To Be Vaccinated or NOT To Be Vaccinated? That is the Question.
Comments
-
Finnish MP Warns All Members of Finnish Parliament that they may Be Intentionally Complicit in Crimes Including Genocide by allowing Toxics Disguised as “Covid Vaccines”
BRILLIANT! 👏🏻🌟
https://tokentube.net/embed?v=3273793332
Because this is very serious, more people have died from vaccinations in the last six months than in the previous 32 years!! And this is just the beginning as spike proteins are toxic to our body.
-
-
Just some more coincidences and bad luck ??????
WHEN WILL PEOPLE WAKE UP INSTEAD OF CONDONING AND APPLAUDING THE CRIMES AGAINST THEM ????
-
Registered deaths (as of 05/28/2021) after Covid-19 vaccinations: current total 5.165
-
-
-
hmn .... anyone waking up yet ??? 😡
-
Norway to pay vaccine damage compensation to AstraZeneca victims
OsloIn Norway, there have been at least three cases of serious side effects from the Oxford-based AstraZeneca vaccine for which financial compensation has been awarded. Dozens of other people affected are waiting for a decision on reactions triggered by the Corona vaccinations. CM
-
Wolfgang,
What is this? Wake up America! Are the vaccines a killing machine? See for yourself. Can @Bill_Coley explain these numbers away? I don’t think so. Please, tell me, what other vaccines given and are there so many deaths or vaccine related cases? CM
PS. The propaganda puppet-masters are at it again with the “Delta variant”. When will it stop? CM
-
-
@C Mc posted:
What is this? Wake up America! Are the vaccines a killing machine? See for yourself. Can @Bill_Coley explain these numbers away? I don’t think so. Please, tell me, what other vaccines given and are there so many deaths or vaccine related cases?
The explanation for the numbers to which you link, CM, is quite simple, and, I must note, easily discovered by a Google search and a bit of common sense.
First, the common sense: IF the death rates associated with the three COVD-19 vaccines were actually as high as the numbers to which you linked suggest, don't you think SOMEBODY in mainstream media would be reporting it? A 2.06% death rate from a vaccine would be a national (and international) emergency. Yet not even the most conservative-leaning, Biden administration-hating media outlets (e.g. Fox News, Newsmax) are reporting one. That in today's politically diverse media landscape, NOT ONE major media outlet is reporting this number or the implications of its apparent magnitude tells us to be wary of investing heavily in the conspiracy theories it spawns.
Now, the Google search: The site to which you link says the numbers of its report come from VAERS. What is VAERS? (Odd, don't you think, that the page to which you linked, CM, doesn't even tell us what VAERS is? The site doesn't even give us that basic information on its home page!) VAERS is the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, which, according to its "About" page, is a "national early warning system to detect possible safety problems in U.S.-licensed vaccines. VAERS is co-managed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)" that receives reports of possible - underscore "possible" - side effects of vaccines.
ALSO on the VAER's "About" page, we find this brief, but important note: "VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem, but is especially useful for detecting unusual or unexpected patterns of adverse event reporting that might indicate a possible safety problem with a vaccine."
So VAERS data can't tell us whether the "adverse events" it reports were the result of vaccinations. That sounds like something we ought to keep in mind. As is the fact, according to THIS PAGE on the VAERS site, that "VAERS reports can be submitted voluntarily by anyone, including healthcare providers, patients, or family members. Reports vary in quality and completeness. They often lack details and sometimes can have information that contains errors."
So, we have to take some care when we interpret VAERS data.
But the data interpretation guide page on the VAERS site just cited gives us additional relevant information about the limitations of its numbers: "When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event."
So the source of the data from which the site to which you linked apparently assembled its report of a 2.06% COVID vaccination death rate says there are limitations to its numbers, which must be interpreted with care. A Google search for more info on VAERS data led me to this factcheck.org report from March of this year (updated in May of this year) which notes that VAERS data don't show causation and reveals the 2,509 death reports submitted to VAERS as of March 29 of this year - deaths whose link to a vaccination are NOT established by the VAERS system - represented 0.0017% of those who had received a COVID-19 vaccine.
AT BEST, then, the VAERS data reported by the site to which you linked tell us that SOMEBODY - healthcare professional, family member, vaccine recipient, or other - reported side effects that MIGHT have been caused by a COVID-19 vaccine, vaccines from which AT WORST, about two one-thousandths of one percent of recipients died (not 2.09%, as suggested by the data to which you linked). But since VAERS data do not show causation, we have no rational basis on which to conclude the vaccine death rate is even 0.0017%.
Are there data that DO provide a rational basis upon which to base conclusions about the safety and efficacy of COVID vaccines? I think so. For example THIS REPORT offers the following data points:
- Of the 130 people who died of COVID in the state of Maryland during the month of June, 0.0% (none) had been vaccinated.
- In Maryland, 95% of new COVID cases and 93% of new COVID hospitalizations are of unvaccinated people.
- National data suggest that 99% of the people with "severe" COVID-related disease are unvaccinated. To that point, 99% of COVID deaths in the U.S. in June were among unvaccinated people.
- Preliminary CDC data show that 99.5% of COVID deaths in the last six months were of unvaccinated people.
- California data show that in the first six months of 2021, 0.04% of fully vaccinated people (8,669 out of 20 million) contracted COVID. Of that 0.04%, only 7.5% - or 0.003% of ALL fully vaccinated persons - were hospitalized, and 0.8% (or 0.0004% of the fully vaccinated) died.
If you ever found data that reported a 99.9996% death rate among the California fully vaccinated, we all know that you would post a link to those data in these forums, probably with a "Can @Bill_Coley explain these numbers away? I don’t think so" challenge attached. Well, I found data that report a 99.9996% survival rate among the California fully vaccinated, a 100% survival rate in Maryland, and a 99+% survival rate nationwide, which I guess means I have to ask: Can @C Mc explain those numbers away? I don't think so.
-
First, the common sense: IF the death rates associated with the three COVD-19 vaccines were actually as high as the numbers to which you linked suggest, don't you think SOMEBODY in mainstream media would be reporting it? A 2.06% death rate from a vaccine would be a national (and international) emergency. Yet not even the most conservative-leaning, Biden administration-hating media outlets (e.g. Fox News, Newsmax) are reporting one. That in today's politically diverse media landscape, NOT ONE major media outlet is reporting this number or the implications of its apparent magnitude tells us to be wary of investing heavily in the conspiracy theories it spawns.
looking at german main stream media, it is obvious why none of them reports any info critical to the vaccination politics of the government ... 😉 observing with common sense what and how they report shows the obvious ...
-
It is quite obvious that one wouldn't report (or allow) information to be released of deaths when he or she is trying to get a person ( or people) to do something. Why would a drug dealer preach against drugs while simultaneously, trying to sell drugs?
@Bill_Coley said:
Well, I found data that report a 99.9996% survival rate among the California fully vaccinated, a 100% survival rate in Maryland, and a 99+% survival rate nationwide, which I guess means I have to ask: Can @C Mc explain those numbers away? I don't think so.
Not so fast! "There are facts, lies, ...lies, and statistics". CM
-
@C Mc posted:
It is quite obvious that one wouldn't report (or allow) information to be released of deaths when he or she is trying to get a person ( or people) to do something. Why would a drug dealer preach against drugs while simultaneously, trying to sell drugs?
We have independent media outlets in the U.S. - constitutionally independent media outlets. Exactly who or what wouldn't report (or allow) information to be released about COVID deaths? And if they/it wouldn't report or allow information about COVID deaths to be released, how do you explain the the fact that those same outlets/sources HAVE ALREADY reported/released information about 600,000+ COVID deaths in the U.S. and more than four million deaths worldwide? If they wouldn't release COVID death information, how do we know about all those COVID deaths?
Not so fast! "There are facts, lies, ...lies, and statistics".
Your cliche is pointless, hypocritical, and unsupported:
- It's pointless because you don't tell us what conclusion(s) we're supposed draw about the statistics I cited. So all we know is that you think there are "facts, lies, ... lies, and statistics," which is an assertion of the obvious with which none of us will disagree. We all know there are such things as facts, lies, and statistics. But so what?
- Your cliche is hypocritical because it denigrates statistics, even though the supporting evidence of YOUR PREVIOUS POST - the one to which I responded and in which you expressed doubt that I could "explain...away" the "numbers" to which you had linked - was a bunch of statistics from THIS SITE. Are you now saying "not so fast!" to the statistics of your own post, as well?
- And your cliche is unsupported because it offers nothing other than its own seven words - that is, no "facts," no "lies," and no "statistics" - to defend whatever conclusion(s) about the statistics I provided you believe are warranted... even though you chose not to name them.
Challenge the accuracy of the statistics I cited, CM, but please do so with something more consequential than a seven word meaningless cliche. For example, provide us with links to "facts" (not "lies," and surely not any "statistics"!) that demonstrate the inaccuracy of my numbers. If you can't do so - SPOILER ALERT: You can't...because no such "facts" exist - acknowledge that statistics can be, and in the case of my previous post, ARE, "facts."
-
We have independent media outlets in the U.S. - constitutionally independent media outlets. Exactly who or what wouldn't report (or allow) information to be released about COVID deaths?
We supposedly - according to constitutional regulations - have independent media in Germany. So what ?? "Constitutionally" seemingly - by now, rather obviously - means little or nothing compared to "economically, corruptly, monetarily, etc." ...
And the people sleep on ... and become the stooges helpers for their slave masters.
-
hmn hmn .... in the course of a little time, more previously damned conspiracy theories have turned out to have been "actualities" ... but then, if you like to rather not take a look, keep doing it. Waking up will only become more hurtful.
-
-
-
Vaccination campaigns are followed by dramatic rises in mortality
“Since this period, vaccination campaigns have spread worldwide even to countries where covid was not present. And everywhere they have been followed by a dramatic rise in new infections and mortality for several weeks or months.” — Dr. Gerard Delepine— The detailed evidence is provided here: https://www.globalresearch.ca/covid-19-vaccines-lead-to-new-infections-and-mortality-the-evidence/5746393?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles
-
Apparently, the grave is ALSO where your replies to my request of you from twelve days ago will lie until Jesus returns.
You'll undoubtedly recall that in response to your post of a link to statistics assembled at THIS SITE, a post at the end of which you asked whether I could "explain those numbers away," I provided a variety of other statistics which not only explained the numbers to which you linked, but also demonstrated the high efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines and the great risks of not getting one of them.
In response to my post and without supporting evidence, you claimed 1) information about deaths would not be released, and 2) "There are facts, lies, ...lies, and statistics." In response that fact-free post, I asked you - again, this was twelve days ago - to challenge the statistics I had cited "with something more consequential than a seven word meaningless cliche." To-date - in the twelve days since - you have not replied.
If it's the case that you don't intend to respond to my post, CM, it certainly won't be the first time. You have a well-established practice of calling me out on issues (e.g. Christology and COVID), but then refusing to respond when I answer your call. You certainly have every right to call people out, then refuse to engage their responses, but don't you think common courtesy urges you to at least acknowledge that you're doing so?
You called me out, BY NAME! I answered your challenge directly and with data harvested from sites to which I linked. You responded with a seven word cliche. I then called YOU out, and you've answered with silence. How about a post that says, "Bill, you challenged me to support my position with something more than those seven words. I respect your right to make such a request, but I am not going to comply with it. Those seven words were my final word about the subject I called you out on"?
-
@Bill Coley quotes @CM:
"The grave is where the deceased is until Jesus returns".
Bill, isn't the statement above accurate and correct? I am sure you agree with it.
On another point, I respond to any post at my choice of time and number of posts. I shouldn't anticipate any shaming, blaming, or force from another poster for exercising my prerogatives. This is one of the rights these forums afford me. Oh, Bill, is the "rule," "criticize ideas and not people" is still in vogue here in CD?
-
@C Mc posted:
Bill, isn't the statement above accurate and correct? I am sure you agree with it.
I pasted your assertion about the location of the deceased until Jesus returns into this thread because my intended use of it would not have been on-topic in its original thread. If I decide to offer an on-topic response to your assertion, I'll do so in its own thread, not this one.
On another point, I respond to any post at my choice of time and number of posts. I shouldn't anticipate any shaming, blaming, or force from another poster for exercising my prerogatives. This is one of the rights these forums afford me. Oh, Bill, is the "rule," "criticize ideas and not people" is still in vogue here in CD?
I'm not seeking to shame, blame, or force you to do anything, CM. Your practice of calling me out in these forums, then refusing to respond to my answers to your calls is so long-standing by now, that I have no expectation of your replies. I acknowledge that I feel great frustration with your practice, but that frustration is on me, not you. My best course of action when in future posts you call me out is not to respond, and that will be my approach to your challenges going forward.
And the "Criticize ideas, not people" expectation is very much "in vogue here in CD." When you revisit my criticism, you'll discover that I didn't criticize you personally. I criticized 1) your claims in a previous post; and 2) your practice of calling me out, but then refusing to respond to my replies. I also suggested that "common courtesy" urges you to let me know when you're not going to respond to my replies. NONE of those was a criticism of you personally; each was a criticism of, or a recommendation about, your posting behavior. And none of them is likely to be repeated since I have decided no longer to engage your posts due to your long-standing practice of not engaging my replies.
I hope that was clear.
-
FWIW
"ONE CAN'T HAVE ITS CAKE AND EAT IT TOO". Especially with a toothless rule like "criticize ideas and not people". It has a hole so large, one can drive a bus through it when it comes to enforcement here at CD. This rule, at best here in CD, is a "Rorschach inkblot". CM
-
The Covid Vaccine Is Now Causing Its Own Pandemic
According to this news report—https://sputniknews.com/us/202107301083490458-delta-covid-19-variant-shed-by-vaccinated-people-spreads-like-chickenpox-cdc-document-suggests/ —an internal CDC document has concluded that Covid vaccinated people shed the delta variant and spread it as easy as Chickenpox.
So what is the CDC’s solution? A call for universal vaccination as the best tool against the delta variant.
In other words, the low grade morons in charge of the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend fighting the outbreak by vaccinating more people with a vaccine that does not protect against the delta variant but does cause vaccinated people to spread the virus by shedding!
What we have here is medical incompetence in service to vaccine profits and, little doubt, hidden agendas.
Why Is a Toxic Vaccine Being Mandated?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I suppose sputniknews.com or PC Roberts must be liars ... and the official story tellers and their "Corona religion" disciples are "the goodie two shoes"??
-
TIME FOR ANOTHER OF MY OCCASIONAL REMINDERS OF THE FALSEHOODS AND OTHER FAILURES OF YOUR POSTS ON SOCIAL AND POLICY MATTERS, WOLFGANG:
@Wolfgang posted:
I suppose sputniknews.com or PC Roberts must be liars ... and the official story tellers and their "Corona religion" disciples are "the goodie two shoes"??
Did you actually read the sputniknews.com article? I'm not asking whether you read PC Roberts' summary of the sputniknews.com article! I'm asking whether you read the original source. I did and found nothing inaccurate in it. PC Roberts, however and to no objective reader's surprise, inaccurately and misleadingly summarized it.
Roberts claims the sputniknews.com article reports that "an internal CDC document has concluded that Covid vaccinated people shed the delta variant and spread it as easy as Chickenpox," which means, Roberts contends, the CDC's recommendation is that we "[fight] the outbreak by vaccinating more people with a vaccine that does not protect against the delta variant but does cause vaccinated people to spread the virus by shedding!"
Sounds ominous, doesn't it? The vaccine doesn't protect people against the Delta variant, and in fact causes them to spread the variant as easily as chickenpox. Lions and tigers and bears, O MY!!!!!!!!!!
Here's what the sputniknews.com article actually says (emphasis added):
- "The Delta COVID-19 strain spreads as easily as chickenpox, with fully vaccinated people also transmitting the virus, The Washington Post has reported, citing an internal document from the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), expected to be published later on Friday. The transmissibility of the Delta variant is almost as high as chickenpox, with each infected person, on average, infecting eight or nine others, according to the document." --- That is, it's the variant that spreads as easily as chickenpox; the vaccine has no role in its spread other than it doesn't appear mitigate it. How do we know?...
- "Fully vaccinated people can transmit the virus as well as unvaccinated people, it also said." --- The applicable term of art here is "viral load," the amount of virus in an infected person's nasal pharynx. The alarming change reported in the CDC's report (read it HERE) is that the viral load in vaccinated people who contract what's called a "breakthrough infection" from the Delta variant is as high as the viral load in unvaccinated people who contract COVID. Prior to the Delta variant, the viral load in vaccinated people with breakthrough COVID infections was much lower than in unvaccinated people, and hence, they were much less likely to spread the virus to others. With the Delta variant, however, higher viral loads mean higher risks of viral spread.
- So what good is vaccination if, due to the roughly equivalent viral loads they carry, vaccinated people can spread the variant as easily as non-vaccinated people ? Let the sputniknews.com article tell us: "Vaccination, however, provides substantial protection against the virus, the document added. The disease control centre called for universal mask requirements and vaccination as the best tool against the Delta variant." --- Existing vaccines STILL protect vaccinated people from serious illness, hospitalization, and death, and give their recipients FAR, FAR, FAR better protection from those outcomes than unvaccinated people have. Here's a chart from the CDC document cited by the sputniknews.com article:
Notice the great reductions in risk of getting the virus, needing hospitalization for or dying from the virus that vaccinated people enjoy. That reduction STILL exists, even though with the Delta variant, vaccinated people CAN more easily spread the virus to others.
So the sputniknews.com article does NOT say current vaccines do not protect against the Delta variant of COVID-19. Vaccines remain extraordinarily effective in protecting people from serious illness, hospitalization, and death from the virus. No, vaccines don't provide 100% protection from breakthrough infections, but that's not at all uncommon among vaccines!
The remainder of Roberts' article is filled with medical conspiracy theory falsehoods that I have neither the time nor the temperament to debunk.
And to answer your questions, Wolfgang:
- Does this closer examination of the sputniknews.com article demonstrate that the media outlet a liar? No. To my reading, their work is factual and accurate.
- Does this closer examination of PC Roberts' essay demonstrate that HE'S a liar? No. The many falsehoods and conspiracy theories in his work only demonstrate that he's PC Roberts.
Post edited by Bill_Coley on -
So the sputniknews.com article does NOT say current vaccines do not protect against the Delta variant of COVID-19. Vaccines remain extraordinarily effective in protecting people from serious illness, hospitalization, and death from the virus. No, vaccines don't provide 100% protection from breakthrough infections, but that's not at all uncommon among vaccines!
I am surprised how anyone can know that vaccines actually do what is claimed ... how do they prove what doesn't happen or doesn't exist?? I know a few double vaccinated people who were positive afterwards, said to have been infected, quaranteened, etc ... something they had NOT been before their vaccinations ... what does that actually show about the vaccine?
You know, I have a very effective "vaccine" against elephants causing damages to my house .... it's rather small, made of yellow plastic- I only need to pick it up and show it at the window ... thus far 100% effective, no elephants have even dared to come close .
-
@Wolfgang posted:
I am surprised how anyone can know that vaccines actually do what is claimed ... how do they prove what doesn't happen or doesn't exist?? I know a few double vaccinated people who were positive afterwards, said to have been infected, quaranteened, etc ... something they had NOT been before their vaccinations ... what does that actually show about the vaccine?
I don't know about the vaccination protocols in Germany, but in the U.S. there are detailed records of who's been vaccinated. To receive my two shots, I had to present ID and, for the second shot, the card on which a label reported the date, time, and location at which I received the first shot. So at least in this country, we know who and how many have been vaccinated. Given the precision of modern medicine, and the obvious need to prevent people from receiving more than the specified number of doses (one or two, depending on the vaccine) I can't imagine that Germany hasn't maintained similarly detailed records.
A second way we know who's been vaccinated is from the testimony of patients and their families. I don't have much regard for anecdotal evidence, but our media have published numerous stories such as THIS ONE about a 39 year-old father of five who from his hospital bed before he died sent his fiancé a text that read, "I should have gotten the damn vaccine."
And we also have the testimony of doctors treating COVID patients in hospital emergency rooms, intensive care units, and regular medical floors. To a person, those doctors say the VAST majority of their patients - many times, their testimony is that ALL of their current patients - are unvaccinated. HERE'S A STORY from mid-July that pegs the unvaccinated proportion of COVID hospitalizations at 99%.
There is no doubt - none - that the people hospitalized for and dying from COVID are overwhelmingly the unvaccinated. Here's a chart presented by the New York Times today. Notice that the death rate in counties with high rates of vaccination has remained relatively flat in the last month or so since the Delta variant emerged, while the death rate in counties with low rates of vaccination has risen dramatically:
Here's another chart from the same Times story, this one displaying the COVID case rate (that is, ALL reported COVID cases, not just hospitalizations and deaths) in counties with high and low rates of vaccination. Notice that while the Delta variant has had a dramatic impact in both groups of counties, the amount and rate of increase is far greater in counties with low vaccination rates:
There is no doubt - NONE - that vaccinations save lives and reduce both case numbers and symptom severity.
And I can't close this reply without noting that your response to my previous post makes no mention of the substance of that post's critique of the PC Roberts essay to which you linked earlier in this thread. That's the least surprising outcome I'll encounter today, of course. You almost never even acknowledge, let alone engage, the substance of my take downs of your conspiracy theories... because you can't... because your conspiracy theories are false and/or misleading in exactly the way(s) my posts demonstrate them to be... and for literally years, your chosen response has been to ignore the debunked ones and move on to the next ones.
-
These variants are as much propaganda non-sense as any previous variations ... should I predict what will happen next? It is as clear as day ... the supposed long term "Covid vaccine" protection will "unfortunately" (because of new variant) have to be refreshed at least once a year and preferably every 6 months .... Announcements to that effect by politicians and parliamentary "experts" coupled with short statements about that "possibility" by Biontec pharma have already been made in Germany.
Modern medical expertise comes from politicians and their masters, and the solution is vaccination... something humanity did without for all of its history until some rather dubious dudes (like Robert Koch) came up with a very clever idea (totally contrary to natural and godly design of the working of the human body) to satisfy greed.
The true solution to counter infections is by having the body's defense system strengthened and wisely conduct your lifestyle ... it is not in weakening your defense system by toxic vaccines, believing the lies of big pharma. Do people normally think it to be wise to weaken their body to get stronger? how about cutting your finger tips so that once they heal the skin at the tips will be stronger and withstand possible future cuts better? Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? Maybe if the media and politics would promote it as the newest medical revelation?
-
@Wolfgang posted:
These variants are as much propaganda non-sense as any previous variations ... should I predict what will happen next? It is as clear as day ... the supposed long term "Covid vaccine" protection will "unfortunately" (because of new variant) have to be refreshed at least once a year and preferably every 6 months .... Announcements to that effect by politicians and parliamentary "experts" coupled with short statements about that "possibility" by Biontec pharma have already been made in Germany.
No. Virus variants aren't propaganda or big pharma business plans. Variants are identified by what's called their "genome sequence." As the article found at that link reports (emphasis added),
"Mutations are changes in the genetic code of a virus that naturally occur over time when an animal or person is infected. While a certain amount of genetic variation is expected to occur as SARS-CoV-2 spreads, it’s important to monitor circulating viruses for key mutation(s) that happen in important regions of the genome. Many mutations do not affect the virus’s ability to spread or cause disease because they do not alter the major proteins involved in infection; eventually these are outcompeted by variants with mutations that are more beneficial for the virus."
That's science, not propaganda.
Modern medical expertise comes from politicians and their masters, and the solution is vaccination... something humanity did without for all of its history until some rather dubious dudes (like Robert Koch) came up with a very clever idea (totally contrary to natural and godly design of the working of the human body) to satisfy greed.
Look at this chart:
What in your view explains the precipitous decline in weekly COVID cases in the U.S. that began in January or February of this year? Was it what you call the "natural and godly design of the working of the human body" finally kicking in after nearly a year of death and serious illness? Was it in your view just a coincidence that at the very same time weekly cases started to fall in the U.S., the nation's distribution of COVID vaccines kicked into high gear?
The true solution to counter infections is by having the body's defense system strengthened and wisely conduct your lifestyle ... it is not in weakening your defense system by toxic vaccines, believing the lies of big pharma. Do people normally think it to be wise to weaken their body to get stronger? how about cutting your finger tips so that once they heal the skin at the tips will be stronger and withstand possible future cuts better? Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it? Maybe if the media and politics would promote it as the newest medical revelation?
Lifestyles HAD to change in response to COVID: We wore masks, practiced social distancing, avoided congregate settings, and washed our hands and sanitized surfaces more frequently. Those lifestyle changes provided a significant measure of protection. I, for one, didn't contract COVID while practicing them. But if we wanted to lose any of those lifestyle changes, we needed to get vaccinated. Since I've been fully vaccinated, I've not masked (though that might soon change, given the Delta variant's virulence), I've stood closer to people, and have felt freer to be in congregate settings. Plus, I haven't felt weakened in any way, nor have I ever thought "big pharma" lied to me about their products (their clinical trial results among 30,000-40,000 people have proven accurate among the hundreds of millions of doses distributed across the U.S.).
There is NO scientific basis for your comments, Wolfgang. None.
And in yet another response to one of my take downs of your posted falsehoods, you refuse to acknowledge, let alone engage, the substance of my post. We both know why: The charts and data to which I draw your attention say exactly what I say they say and lay waste to your conspiracy theories. In such a circumstance, your only choice is move on to another falsehood.
That said, I can never distance myself from the observation that over the years, when other CD posters haven't responded directly to an argument in one of your posts, you called them out in your very next post, making clear to them that they hadn't answered the question(s) you asked. How someone who documents others' failures to engage his posts directly has for years so frequently and consistently practiced THE VERY SAME BEHAVIOR (but on steroids!) in his responses to another CD poster is just astonishing to me.
-
what does this chart really show? number people actually sick? number people hospitalized? what kind of "case" did they have? symptom free (formerly called "healthy") people included? how were these cases found and determined? did people actually see a doctor or hospital to seek help and were then reported and registered in the count?
I don't expect answers ... I know the details of how the official "RKI (Robert-Koch-Institute)" numbers for Germany are collected and how their experts count and subsequently report as government department to the public ... I doubt it would be different in the USA.
You know that 100 of 100.000 equal 0.01%, 400 => 0.04% ... really deadly dangerous? really severe increase? there are plenty of other real health threads with figures much higher than 0,006%-0,4% Why all the campaign and panic propaganda and restrictions for the 99.96% of the population totally unaffected?
I suggest to use a more appropriate standard instead of the "propaganda" purpose chart as it is. Also, anyone not infected by political panic virus will notice that the curve shows essentially the same as the annual fall/winter season flu over many years ...
But keep believing "experts" and mass media information ... whatever suits one's fancy
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
