My name is The Oracle.
Ask around.
When will those effects of destroying my innards will show up? It is already 3.5 months after 2nd shot, and nothing yet.
Think of the brain damage. Always the brain damage.
Posted on 06/07/2021 9:09:26 PM PDT by familyop
Early evidence about B.1.617 and a related variant, B.1.618 - which also emerged in India - also suggested that vaccines and other common COVID treatments may not work against these strains...The NYU researchers found that the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines both neutralize spike proteins from B.1.617 and B.1.618. While these neutralizing responses are not as strong as they would be against older coronavirus strains, the vaccines still provide much more protection than a prior coronavirus infection would. The results show that the vaccines are 'well within the cushion effect of the capability to protect against infection...
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
I hope the therapeutics work well for you. I just do not want to be swallowing pills daily. 2 shots of vaccine requiring couple of minutes each is my preference. Now 3-1/2 months after 2nd shot of vaccine, I am as energetic as ever and zero side effects. I would not ne averse to one booster shot every year.
But if your prefer to swallow pills on regular basis, I respect your choice.
My name is The Oracle.
Ask around.
When will those effects of destroying my innards will show up? It is already 3.5 months after 2nd shot, and nothing yet.
Think of the brain damage. Always the brain damage.
I have started swallowing vitamins daily. I haven’t had a cold sore in over 20 months.
Horse wormer doesn’t prevent transmission and doesn’t drop the RT below one causing the virus to die off. If it is successful the person is already am active vector shedding virus to everyone around them. There is loads of data that shows both Pfizer and Moderna prevent symptomatic and asymptomatic infection 94% of the time. That means a 94% reduction in the RT value vs unvaccinated people as it is impossible for someone to shed virus if they are neither symptomatic nor asymptomatic. For the simpletons Pfizer and Moderna have proven data to state they prevent 94% of people from ever catching corona in the first place. That is the key difference the vaccines will end the chains of transmission something that HQZ nor invermectin can ever do when administered to already symptomatic people who are by definition contagious and shedding virus.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Good morning.
Paragraphs and punctuation are your friends...Please use them.
Your screen name indicates you may have a law degree or be working on one. Hmmm not sure how that gives you the medical expertise to state facts without backing them up and then go on to call people who disagree with your unsubstantiated facts “simpletons.”
For the “simpletons,” please provide links that support your various claims so a decent discussion/debate can be had.
BTW, you refer to Ivermectin as “horse wormer.” Though it is used as a medication for various animals including horses, Ivermectin is used world-wide by humans for a variety of conditions so let’s not try to bias the discussion here eh?
Looking forward to those links...
And thank you for being a participant in the long-range trials (currently for which there is no data). BTW, did you win a prize for getting the jab? I hope so as there are Lots of offers being presented...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Your information is false, but it is written in such a confusing manner that it's a little hard to isolate specific ideas you're mistakenly asserting.
Ivermectin is FDA approved for use in humans and has been used around the world, safely, for many years to treat scabies, river blindness, and other parasitic diseases. It's also used in animals. Many drugs sold or dispensed by veterinarians for the treatment of illness in domestic animals are generic equivalents of human drugs.
Contrary to what you have said, the 'vaccines' don't prevent infection and spread. When Pfizer and Moderna filed with the FDA, they stated they didn't have data on the impacts the 'vaccines' may have on mortality and spread:
-i.e. there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:
Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55
Pregnant or lactating mothers
Auto-immune conditions
Immunocompromised individuals
No data on transmission of covid
No data on preventing mortality from covid
No data on duration of protection from covid
If you want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by Pfizer and Moderna for their Emergency Use Authorization, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.
As to 'preventing spread,' the vaccine companies only tested 'protection from infection' for 2 months. Those infected a few days after this window would ordinarily decrease efficacy stats but were not counted.
Also, Fauci, the CDC and the companies all stated that the vaccine would not prevent infection or spread but would instead lessen severity.
This was the party line for a long time when the 'vaccines' were first introduced, and now it 'breaks through' updated talking points in the MSM sometimes.
The way most people think of vaccines is pretty simple: you get vaccinated, and your immune system is primed and trained to fight off the invisible intruder in question, be it virus or bacteria. If you’re protected, you can’t be infected, and if you’re not infected, then you can’t spread it to anyone else.And that’s true most of the time. But not all vaccines work that way, and it’s not actually what the two COVID-19 vaccines authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—made by Moderna and Pfizer-BioNtech—are designed to do. Their effectiveness is measured by how well they protect people against moderate to severe COVID-19 disease—not how well they prevent infection or spread of the COVID-19 virus itself." Do Vaccines Stop Spread of COVID-19? What You Need to Know | Time BY ALICE PARK FEBRUARY 11, 2021, TIME.COM
After administration began, Fauci, the CDC and other shills all started saying, "We're seeing evidence...." This is an otherwise laughable tactic. It's not scientific evidence if you advise public health policy on anecdotal cherry picked data 'we saw'.
The 'vaccine' companies failed to adequately test these 'shots' with double-blind trials (because people with inflammation and headaches were 'unblinded), of sufficient size (too few enrolled) and sufficient length (2 to 3 months is a joke) and sufficient rigor (e.g., fudged data that didn't fit their expectations re negative PCR tests).
So now Fauci and the CDC have dropped scientific rigor through the floor and are digging. "We're seeing evidence..." is the scientific equivalent of "we're providing biased talking points as if they are proof of something."
They do this to a degree I find criminal. The 'shots' were never tested on pregnant women, but the head of the CDC and Fauci encourage those women to get the shots because "We're not aware of any evidence...." You see - they are preparing a "What did they know and when did they know it" defense, at the expense of pregnant women and their unborn babies.
The following article shows that the raw data from the companies' trials were never released, and is now needed to prove their protective claims, as trial documents basically admit they opportunistically interpreted results when a person appeared to have a respiratory illness but they had a negative PCR test result. This could ultimately mean 'efficacy' was never above 20% during the ridiculously short 2-month trial.
Peter Doshi: Pfizer and Moderna’s “95% effective” vaccines—we need more details and the raw data January 4, 2021
bmj.com ^ | January 4, 2021 | Peter Doshi
Also, let's pause to consider how invalid these 'vaccine trials' were given they relied upon the invalid PCR test, which cannot detect the presence of the virus, nor the Covid illness.
JD_UTDallas said: "For the simpletons Pfizer and Moderna have proven data to state they prevent 94% of people from ever catching corona in the first place."
Ah. You embarrass yourself here. But you are not alone as I've seen reporters and medical staff relay the same ridiculous error. It's being shared in the MSM because the CDC and Fauci intentionally want the public to believe this to be the case.
In reality, Pfizer said, after its little two-month trial, that infection rate was .93 of one percent in the unvaccinated, and .05 of one percent in the vaccinated for two months. They can't say what the efficacy rates are beyond that 2-month period.
In both instances, the chances of contracting what they deemed Covid, without using a valid test, was less than 1 percent. For Pfizer's data, both vaxxed and unvaxxed had a 99% chance of not catching Covid.
You need to study up if you're going to go around calling others simpletons for understanding the science better than you do.
Here's a thread to help you understand the difference between RR and ARR efficacy rates.
The vaccine companies never tested who was and who was not shedding viruses, or the billions of spike proteins produced in response to the 'vaccines'. Therefore, your assertions about shedding are fiction.
The vaccines do not 'end the chain of transmission'. However, being infected and recovering from Covid imparts lasting immunity, and that should 'end the chain'.
The risks of 'vaccinations' pile up with every injection. The CDC/Fauci are assuring the public that they'll need booster shots to 'maintain' protection (reduction in severity of infections).
The vaccine 'breakthrough' rate is climbing even though the CDC has elected not to collect most of the cases, proving their assertions of 'vaccine' efficacy and reduction in severity are false.
Here's a study which seems to indicate adverse reactions to the Covid 'vaccines' result in the 'vaccine taking more lives than it saves.
Calculating Vaccine Effectiveness in Ontario From December 14, 2020 - April 17, 2021
docs.google.com ^ | June 4, 2021 | Koen Swinkels
Posted on 6/8/2021, 9:40:48 AM by ransomnote
Something is very wrong with the Covid 'vaccines'.
You need to study up if you're going to go around calling others simpletons for understanding the science better than you do.
Ha. Another superlative, thorough, and indisputable beat down.
You'd think these mutts would shut their yap after being so massively stomped on, but noooo.
They jump right back n their dead and brutalized horse and charge on.
#Dracarys
(I read your long rebuttal posts word for word hoping to run across gems like I quoted above. You never disappoint).
However, what Ivermectin and other prophylactic treatments DO do when administered appropriately, is allow the person to achieve natural immunity to the disease without nearly the risk of death or long term complication as if they never used it.
That gives the person far better natural immunity than any so-called *vaccine* can or does, considering the breakthrough rates we've been seeing.
That way actual, true herd immunity can be gained by the population without injecting risky, experimental substances into people who are lining up to be human guinea pigs.
I'm giving you Fauci's job.
What will we do with all these newly minted vax mutants?
The Island of Dr Moreau is too small.
Besides, no vaccine prevents anyone from catching a virus. There is simply no way to prevent exposure to a virus and from it entering the body.
What they do do, if they work properly, is to cause the immune system to recognize the virus and defeat it BEFORE it makes you sick because the immune system has been primed, so to speak.
And natural immunity is better and superior to vaccines, otherwise there would not be the constant need for boosters.
But there's no money or power in natural immunity.
So, nah.
#VaxItUp
Ka-ching!
You nailed it.
It’s ALWAYS about the money.
If you're looking for the chief comorbidity of vaccinated children, you'll find that it is their parents.
So, you do not believe in parental rights?
Going with Latin, we have Homo Sapiens. How about Homo Stultus.
“Vaccine”
LMAO
It really is disgusting how fear has driven the consumption of Kool-Aid among FReepers.
I simply don’t have the will to contribute combatting the idiocy in this thread. Thanks for the ping.
#AlwaysLearning
#ThankQ
In Greek mythology, Stentor (Ancient Greek: Στέντωρ; gen.: Στέντορος) was a herald of the Greek forces during the Trojan War. He is mentioned briefly in Homer's Iliad in which Hera in the guise of Stentor, whose "voice was as powerful as fifty voices of other men" encourages the Greeks to fight.
Buck up and stay in the fight, patriot.
We must not let ignorance win they day. That is a win for the Derp State and a loss for America.
There are many battlefields in the Silent War. This is one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.