Beer Virus V

[manifest destiny]

Two different situations, but cruelty is cruelty, whether it's done to a human or an animal. It's a sign of depravity.

"If you have men who will exclude any of God's creatures from the shelter of compassion and pity, you will have men who will deal likewise with their fellow men." -- St. Francis of Assisi

If a cruel person burns alive a dog, and burns alive a 6yo child, would you equate them different? There is no wrong answer. I would view them different. Albeit both very cruel. A neighbor shoots and kills my dog for no good reason, there's a definite problem. The same neighbor shoots and kills my kid for no good reason, my level of pissed would be greater. Two different situations. Two very different responses. I place human life above other creatures. That isn't the same as agreeing to torture of other creatures. Sick is sick but not all sick is equal.

 

[qwerty]

Most murders start with animals. Gacy, Dahmer, Fauchi....

 

[DoggyDaddy]

If a cruel person burns alive a dog, and burns alive a 6yo child, would you equate them different? There is no wrong answer. I would view them different. Albeit both very cruel. A neighbor shoots and kills my dog for no good reason, there's a definite problem. The same neighbor shoots and kills my kid for no good reason, my level of pissed would be greater. Two different situations. Two very different responses. I place human life above other creatures. That isn't the same as agreeing to torture of other creatures. Sick is sick but not all sick is equal.

I agree, but that's why I said cruelty is cruelty. The penalty is going to be different for killing a human vs. killing an animal as in your example of your dog vs. your child.

I guess my point is that being pissed about Fauci torturing dogs doesn't take anything away from me being pissed at him participating in gain of function testing of a virus designed to harm people. I can be pissed about both. I just disagree that being pissed about the beagles some how lessens the importance of being pissed about human suffering and death.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

A neighbor shoots and kills my dog for no good reason, there's a definite problem. The same neighbor shoots and kills my kid for no good reason, my level of pissed would be greater. Two different situations. Two very different responses.

Similarly, if I saw a dog attacking a small child I wouldn't hesitate to shoot the dog. I wouldn't shoot a kid that was being cruel to a dog, but I would intervene, and I would damn sure talk to the parents, and/or report it to the proper authorities if necessary.

 

[manifest destiny]

I agree, but that's why I said cruelty is cruelty. The penalty is going to be different for killing a human vs. killing an animal as in your example of your dog vs. your child.

I guess my point is that being pissed about Fauci torturing dogs doesn't take anything away from me being pissed at him participating in gain of function testing of a virus designed to harm people. I can be pissed about both. I just disagree that being pissed about the beagles some how lessens the importance of being pissed about human suffering and death.

I think I may have misunderstood your point. I'm utterly sickened by the beagle dog reporting. I don't discount it's abhorrence and it just adds to the my fuming disgust of the man and the system that rewards him. I'm not sure what's gained from that type of "research". And I'm not sure what might be gained is worth the depravity of the process. Mankind and canine go together like peanut butter and jelly. It's just that when push comes to shove, I value peanut butter more than jelly. Gain of function research/testing is disgustingly wrong. Weaponizing contagions cannot possibly benefit humans. Injecting experimental vaccines into fellow man without consent isn't acceptable. Sorry for the misunderstanding. And my ramble.

 

[NKBJ]

It starts with animals.

 

[rooster]

I think I’ve posted this before but it’s worth getting exposure.

~35000 pregnant women vaccinated
827 successful pregnancies.

Idk what the normal rate of loss is but that’s a 2% success rate in women that are vaccinated. But the study says right at the top that it’s safe.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8117969/pdf/NEJMoa2104983.pdf

 

[JettaKnight]

I think I’ve posted this before but it’s worth getting exposure.

~35000 pregnant women vaccinated
827 successful pregnancies.

Idk what the normal rate of loss is but that’s a 2% success rate in women that are vaccinated. But the study says right at the top that it’s safe.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8117969/pdf/NEJMoa2104983.pdf

It's over a very short time frame if I'm reading that right, i.e. most of the women were still pregnant at the end of that data set.

 

[HoughMade]

I think I’ve posted this before but it’s worth getting exposure.

~35000 pregnant women vaccinated
827 successful pregnancies.

Idk what the normal rate of loss is but that’s a 2% success rate in women that are vaccinated. But the study says right at the top that it’s safe.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8117969/pdf/NEJMoa2104983.pdf

Did you not read the article you posted?

"A total of 35,691 v-safe participants 16 to 54 years of age identified as pregnant. Injection-site pain was reported more frequently among pregnant persons than among nonpregnant women, whereas headache, myalgia, chills, and fever were reported less frequently. Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). Adverse neonatal outcomes included preterm birth (in 9.4%) and small size for gestational age (in 3.2%); no neonatal deaths were reported. Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic. Among 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, the most frequently reported event was spontaneous abortion (46 cases)."

There were 46 miscarriages reported to VAERS of the 827 completed pregnancies. That's 5.56%. Which seems high...unless you know what the miscarriage rates normally are. Also causation has not been established. Overall, there were 13.9% who lost the pregnancy. However, the "normal" miscarriage rate of "known pregnancies" is 10% to 20% before 20 weeks which the article states was almost all of them. There was one pregnancy loss after 20 weeks.

All of this lines up with known miscarriage and stillbirth rates prior to these vaccinations.

It's a very balanced article. They are clear about what they found, no "safety signals", but clear that additional and longer term study is necessary.

 

[nonobaddog]

I think I’ve posted this before but it’s worth getting exposure.

~35000 pregnant women vaccinated
827 successful pregnancies.

Idk what the normal rate of loss is but that’s a 2% success rate in women that are vaccinated. But the study says right at the top that it’s safe.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8117969/pdf/NEJMoa2104983.pdf

Yeah, maybe if they waited 9 months or so.

 

[rooster]

Did you not read the article you posted?

"A total of 35,691 v-safe participants 16 to 54 years of age identified as pregnant. Injection-site pain was reported more frequently among pregnant persons than among nonpregnant women, whereas headache, myalgia, chills, and fever were reported less frequently. Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). Adverse neonatal outcomes included preterm birth (in 9.4%) and small size for gestational age (in 3.2%); no neonatal deaths were reported. Although not directly comparable, calculated proportions of adverse pregnancy and neonatal outcomes in persons vaccinated against Covid-19 who had a completed pregnancy were similar to incidences reported in studies involving pregnant women that were conducted before the Covid-19 pandemic. Among 221 pregnancy-related adverse events reported to the VAERS, the most frequently reported event was spontaneous abortion (46 cases)."

There were 46 miscarriages reported to VAERS of the 827 completed pregnancies. That's 5.56%. Which seems high...unless you know what the miscarriage rates normally are. Also causation has not been established. Overall, there were 13.9% who lost the pregnancy. However, the "normal" miscarriage rate of "known pregnancies" is 10% to 20% before 20 weeks which the article states was almost all of them. There was one pregnancy loss after 20 weeks.

All of this lines up with known miscarriage and stillbirth rates prior to these vaccinations.

It's a very balanced article. They are clear about what they found, no "safety signals", but clear that additional and longer term study is necessary.

Right only 827 had a successful pregnancy out of 35k that got the vaccine while pregnant. That’s what I’m reading here. Those stats on safety are only measuring the couple of spontaneous abortions. What happened to the other 34k pregnant women that got the vaccine? Why are they not in the successful pregnancy category?

If they were still pregnant at the “end of study” why was there not a follow up to obtain a larger data set? Why start a study with 35k people to make it seem big and then trim your findings down to less than 1k and make a large generalization?

Article is from April so a lack of follow up on the larger data set, if that is what the reason is then this is a flawed study and shouldn’t be used to safe it’s safe for the millions.

 

[HoughMade]

Right only 827 had a successful pregnancy out of 35k that got the vaccine while pregnant. That’s what I’m reading here. Those stats on safety are only measuring the couple of spontaneous abortions. What happened to the other 34k pregnant women that got the vaccine? Why are they not in the successful pregnancy category?

If they were still pregnant at the “end of study” why was there not a follow up to obtain a larger data set? Why start a study with 35k people to make it seem big and then trim your findings down to less than 1k and make a large generalization?

Article is from April so a lack of follow up on the larger data set, if that is what the reason is then this is a flawed study and shouldn’t be used to safe it’s safe for the millions.

Only 827 had completed the pregnancy in any way, shape or form at the time the follow-up data was gathered. Further, there may not be follow-up data on all persons who were initially identified. In fact, that is likely.

The "identified" 35k who were pregnant and were vaccinated. Not all were in the study. It's right there in the 'Results':

"Among 3958 participants enrolled in the v-safe pregnancy registry, 827 had a completed pregnancy, of which 115 (13.9%) resulted in a pregnancy loss and 712 (86.1%) resulted in a live birth (mostly among participants with vaccination in the third trimester). "

So, only 3.9k were in the actual study and only 827 had completed their pregnancies (in any way) at the time the information was gathered for this study.

The study is ongoing.

 

[JCSR]

Now Monkeys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!​

Anthony Fauci’s Freakshow: NIH Conducted Psychological Torture Experiments on Monkeys​

Fauci's Freakshow: NIH Conducted Psychological Torture Experiments on Monkeys

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has spent millions in taxpayer dollars conducting psychological torture experiments on primates.

www.breitbart.com

 

[NKBJ]

Aw Anthony not the monkeys.

 

[BugI02]

Maybe they'll give him Marburg

 

[1DOWN4UP]

Report: 12K Air Force Personnel Reject Orders to Be Vaccinated

Approximately 12,000 Air Force personnel have reportedly refused orders to be vaccinated against the coronavirus despite a mandate.

www.breitbart.com

 

[1DOWN4UP]

 

[printcraft]

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/578448-moderna-chairman-says-booster-could-be-yearly

Moderna Chairman Noubar Afeyan indicated on Tuesday that his company's COVID-19 shot could require yearly boosters.

L O L

As long as there is billions to be made, this will never be over.

 

[1DOWN4UP]

......

 

[1DOWN4UP]

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/578448-moderna-chairman-says-booster-could-be-yearly



L O L

As long as there is billions to be made, this will never be over.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/578448-moderna-chairman-says-booster-could-be-yearly



L O L

As long as there is billions to be made, this will never be over.

There is a reason the Vax cards had 6 proof of vax slots instead of only 1.......