Replies

Would you consider the experimental vax and boosters more safe and effective than Ivermectin treatment and the natural immunity that comes as a result of having gotten Covid?

I believe Ivermectin is pretty safe based on it's history as a malaria preventative and treatment. And studies in third world countries seem to indicate it's effective against Covid. But studies and reviews of studies in more developed countries cast doubt on the effectiveness. (I have some on hand, just in case. But I don't have enough to take regularly as a preventative.)

Vitamin D, Quercetin and Zinc are also of benefit as are some others. Vitamin D deficiency plus covid is deadly.

I've just not seen good apples to apples comparisons to say how it compares to the vax. I suspect that maintaining vitamin D levels is the BEST thing you can do.

I do vitamin D, occasional Quercetin and zinc, AND I got vaxed.

I don't think acquiring natural immunity is safer than the vax. The risks of complications from getting covid are significant. The risk of blood clots are higher than the vax. I've read that the risk of long covid is 25%. The risk of a long term condition from the vax is nowhere near that.

Now if you've already gotten Covid once, the major part of the risk is now behind you. Then a vax probably isn't going to do you a great amount of good. Again, I'm not seen apples to apples studies on this.

Once you've got natural immunity, does that seem to be more effective than the vax and last longer. Yes. But you got to catch Covid and incur those risks to get that natural immunity.

In my opinion, it's safer to get the vax first, and then if you get covid, you're less likely to have complications.

In other words, (the risk of complications from the vax + the risk of complications from getting covid post vax) is less than the risk of complications from getting covid pre vax. But again, show me the studies.

There is so much bias crap that has been published on both sides, that your chances of wasting your life trying to find the answers is now much higher than the complications of covid or the vax or both.

There is quite a bit in this paragraph’s logic and post in general I disagree with.

Firstly, the clot shot is not a vaccine in the traditional definition prior to it being changed. I wonder why? Traditional understanding of a vaccine is to basically trigger an immune response that is supposedly safe so a form of naturally immunity can be acquired for fighting a more harmful disease. The clot shot is not a vaccine in this sense — instead it is a giant very profitable mRNA thearpy experiment on the population at large. Of which through FOIA lawsuits we are finding significant risks were hidden from the public. Big pharma wanted to keep this data under wraps for 75 years! There is very little to wonder why.

The risk of complications from COVID-19 is greatly mitigated with Ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, the naturopathic vitamin treatment protocols you have mentioned— vitamin D, zinc etc..

Unfortunately, those with a profit, political and/or population control agenda wanted nothing to do with these cheap relatively safe treatment protocols. They greatly suppressed what should be informed consent — violating basic human rights.

The profits and political stakes are much greater in the more developed countries thus the studies you seek where greatly suppressed, manipulated, mocked (horse medicine anyone?), greatly rigged or not even done in these more developed countries. This obviously was by design.

I would also add, the risks to blood clots you refer too maybe due to the often deadly hospitalization treatment protocols involving remdesivir and respirators. Had more folks avoided hospitalization to begin with Ivermectin and other natural treatments protocols suppressed with the aid of big tech/media we would have avoided a lot of grief — including the whole need for election rigging drop boxes fiasco that stole the election.

If you are intellectually honest, then it should be obvious there are other motives/agendas taking priority over the health of our nation and world.

That’ll do for now. God Bless!

“ I’ve read that the risk of long covid is 25%. The risk of a long term condition from the vax is nowhere near that.”

From down here in the trenches I don’t see anywhere near a 25% chance of long Wuhan. Nearly every single person I work with has tested positive once or more whether vaccinated or not and of those one guy that supposedly has issues from long Wuhan. He was one of the people who felt fine but couldn’t get 2 tests in a row that were clear during the time that the hysteria was running full blast. Now supposedly he has lingering issues from long Wuhan. I’m skeptical.

You make it sound complicated.
It’s really easy.
False assertions that Covid is worse than the experimental gene therapy shot are lies.
Within about 1 or 2 months of administration of the Covid ‘vaccine’, there were over 1000 reports of death for those who had received this experimental, poorly tested, lied-about-in-the-trials ‘vaccine’; normally a vaccine would be pulled off the market or get a black box warning one there were more than 50 deaths.
The CDC’s Walensky and Fauci lied through their teeth promising pregnant women there was no reason to fear the vaccine’s impact on their pregnancy, even though they knew it had never been tested on pregnant women.
Ohhh and did you hear? Your next favorite vaccine (Bivalent Covid ‘vaccine’) was tested on 8 mice before being released to the public.

3 out of every 4 deaths reported over the past 30+ years to the CDC's vaccine database (VAERS) were reported following Covid 'vaccination.'
Here's a chart showing all deaths reported to VAERS over the past 30+ years - note how Covid 'shots' are unlike any other 'vaccine'. That must be why there was so much arm twisting and forcing the public to take the shot they didn't need, that had the negative effects that the CDC wouldn't share.
For those not pretending to be 'confused', the charts above are based on VAERS data releases to the public. This one is used to feed Openvaers.com search engines.
https://openvaers.com/covid-data/mortality

Evidence of harm (covid vaccine)
	09/26/2022 8:13:23 AM PDT · by bitt · 103 replies stevekirsch.substack.com ^ \| 9/22/2022 \| steve kirsch A short collection of key pieces of evidence showing the COVID vaccines are not "safe and effective." Not even close. They are the most deadly vaccines we've ever produced. Here’s a high level collection of some of the most compelling pieces of evidence I’ve seen to date. This is not an exhaustive list, but just the key pieces of data that are impossible to explain if the vaccines are safe and effective. ...more.. I’ve divided the collection into sections and I’ve tried to limit each section to the most compelling data points. So don’t be disappointed if your favorite item...