Beer Virus V

[NKBJ]

This is gonna be fun.

They Killed People for Vaccine Profits – Paul Craig Roberts | Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog

By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com (Corrected and updated) International award winning journalist and former Assistant Treasury Secretary Dr. Paul Craig Roberts says the evidence is clear Covid vaccines are not safe and effective. Dr. Roberts says, “So, why the push for overriding everyone’s civil...

usawatchdog.com

 

[jsx1043]

This is gonna be fun.

They Killed People for Vaccine Profits – Paul Craig Roberts | Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog

By Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com (Corrected and updated) International award winning journalist and former Assistant Treasury Secretary Dr. Paul Craig Roberts says the evidence is clear Covid vaccines are not safe and effective. Dr. Roberts says, “So, why the push for overriding everyone’s civil...

usawatchdog.com

Guys like you and I know this, and knew this like months ago. It’s hard sometimes to be plugged into the Matrix.

Now, my next big concern is the Ligma Variant:

FACT CHECK: What is Ligma Variant? Highly Transmissible COVID-19 Strain Runs Rampant in Hospitals?

Alpha, Beta, Delta and Gama variants circulating in the US are classified as variants of concern by CDC.

www.ibtimes.sg

 

[NKBJ]

Guys like you and I know this, and knew this like months ago. It’s hard sometimes to be plugged into the Matrix.

Now, my next big concern is the Ligma Variant:

FACT CHECK: What is Ligma Variant? Highly Transmissible COVID-19 Strain Runs Rampant in Hospitals?

Alpha, Beta, Delta and Gama variants circulating in the US are classified as variants of concern by CDC.

www.ibtimes.sg

PCR is making a really good point about the vaxxed having so much "covid" versus the unvaxxed.

 

[chipbennett]

PCR is making a really good point about the vaxxed having so much "covid" versus the unvaxxed.

That depends. If people who were low-risk for the disease all along are making an informed decision not to get the vaccine, then sure - they were always low-risk, and are still low-risk. So it makes perfect sense that they would remain at a low percentage of positive cases. Similarly, if people who are high-risk for both infection and for disease severity all along are also making informed decisions to get the vaccine - guess what? They remain high-risk, and it make perfect sense if they still represent a higher percentage of positive cases.

I view all of this as politicizing a virus. I disagree with such politicizing, whether it comes from the left or from the right. And I'll continue to speak out against it, whether it comes from the left or from the right.

 

[dusty88]

The left leaning and centrist media are barely mentioning that Obama still had a relatively big bash with people most of us would consider outside the "close friends and family" circle.

But plenty of articles on Sturgis.

I honestly thought Obama was smart enough and thoughtful enough to realize how bad the optics are of him having party right now: it really might contribute to spread and he has the resources to understand that. The party-goers are all vaccinated. What of the elderly relatives of the catering workers? What of someone's high-risk child who isn't yet old enough to get vaccinated? He should be more restrictive in his activities than the typical American. He can afford to reschedule his birthday party.

 

[NKBJ]

That depends. If people who were low-risk for the disease all along are making an informed decision not to get the vaccine, then sure - they were always low-risk, and are still low-risk. So it makes perfect sense that they would remain at a low percentage of positive cases. Similarly, if people who are high-risk for both infection and for disease severity all along are also making informed decisions to get the vaccine - guess what? They remain high-risk, and it make perfect sense if they still represent a higher percentage of positive cases.

I view all of this as politicizing a virus. I disagree with such politicizing, whether it comes from the left or from the right. And I'll continue to speak out against it, whether it comes from the left or from the right.

It's like PCR said, people take the vaccine and then they believe in it.

 

[nonobaddog]

The easiest way to handle this stuff about vaccine safety, effectiveness and breakthrough cases is to first decide what you want to believe.
It doesn't matter which way or how extreme that belief is - you can almost certainly find statements and numbers to support that belief.
Obviously all the contradictory statements and numbers can't be honest and accurate but they are available.

 

[dusty88]

That depends. If people who were low-risk for the disease all along are making an informed decision not to get the vaccine, then sure - they were always low-risk, and are still low-risk. So it makes perfect sense that they would remain at a low percentage of positive cases. Similarly, if people who are high-risk for both infection and for disease severity all along are also making informed decisions to get the vaccine - guess what? They remain high-risk, and it make perfect sense if they still represent a higher percentage of positive cases.

Exactly. It's often called "rate base bias" in epidemiology. And it is definitely part of the Covid numbers because the high risk were vaccinated in greater numbers.



Imagine a total population of 100 people. Imagine 85% of that population is vaccinated.
Imagine that there’s a 20% positivity rate for COVID-19 infections in the general population, and 50% of those infections are among vaccinated folks.
That means you have 20 total cases of COVID-19, 10 among the vaccinated (of which there are 85) and 10 among the unvaccinated (of which there are 15).
That means that there’s an 11% positivity rate among vaccinated folks and a 66% positivity rate among unvaccinated folks. Vaccinated folks are still far far far far far far far less likely to be infected than unvaccinated folks, despite being “50% of total infections” because of a rate base bias where the base number of vaccinated people is substantially higher than the base number of unvaccinated.

This is even more magnified if you break the groups down by age. Something like 80% of the Indiana residents over age 80 are vaccinated for Covid.

 

[dusty88]

The easiest way to handle this stuff about vaccine safety, effectiveness and breakthrough cases is to first decide what you want to believe.
It doesn't matter which way or how extreme that belief is - you can almost certainly find statements and numbers to support that belief.
Obviously all the contradictory statements and numbers can't be honest and accurate but they are available.

Deciding first, then looking for matching data is called cognitive dissonance. We are all somewhat susceptible to it, especially with deeply held beliefs such as political positions.

IMO, the more honest view is to either get highly educated on a topic and attempt to understand the opposing view or to just admit you don't know.

 

[nonobaddog]

Deciding first, then looking for matching data is called cognitive dissonance. We are all somewhat susceptible to it, especially with deeply held beliefs such as political positions.

IMO, the more honest view is to either get highly educated on a topic and attempt to understand the opposing view or to just admit you don't know.

That isn't exactly cognitive dissonance since it is missing the internal conflict, in fact it is more like one of several coping mechanisms to reduce the stress of cognitive dissonance.

What I described, although common these days, is exactly the opposite of what I consider an intelligent way to form beliefs. That was more of a jab at the overabundance of crappy, bias-based "information" being spread around regarding the whole subject of COVID and the vaccines.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

COVID-19 variants could be named after constellations once Greek alphabet is used up, WHO official says

Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organisation's COVID-19 technical lead, confirmed the agency is considering naming new COVID-19 strains after star constellations. She also warned new variants could emerge which evade vaccines.

news.sky.com

They ain't letting this money train die.....

Did the CDC Director just kill the rationale for vaccine passports?

Dr. Rochelle Walensky has been making the media rounds. During her most recent appearance on CNN, The Conservative Treehouse caught her making a startling admission: The vaccines neither prevent people from catching COVID nor from spreading COVID. At...

www.americanthinker.com

 

[nonobaddog]

This has already been stated better than I can but the purpose of a vaccine is to kick-start your immune system so it is better prepared to fight against a fairly specific virus or other type of pathogen.

It does nothing to prevent one from inhaling or contacting any pathogen, it just gets you ready for the fight.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

This

A PATHOLOGIST SUMMARY OF WHAT THESE JABS DO TO THE BRAIN AND OTHER ORGANS

Ryan Cole MD AFLDS PHYSICIAN A scientific clarification of what these injections do in the head and other organs of the vaccinated people

rumble.com

p

 

[nonobaddog]

I could only watch the first 6 1/2 minutes because in that time this guy proved he is full of crap.

He makes a big deal out of the fact that the investigational vaccine does not stay in the deltoid. That is grade school stuff - did anybody ever think an intramuscular shot of any vaccine stays in the muscle?

He also says that the injection leads to spike proteins being generated throughout the body and there is a reaction to the spike protein and the spike protein is the toxin and this is not a vaccine. Duh! That is the whole idea of a vaccine - to introduce a substance into the body that the body finds toxic and will fight it and in the process get better at fighting it by strengthening the immune response to that particular substance.

If his credentials are valid he certainly knows this but he is willing to say it the way he does because the audience wants to hear that and he is getting paid to provide that.

 

[JCSR]

Solid advise for all of us.!

 

[Jaybird1980]

I could only watch the first 6 1/2 minutes because in that time this guy proved he is full of crap.

He makes a big deal out of the fact that the investigational vaccine does not stay in the deltoid. That is grade school stuff - did anybody ever think an intramuscular shot of any vaccine stays in the muscle?

He also says that the injection leads to spike proteins being generated throughout the body and there is a reaction to the spike protein and the spike protein is the toxin and this is not a vaccine. Duh! That is the whole idea of a vaccine - to introduce a substance into the body that the body finds toxic and will fight it and in the process get better at fighting it by strengthening the immune response to that particular substance.

If his credentials are valid he certainly knows this but he is willing to say it the way he does because the audience wants to hear that and he is getting paid to provide that.

The problem is the people that are going to watch it and then repost it and spread his nonsense don't know any better. They won't actually think about what he is saying. They just jump on a bandwagon and spread it as some sort of truth.

People have certainly shown that they don't have the ability to think things out anymore. Not all people, but it seems like a large chunk of people.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

To anyone whom I upset. I am sorry for reposting these videos, for I don't know any better.I am not a Dr.,and I also do not play one on INGO. Considering most of the changing disinformation that has come foward from gov't concerning this pandemic, I now know less then when this began.

 

[jamil]

That depends. If people who were low-risk for the disease all along are making an informed decision not to get the vaccine, then sure - they were always low-risk, and are still low-risk. So it makes perfect sense that they would remain at a low percentage of positive cases. Similarly, if people who are high-risk for both infection and for disease severity all along are also making informed decisions to get the vaccine - guess what? They remain high-risk, and it make perfect sense if they still represent a higher percentage of positive cases.

I view all of this as politicizing a virus. I disagree with such politicizing, whether it comes from the left or from the right. And I'll continue to speak out against it, whether it comes from the left or from the right.

Contrary to what the administration says, the best democgraphic predictor of who is vaccinated is age, not political affiliation. It looks to me like the people who know they're high risk are more likely to be vaccinated. Of course there are variations within age groups too, like race, and maybe even political affiliation. But generally people are making decisions according to risk. Or at least perceived risk. It's the perception, I think, that accounts for the variance within the different risk groups.

 

[jamil]

Deciding first, then looking for matching data is called cognitive dissonance. We are all somewhat susceptible to it, especially with deeply held beliefs such as political positions.

IMO, the more honest view is to either get highly educated on a topic and attempt to understand the opposing view or to just admit you don't know.

With covid/vaccines, I'm firmly in the "admit I don't know" camp. I don't know the science. I hated the biology classes I had to take. I have zero interest in learning it at the level necessary to be able to know enough of the science to know the particular make and model of **** either side is full of.

But, I'm not going to blindly trust someone because they work for an alphabet agency, because whether people want to admit it or not, agencies are political entities and they have reasons to lie. I'm not going to blindly trust experts because there are credentialed people on either side of this and they're saying different things and both sides have reasons to lie.

I can evaluate consistency. I can tell when people look to be hiding information. I can tell when one side is trying to silence another side. I can tell when someone is making a logical argument. So I'm not completely without tools to approximate a reasonable view of reality on matters I don't otherwise fully understand.

So while I can admit I don't know, I can also kinda tell when someone's full of ****. Fauci is full of ****. I can tell that much. And I can tell that pretty much everything from sources like "trunews" is ideologically derived, and therefore not trustworthy without in-depth verification.

 

[jamil]

To anyone whom I upset. I am sorry for reposting these videos, for I don't know any better.I am not a Dr.,and I also do not play one on INGO. Considering most of the changing disinformation that has come foward from gov't concerning this pandemic, I now know less then when this began.

It looks to me like we get disinformation from more than just government sources. Be weary of any source that has a reason to lie.