a respiratory bug--stomach pains and puking.
 
my 21 yr old niece just got covid last thursday. tested positive. bad stomach pain and puking. Feeling better today. wasn't vaxxed. but on 4th day, yuk.
Of course my sister gets it too today. stomach pains this morninng and puking too but she better now. she was vaxed . she was scheduled for a test at 3pm but was already feeling better by that time so skipped it so not 100% it was covid. so the vax probably did it's job with her.
brother-in law against vaccine. I told him he probably already had it and didn't even know it and is now immune.

strange symptoms for a respiratory bug--stomach pains and puking.

I'd get checked out just to be safe.
 
CDC says it does not slow it down, we need to wear masks again. Why not just be a grown up and admit that information is conflicting at least.

In theory vaccines could create more mutations and some scientists have pointed to that. Only time will tell

Yup, we're gonna have to see how it all plays out.
 
Who would have thought that we'd have to rely on the Mexican government to state the obvious and call out big pharma. Wow...

Mexico have been bossing it since day 1. They refused to bow down to the WHO's attempts at bullying and shaming them into locking down, because they couldn't afford to lock down. Told the WHO to fuck off, basically, legends. I've got several mates who fled Canada the second Trudeau started throwing his weight around, and got a 1-way flight to Mexico - they've been there for months and months and they reckon it's been the closest thing to normal life you can imagine.
 
I am reading Vaccinated can still transmit the virus.

However vaccinated people are better off if they contract the virus. Symptoms are far less severe. Which is a plus for vaccination but we can't mandate what people put in their bodies, that strikes at the core of individual rights.

It should therefore be personal choice and I would think those who wish to avoid the virus worst affects should be vaccinated, as is their choice.

If it is true if you are vaccinated or unvaccinated it makes no difference to the spread of the virus. Then vaccination is a personal choice and not a wider concern.

So your choice to be unvaccinated has no negative effect on the wider population. Then choose accordingly based on your beliefs as it can only harm YOU and not everyone else.

I might be wrong.

Based on the harm principle if being unvaccinated has no detrimental effect on the wider population then it is up to the individual what they put into their bodies as it has no detrimental effect on the whole.

We can get into arguments about overrun health systems etc but the state has no right to control what we put in our bodies.

If it was the case that vaccination meant no further spread of the virus I think there could be an argument but that does not seem to be the case and while this pandemic has been a brutal and trying time which has seen many deaths I would not give up fundamental rights over it.

The BMA (british medical association) stated they cannot force people to be vaccinated. It is unethical.

I could be wrong but if vaccines do not halt transmission then mandatory vaccination is wrong on very many levels and this is not something that should be a kneejerk reaction by businesses or a political ball to be bounced back and forth.

We are talking about our bodies which are sancrosanct and if being vaccinated or unvaccinated has little negative effect on our fellow man while mandatory vax cuts to the core of our rights then I think that is a sacrifice worth making.

Otherwise it becomes reductio ad absurdum.
 
I am reading Vaccinated can still transmit the virus.

However vaccinated people are better off if they contract the virus. Symptoms are far less severe. Which is a plus for vaccination but we can't mandate what people put in their bodies, that strikes at the core of individual rights.

It should therefore be personal choice and I would think those who wish to avoid the virus worst affects should be vaccinated, as is their choice.

If it is true if you are vaccinated or unvaccinated it makes no difference to the spread of the virus. Then vaccination is a personal choice and not a wider concern.

So your choice to be unvaccinated has no negative effect on the wider population. Then choose accordingly based on your beliefs as it can only harm YOU and not everyone else.

I might be wrong.

Based on the harm principle if being unvaccinated has no detrimental effect on the wider population then it is up to the individual what they put into their bodies as it has no detrimental effect on the whole.

We can get into arguments about overrun health systems etc but the state has no right to control what we put in our bodies.

If it was the case that vaccination meant no further spread of the virus I think there could be an argument but that does not seem to be the case and while this pandemic has been a brutal and trying time which has seen many deaths I would not give up fundamental rights over it.

The BMA (british medical association) stated they cannot force people to be vaccinated. It is unethical.

I could be wrong but if vaccines do not halt transmission then mandatory vaccination is wrong on very many levels and this is not something that should be a kneejerk reaction by businesses or a political ball to be bounced back and forth.

We are talking about our bodies which are sancrosanct and if being vaccinated or unvaccinated has little negative effect on our fellow man while mandatory vax cuts to the core of our rights then I think that is a sacrifice worth making.

Otherwise it becomes reductio ad absurdum.
The vaccine does reduce the transmission, but vaccinated people can still spread the virus.

I agree that nobody can be forced to take the vaccine. Nobody should be ostracised or lose their rights for not taking it. It should be a personal choice. If you’re vulnerable then you should take it. If you think it will ultimately benefit then you should take it. If you’re young like I am then I see nothing wrong with not wanting to take it right now. If I somehow die or get long covid then that will be unfortunate but it’s my choice to make.

If the people who don’t want the vaccine ultimately fold to this pressure, it will create a worrying precedent. Body autonomy is one of the most important things.
 
Last edited:
GOATvernor Cuomo once again leading the way and trends for reopening

 
I am reading Vaccinated can still transmit the virus.

However vaccinated people are better off if they contract the virus. Symptoms are far less severe. Which is a plus for vaccination but we can't mandate what people put in their bodies, that strikes at the core of individual rights.

It should therefore be personal choice and I would think those who wish to avoid the virus worst affects should be vaccinated, as is their choice.

If it is true if you are vaccinated or unvaccinated it makes no difference to the spread of the virus. Then vaccination is a personal choice and not a wider concern.

So your choice to be unvaccinated has no negative effect on the wider population. Then choose accordingly based on your beliefs as it can only harm YOU and not everyone else.

I might be wrong.

Based on the harm principle if being unvaccinated has no detrimental effect on the wider population then it is up to the individual what they put into their bodies as it has no detrimental effect on the whole.

We can get into arguments about overrun health systems etc but the state has no right to control what we put in our bodies.

If it was the case that vaccination meant no further spread of the virus I think there could be an argument but that does not seem to be the case and while this pandemic has been a brutal and trying time which has seen many deaths I would not give up fundamental rights over it.

The BMA (british medical association) stated they cannot force people to be vaccinated. It is unethical.

I could be wrong but if vaccines do not halt transmission then mandatory vaccination is wrong on very many levels and this is not something that should be a kneejerk reaction by businesses or a political ball to be bounced back and forth.

We are talking about our bodies which are sancrosanct and if being vaccinated or unvaccinated has little negative effect on our fellow man while mandatory vax cuts to the core of our rights then I think that is a sacrifice worth making.

Otherwise it becomes reductio ad absurdum.


In the U.S. to attend public school your child must be vaccinated against diseases. It's mandatory. Dunno about Britain though.
 
Lindsey Graham testes positive after vaccination.

Admits the vaccine probably saved his life

 
It was a well-played set up by them, but they didn't get him to commit to anything. The "yes" they were using an affirmation that he agreed to a policy change was really just a "yeah" in him acknowledging what they were saying. He did not agree to any policy changes and the only statement they got him to repeat was a minor one that is 100% true (astrazeneca is not an mrna vaccine).

I don't see anything illegal or unethical there. Its dishonest to go after this guy for accepting a $10k donation from what he thought was a hedge fund, when big pharma spends more on lobbying than any industry by far.

You dont see the hypocrisy accepting funding derived from a shareholder of one of the vaccines that you've been vociferously attacking for the last year and a bit, on the proviso that you curtail said criticism? (I think you do really)
 
In the U.S. to attend public school your child must be vaccinated against diseases. It's mandatory. Dunno about Britain though.
<TrumpWrong1>

"All states and the District of Columbia allow a medical exemption. A medical exemption is allowed when a child has a medical condition that prevents them from receiving a vaccine. All but three states offer nonmedical exemptions for religious or philosophical reasons. Please check with your school to learn about exemptions or visit the School Vaccination Requirements and Exemptions tool."
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/coverage/schoolvaxview/requirements/exemption.html

The only thing I had to do for my kids was initial and sign a one page document stating my philosophical objections, and agreeing that my children will stay home in case of an outbreak.

This is but another lie perpetuated by the vaccine zealots...
 
Last edited:
<TrumpWrong1>

"All states and the District of Columbia allow a medical exemption. A medical exemption is allowed when a child has a medical condition that prevents them from receiving a vaccine. All but three states offer nonmedical exemptions for religious or philosophical reasons. Please check with your school to learn about exemptions or visit the School Vaccination Requirements and Exemptions tool."
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/coverage/schoolvaxview/requirements/exemption.html

The only thing I had to do for my kids was initial and sign a one page document stating my philosophical objections, and agreeing that my children will stay home in case of an outbreak.

This is but another lie perpetuated by the vaccine zealots...

Good reminder. I was totally wrong about that one. We had a kid in middle school who had that "exemption."

He stole around $300 from his dad one day, stood on a bench, and just started doing this.


OGC.07cc27489d618611876be63564f42446


But he WAS exempt though.
 
Back
Top