penultimatebro

Important question:

Did they die from COVID-19 or did they with COVID-19?

Italy just revised their numbers and it’s quite a significant difference.

This from May, which is before Delta.

>Not least of which is that no one calls "natural" immunity psuedoscience—it's how the vaccine works.

I’m sure that’s how it was intended to work but the term you’re looking for is artificial immunity or vaccine derived immunity. Unfortunately the vaccines don’t confer immunity so there goes that.

>What happens when we reach a critical mass of health workers quitting?

For not consenting to a vaccination mandate? We’re all about to find out. Can you imagine working on the front lines for over a year to suddenly be discarded like a piece of trash because you won’t take a vaccine (when you are almost certainly already immune)?

>The transmission argument similarly falls short given that the vaccine reduces the odds of you becoming a vector in the first place, or progressing to the point you require state intervention to survive

Speaking of disingenuous... I’m not sure why people gloss over the fact that the vaccines don’t prevent transmission. Why fumble over word games instead of acknowledging the simple fact that you don’t get immunity from the vaccine.

Now follow that train of thought to it’s logical end. Universal forced vaccination of everyone on Earth with passports to boot and the outbreaks still continue.

Well hey at least we have this neato “world ID” (vaccine passport) which couldn’t possibly be used for nefarious means.

>We are already seeing this in action--while natural immunity provides very good protection against reinfection with that strain it doesn't do so well against other strains.

Please post some proof to corroborate any of this. I assume you’re talking about COVID strains here?

>Natural immunity isn’t going to happen, we have seen far too many cases of reinfection with different variants.

Again, source desperately needed here. I’m more than willing to change my take but only with hard data, not sweeping generalizations based on a misunderstanding of how natural immunity works.

You’re comparing traditional vaccines to mRNA vaccines here. An mRNA “vaccine” is closer to a biologic than to a traditional vaccine. We’re told they’re not “gene therapy”, instead the Moderna CEO has called them “information therapy”.

Anyway, I’m rambling. In a nutshell, they shouldn’t be thought of as the same technology because well, they’re not.

There you have it... if one dares to post anything that conflicts with the official narrative, you are a paid shill. Even if that post is literal science like the comment above which is a collection of studies on Ivermectin.

Instead of straight coercion like limiting travel with a passport, I would argue the following is more effective:

- Full liability for vaccine manufacturers

- No censorship of dissenting views

- Open discussion with all views represented instead of suppressed

- Honesty on unvaccinated vs vaccinated case, death numbers

- Following the science instead of what’s convenient for politicians at the moment

Let’s think outside the box a bit here. If we see a few more of these leaks, it’s reasonable to assume that they’re leaked on purpose.

Why? So that vaccination status won’t be private health data anymore, it will slowly work it’s way towards being public information.

With the data public, non-compliers can be harassed, threatened or worse without governments having to lift a finger to oppress them.

But that’s the only argument they have

Yeah, dang morons not getting the not-yet-available booster shot!

I mean, those dang morons not getting the available vaccine which does nothing for transmission of the current viral variant! Eesh, well that doesn’t hold water either...

Ugh this is too complicated, let’s just blame the unvaccinated anyways mmkay?

You were doing so well until the last sentence.

Vaccinated people are just as likely to spread the delta variant. If you disagree, please post your proof. Until then, please stop spreading misinformation.

Thank you EU - Bitcoin transactions weren’t traceable at ALL before.

The vaccinated shed mutations - it’s the conclusion of the paper. They are the petri dishes of which new vaccine derived mutations spawn.

You’re attempting to tie these mutations to only the unvaccinated. They likely shed mutations as well but that’s not what this paper highlights.

Not only can the vaccinated spread the virus but they’re likely making it more pathogenic in the process. See here:

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/info:doi/10.13...

If you haven’t yet, now would be a good time to get completely out of USDT on any exchanges or Celsius/BlockFi/etc

Thank you censorship, or I would have never known about this subreddit.

Been using for years and could never go back to vanilla Firefox. This plus Blockada for Android keeps me under my data caps each month!

Terrorist becomes Domestic Terrorist very easily which is code word for dissident. Imagine being a government and being able to suppress all damaging dissent and free speech? The same thing has been happening for years in the US using the tech companies as proxies.

We conclude that the virus becomes more contagious as it is screened through the vaccinated population and the resultant strain becomes the dominant strain and able to infect the entire population.

We recommend that: 1) universal vaccination should be administered as soon as possible to suppress the generation of virulent mutations;

Wait, I’m being punked.. right?

How is universal vaccination the solution, if it is literally the cause of the more contagious strain?

The logic is a bit circular, no?

Called this last year. This will become more prevalent in the industry as time goes on. Tell your boss you’re moving to San Francisco and if your employer bases your salary on your zip code then your pay should be going UP

Hey maybe the next one won’t give cancer to whoever’s exposed to it. I’m just psyched the soil will able to be grown in eventually.

They really not needed in commercial agriculture either. Farmers know their craft and would do well without it, and wouldn’t have the additional finance burden.

Also Roundup doesn’t particularly work that well anymore. Ask anyone who uses Roundup in a commercial setting about it.

Ugh, you seriously sound like a lawyer from Bayer’s legal department.

Search pubmed for glyphosate for a small taste. Then realize that most of those studies were done ONLY on glyphosate, the solvents and surfactants that glyphosate is mixed with to make Roundup are excluded. Post some studies if you find any juicy ones!

Remember when people were called cranks and tin foil hatters for suggesting Roundup might contribute to health problems?

Unfortunately Monsanto will just wheel out their next toxic poison right after Roundup is banned completely.

What you said was you don’t want to be forced to be around potentially infectious people. So anyone who’s been fully vaccinated and unvaccinated people who are currently infected. The only people to my knowledge who don’t spread are unvaccinated who have been previously infected. Robust natural immunity can be had from previous infection or cross reactive immunity from a previous coronavirus strain.

Back to your last point. If you don’t want germs, I’m not sure an office environment is for you. A 100% vaccinated office will still be susceptible to spreading COVID, especially if the Delta variant takes off like it did in the UK and Israel.

Then you’ll be opting to stay home? If everyone in the office is vaccinated you’ll be around only potentially infectious people.

>Unvaccinated people have made a choice to risk their lives, they don’t get the choice to risk mine.

Doesn’t the vaccine cover for this? You get the vaccine and it reduces your symptoms, making you less likely to end up hospitalized or die. Even vaccinated you can still get infected, get sick from and spread the virus.

Hi again. Deplatforming is censorship. Your example is censorship. I’ll leave the definition here for others and maybe you too if you want to learn what it actually means.

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/896/censorship

I think the need to redefine words like censorship is to make one seem good and necessary and one seem bad and deplorable. So “deplatforming” is now the good censorship and censorship remains the bad. Again see the link to clarify what exactly constitutes censorship. It doesn’t matter if you get it or not.

>Have a miracle cure for COVID?

Nope, just a suppressed treatment which could save lives. If the medical establishment actually cared about health it would be bending over backwards to study it instead of actively suppressing it. All I can do is post the science, here are 60 studies with more than half peer reviewed:

https://ivmmeta.com/

Calling medical doctors and researchers who risk their careers to publish studies backing up potential treatments are not charlatans, they’re heroes.

This response is simply goal post shifting. Censorship is censorship.

Using a recent example: YouTube removes a video of medical Doctors promoting studies of a COVID treatment, one that could save lives. There’s science to back it up, however it’s not science promoted by the medical majority. Thus, it is censored. As a result, people don’t have access to a potentially life saving treatment and will die - this is censorship.

Are there worse examples of this concept happening over the past century? Yes, of course. But censorship leading to the deaths of millions is certainly bad.

Re: #2

https://mobile.twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/14157273544632...

Sorry, thought stuff like this was more well known. They’ve been colluding for quite a while but now it’s so brazenly open the White House press secretary is mentioning it in press conferences.

Is this a new concept to you? Cool!

offers you red pill

Here’s a good starter article: https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/07/op...