Posted on 06/18/2021 12:47:08 AM PDT by wannabegeek
No, you’re a troll.
When you get caught trolling (and you were) I call you on it.
You tried to slide in a “Because SCIENCE!”™ piece of propaganda, posing it as relevant and serious research.
If I hadn’t flamed the crap out of you and taken it to pieces (remember, you were posting it for ransomnote to try to discredit her), you’d have wrenched your own shoulder out of its socket patting yourself on the back over it.
I also seem to recall you posted one of those two studies to 2trollprotectstherest. “Was I a good drone, master?”
You appear to think people on the threads don’t notice your crosstalk and collusion with the trolls who arrived earlier.
My dermatologist tells me to get it which makes me question her mental aptitude.
methinks a plastic surgeon or orthopedic surgeon, maybe even a neurologist would know more about “vaccines” than a dermatologist../s
I post my own facts and research. If you already posted the paper that I posted, I didn't see it. In the future, please ping me if you post any papers or scientific sources. If you don't or won't I'll assume you have none.
If I hadn’t flamed the crap out of you and taken it to pieces (remember, you were posting it for ransomnote to try to discredit her)
I assumed it was a he. No wonder the rest of you circle the wagons. Very chivalrous of you. No I merely pointed out "her" labeling of any study "she" doesn't like as Gates foundation funded.
Yes, you did point out very cogently that three people and no controls is not a study. But you have yet to post your sources of spike protein amounts in anyone. Instead you post your calculation like 100 million spike proteins per ml of blood. I point out that the inject 25,000 times more spike proteins into mice to get a negative effect.
If you had any scientific chops at all you would point out that's a standard toxicology test, to inject a large amount, look for adverse reactions and extrapolate the danger to smaller amounts.,
Because unlike you, I am am scientific although as you pointed out, I sometimes overlook things like the three person study. Unlike you I don't resort to innuendo about dangers. I am open minded, I believe there are some dangers in all vaccines and more in these new ones. But I want the facts. Even your facts if you present some.
You're a liar or bone-crushingly stupid.
Read the paper.
IF you can.
They were not vastly overdosing with spike protein and then waving around the results "OMG spike protein bad!" as you falsely accuse them of.
They already knew the spike protein was bad; they were trying to suss out the inflammatory pathways by which the clotting occurred.
If you'd bothered to read the paper, troll, you'd have seen that the first half of their experiment was in TEST TUBES.
If you were trying to discredit it as applicable, you'd have used that.
But even more telling, the 2nd half, they were using mice infused with HUMAN transgenic ACE2 receptor cells.
At this point, it's clear they're not trying to "prove" the spike is dangerous.
But you have yet to post your sources of spike protein amounts in anyone. Instead you post your calculation like 100 million spike proteins per ml of blood.
Nice lie. I said a billion. In your response to where I said a billion, you said you checked my numbers, and they are correct. Post YOUR work. I already posted mine in a post before you mentioned anything.
If you had any scientific chops at all you would point out that's a standard toxicology test, to inject a large amount, look for adverse reactions and extrapolate the danger to smaller amounts.,
That's what you'd LIKE to accuse them of doing.
But they were studying the various clotting pathways.
And you claim to be "scientific".
No, not in the slightest.
Troll.
And over your head intellectually.
But they are showing it is not.
Post YOUR work.
I misremembered that you said a billion. Then looked and saw my 2 billion estimate which I posted the work for. My reluctance to post numbers at the beginning was that they don't mean anything if there's no effect. The effects of a billion of some molecule per ml need to be measured in the tests, or some mechanism elucidatd. Your clotting mechanism was speculative and not backed up with any sources. Just numbers (spike protein numbers comparable to platelet numbers) and nothing else
That's what you'd LIKE to accuse them of doing.
But they were studying the various clotting pathways.
Which means they were also studying whether clotting took place or not.
They would not be mentioning treatments for the clotting in their paper unless they were trying to treat it.
And they're trying to treat it because it's dangerous.
The effects of a billion of some molecule per ml need to be measured in the tests, or some mechanism elucidatd. Your clotting mechanism was speculative and not backed up with any sources.
You're wrong on both counts.
As Dick Feynman said, "if it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong."
There ARE blood clots being observed among those vaccinated.
So we know they are a problem.
Again you're lying through your foul teeth: because YOU were the one who was jumping up and down and spitting wooden nickels that 60 picogram/ml PROVED the spikes were harmless.
When I pointed out that that concentration meant a billion spike molecules per milliliter of blood, you pivoted and said, "well, you have to prove a mechanism."
No, I don't : because the dangers of the spike aren't inferred based upon a supposed model mechanism, they are directly OBSERVED in those who got the jab: because the jab TELLS your body to produce the spike protein in free form. Real COVID infection tells your body to make whole virus.
The study you misquoted and misinterpreted, was looking for ways to treat the clotting already known to occur.
Death-rate from the delta variant, is TWICE among those who got the jab, compared to those who didn't.
Significant at p=0.0007 level. (Far more impressive than the 95% confidence level used in "publish or perish BS papers).
Hey, troll-boi. Wave at the Milky Way Galaxy on your way by.
That's just what people here are saying: peaks in infections/deaths, seem to be highly correlated with activity in giving people the jab, lately.
You don’t even know geometry.
The earth is an oblate ellipsoid.
Think of a large exercise ball when you sit down on it.
How many? How many are expected in the general population?
YOU were the one who was jumping up and down and spitting wooden nickels that 60 picogram/ml PROVED the spikes were harmless.
I've always pointed out that vaccines are a small amoiunt of a harmful substance. It's up to you to show the harm, not anecdotes from junky database. You have yet to show amounts, or any amount, of the spike proteins in the autopsies. It's just innuendo as usual.
Those both vary by age and other factors which is why the Harvard Med Professor and world-class vaccine expert who was advising the CDC, but who got thrown off the panel for promoting the JNJ jab rather than pausing it over blood clots, said nobody under 70 should get the jab, because the risks outweigh the benefits.
It's up to you to show the harm, not anecdotes from junky database.
The VAERS database was created for the express purpose of allowing researchers to find harmful trends early. Which is why Swine Flu got a black-box warning after 5 reported deaths and got pulled from the market at 25.
Incidentally.
Broken down by which jab and specific effect. Oh, and this one.
p-value of 0.0007. A lot better than the 95% confidence you "Because SCIENCE!"™ trolls get all excited over.
Not clots, but the myocarditis & stuff.
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3970233/posts?page=55#55
CDC is the source.
200 x the baseline rate.
Troll.
Oui, oui, monsieur le troll.
Your obvious flaw is left as a proof to the interested lurker.
How many more is still TBD.
Nope, nice try.
Troll.
I got the Moderna. Am I a stupid sheeple?
It's your life, it's your choice. AFAIK if bug with supposedly widespread infections to sympthomatic don't have any viable treatment, that's the only time you'd get the vaccine if available.
But SARS-C0V-2 infection only causing mostly mild upper respiratory track infection to some sympthomatic people 1% vs 99% asympthomatic.
If it's only mild URTI like common cold, do you think you really need vaccination?
And according to medical ethics, people should be made "fully aware" of the risks of the medical intervention ie vaccination, and if any alternatives exists to the intervention, you don't need to be vaccinated.
Dr. Zev Zelenko had treated sympthomatic people with Hydrocloroquine plus Azithromycin as out patients with 100% success, nobody died of SARS-C0V-2 infection on his watch.
But Dr. Antony Fauci said the 60-years old malaria medication is not safe to treat C0VID-19 infection? So, you gotta connect the dots there.
Yes, you're stupid-dumb sheeple because you didn't do your own fact-checking. So now you have the experimental mRNA in your body that'd secret spike protein in your body you like lab rat you'll not be sure what'd happen if you'll get influenza within 2 to 5 years from now because of autoimmune disease.
she went on to say that as soon as it was okayed to get kids vaxes, she rushed her kids in....
stupid idiot.....
she's chinese I think....
people who have rushed breathlessly to get this INJECTION know something about themselves...and that is, if they lived in 1930's Germany they would indeed go along with the gas chambers....
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.