I accept your surrender.
Now go post some imbecilic memes.
Posted on 08/23/2021 5:28:28 PM PDT by Meah
A groundbreaking preprint paper by the prestigious Oxford University Clinical Research Group, published Aug. 10 in The Lancet, includes alarming findings devastating to the COVID vaccine rollout.
The study found vaccinated individuals carry 251 times the load of COVID-19 viruses in their nostrils compared to the unvaccinated.
While moderating the symptoms of infection, the jab allows vaccinated individuals to carry unusually high viral loads without becoming ill at first, potentially transforming them into presymptomatic superspreaders.
This phenomenon may be the source of the shocking post-vaccination surges in heavily vaccinated populations globally.
The paper’s authors, Chau et al, demonstrated widespread vaccine failure and transmission under tightly controlled circumstances in a hospital lockdown in Ho Chi Minh City, Viet Nam.
The scientists studied healthcare workers who were unable to leave the hospital for two weeks. The data showed that fully vaccinated workers — about two months after injection with the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (AZD1222) — acquired, carried and presumably transmitted the Delta variant to their vaccinated colleagues.
They almost certainly also passed the Delta infection to susceptible unvaccinated people, including their patients. Sequencing of strains confirmed the workers transmitted SARS-CoV-2 to one another. ..
(Excerpt) Read more at childrenshealthdefense.org ...
Get lost. You are simply not intelligent enough to hold a conversation with.
Now go post some imbecilic memes.
“Given what some of these threads have deteriorated to”
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/3988150/posts?page=84#84
I accept your surrender.
Now go post some imbecilic memes.
It has been demonstrated that there were no lies or misrepresentations. You vaxtards are lying and misrepresenting. You are Fake News.
#JustStop
#ReadAndLearn
Apparently you have difficulty reading. But please continue supporting clickbait artists. They need the money.
“Learn more”
The above suggestion coming from a larper who gets caught misrepresenting studies.
You don’t understand what you read but you don’t really care because you figure no one is going to know. Sucks when that turns out not to be the case, eh whiskers? Your one real skill is shouting “troll” when you get shown to be a fraud. Fun times!
You are citing one man’s opinion, and it is from someone who describes himself as a vaccine expert and for whom Researchgate lists 8 papers, none of which are on vaccines.
Apparently his solution to the pandemic is a new type of vaccine based on natural killer cells, which he claims he is working on, but for which there is no published evidence.
This is why I specifically excluded opinion pieces, and asked for citation from a virology text, study, or a consensus statement.
If you don’t want to provide credible back up for the assertion “one does not vaccinate in the midst of a pandemic,” there’s no reason for us to continue the discussion.
I wish you the best.
Two of your citations go to the same article. While some of the citations do discuss the problem of mutations lowering vaccine efficacy, not one of the articles supports not vaccinating.
You call over skepticism, I call it wanting to see credible support for your assertion. None of your citations support not vaccinating during a pandemic.
I agree, this discussion is over. Be well.
I called it in my post.
Demand an answer then declare nothing matches up.
Sigh. If any of what you cited actually said what you claimed, I’d acknowledge it. None of it does, or you would quote it.
I’m done. Bye.
I gave you the benefit of the doubt at first.
Talking about my behaviour during an internet discussion, is not a valid syllogism; nor can my behaviour long after the studies were conducted and published, affect what is in them.
Smells of moving the goalposts.
If you were ...less chagrined, or more honest, maybe (there are lots of trolls on these threads, most of whom like to jack off over their MD, and call other, more-research-oriented or more prestigious and published MDs "quacks") you'd say I partially made the case: that all my sources acknowledge immune escape as a problem, and seek to prevent it, but don't ALL come out *in so many words* and make a policy statement.
And then the question is, are those kinds of studies, the type of studies where the authors are likely to jump from detailed consideration of antibody binding to different parts of a virus, over to making policy proclamations? Probably not.
But the regulatory agencies (both over the public health apparatus, as well as much of the scientific / medical publishing) has been coopted or captured; see also Peter Hotez's editorial in Nature saying those who push back against mandatory jabs are colluding with Russian propagandists, affiliated with right-wing extremists who think Trump won the election, and that a UN Task Force should be created to deal with them.
But his article is woefully scanty on kJ/mol binding energies, and all that.
Or the Daszak paper in the Lancet where he literally recruited scientists to write the paper trashing the Wuhan lab theory -- as it turns out, carefully omitting anyone involved in gain-of-function research, in order not to let the cat out of the bag.
Toodles.
I just did.
But, like all vaxtards, facts bounce off you like bullets off Underdog.
For you golfers...patrick reed has bi lateral pneumonia. They arent disclosing it is Covid
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My friend’s boss has same thing—and he was fully “vaccinated.”
He is in the ICU now. Prayer’s appreciated.
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.