Guest viewing is limited

Covid Vaccine + SPERM

WesleyInman said:
Statistically it went from like 20 a year to several thousand cases a year starting in 2020..

There is a clear as day and factual explanation.

Studies prove the vaxx causes myocarditis. Are u denying the actual science? Bc it sounds to me that you aren't "trusting the science"??
Click to expand...

Just the sheer amount of soccer players that “died suddenly” last year should present staggering mountains of discussion at the very least! Suppression is the name of the game, and they are damn good at it.
 
I take that back, ignorance, misplaced trust and denial are the real culprits. That is a fault on a personal level.
 
Invalid Link Removed

Trust the science. Get boosted. What’s the worst that could happen to your kids????



Disgusting.
 
SkRaw85 said:
Invalid Link Removed

Trust the science. Get boosted. What’s the worst that could happen to your kids????



Disgusting.
Click to expand...
You know. It is disgusting. But all this information coming out definitely makes me take heart health and life more serious. It’s helped change my values quite a bit. My family isn’t vaxxed but still
 
WesleyInman said:
Like we said these people not only "trust the Science" (which is the opposite of actual science...

But they fight for it...they fight for the lie...

And they ultimately die for it. They want to force their beliefs on you...and they are wrong about all of it.

Sad how brainwashed these people are...and they think you and I are the brainwashed ones.

Invalid Link RemovedInvalid Link RemovedInvalid Link RemovedInvalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
I'm telling you guys, watch Died Suddenly on rumble..
 
SkRaw85 said:
I take that back, ignorance, misplaced trust and denial are the real culprits. That is a fault on a personal level.
Click to expand...
My wife speculated COVID would be used to destroy families (which is biblical in some sense and she doesn't know that) but if the vax side effects continue to snowball rather than decrease I'm beginning to think the vax will ultimately be what divides families as the blame game rolls out after loved ones die. "You made them get it!". "they died because you didn't get it"

Everyone's just fighting and the root of it is manipulation of unjustified fear IMO.
 
Dustin07 said:
My wife speculated COVID would be used to destroy families (which is biblical in some sense and she doesn't know that) but if the vax side effects continue to snowball rather than decrease I'm beginning to think the vax will ultimately be what divides families as the blame game rolls out after loved ones die. "You made them get it!". "they died because you didn't get it"

Everyone's just fighting and the root of it is manipulation of unjustified fear IMO.
Click to expand...

That could get real ugly
 
WesleyInman said:
Statistically it went from like 20 a year to several thousand cases a year starting in 2020..

There is a clear as day and factual explanation.

Studies prove the vaxx causes myocarditis. Are u denying the actual science? Bc it sounds to me that you aren't "trusting the science"??
Click to expand...
I'm not denying the association with myocarditis. As per my post above, the association needs to be stated in context.
 
SkRaw85 said:
Just the sheer amount of soccer players that “died suddenly” last year should present staggering mountains of discussion at the very least! Suppression is the name of the game, and they are damn good at it.
Click to expand...
Many players died suddenly before the vaccines too. Some of these who have died recently weren't even jabbed. As for those that were, correlation does not equal causation. How do you know they weren't doing blow?
 
SSJ4GOD said:
When you link a fact check from abc, just stop and quit. I no longer care about anything you say.
Click to expand...
"The trailer for the film includes footage of a US basketballer collapsing face-first onto the court — the day before the country's vaccine rollout began — though Invalid Link Removed."

If you trust anything that does this type of thing, good luck to you.
 
earlyriser said:
"The trailer for the film includes footage of a US basketballer collapsing face-first onto the court — the day before the country's vaccine rollout began — though Invalid Link Removed."

If you trust anything that does this type of thing, good luck to you.
Click to expand...
Collapsing potentially from a vaccine is also not good.
 
earlyriser said:
Did you turn vegan after watching Forks Over Knives?

Invalid Link Removed
Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

While watching Died Suddenly it was crazy how many of the facts and stats they came out with were all verifiable, things I was already familiar with after 2 years of watching it unfold. There was only one item of question in the entire documentary that I don't know how to verify.

you have to be your own fact checker. those people are just telling you what to think, which worked apparently.

Interesting how the rate of annual death rate increase, did not grow in developed countries in 2020, the year of COVID. But it did grow in 2021, the year of the vaccine. Japan is a great example. Of the top 10 vaccinated countries I believe Napal was the only one to not see an increase in their death rate growth in 2021.
 
Dumbocrats...


Invalid Link Removed
 
@Dustin07 finally had some time to watch died suddenly. The first 5 minutes has been my argument against the vax. I remember that Ted talk where micro limp boy bill gates was talking about 10-15% reduction via VAX, reproductive “healthcare”, et al.
If a “guy” says he’s going to do this, then years later is the money behind this magic vax. 1+1 is pretty fahking simple one would think?????


Just look at that greasy slime ball laughing at what he’s gotten away with. One day his and many other’s backs will be up against the wall. They will not smile.
 
SkRaw85 said:
Just look at that greasy slime ball laughing at what he’s gotten away with. One day his and many other’s backs will be up against the wall. They will not smile.
Click to expand...

One can only hope. I know one thing is for sure, I do a better job of questioning everything now days...
 
Caught red handed

Invalid Link Removed
 
Trust the Science 🤡🤡🤡



Invalid Link Removed
 
No **** Sherlock
Now when do Fraudci, Tedos and all these pieces of s*** face trials for Treason and go to Gitmo until sentencing???

Invalid Link Removed
 
Holy fucking **** 🤣🤣🤣🤣



Just when you though libtards couldn't get any stupider...any dumber...when they are caught red handed with gain of function research and a lab leak....



These absolute 🤡🤡🤡s come out with the dumbest **** I have ever heard in my entire life



My God these imbeciles....



Invalid Link Removed
 
WesleyInman said:
Holy fucking **** 🤣🤣🤣🤣



Just when you though libtards couldn't get any stupider...any dumber...when they are caught red handed with gain of function research and a lab leak....



These absolute 🤡🤡🤡s come out with the dumbest **** I have ever heard in my entire life



My God these imbeciles....



Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...
Jesus christ...... raccoon dogs!
 
Crimes against humanity.



When does Fraudci pay for this?



Asking for a friend...



Invalid Link Removed
 
Dumbest in the world

7 shots, ROTFLMFAO

Invalid Link Removed
 
Time for public hangings



Invalid Link Removed
 
mRNA aka the jab can alter your DNA.



In 6 hrs in this study...



Invalid Link Removed
 
Dems,libz, media...all u mother fuckers.



Dumbest creatures that slither the Earth...



Now it's time to pay up💫💫💫



You owe big time, and you aren't getting away with it. You aren't victims.



Invalid Link Removed
 
Where's the clowns still parroting Fauci now?

Invalid Link Removed

“FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, said during oral arguments on Aug. 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.
 
WesleyInman said:
“FDA explicitly recognizes that doctors do have the authority to prescribe ivermectin to treat COVID,” Ashley Cheung Honold, a Department of Justice lawyer representing the FDA, said during oral arguments on Aug. 8 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit.
Click to expand...

I saw that the other day and made a stink about it but the people around me didn't understand why it was so important. even my unvaccinated friends and family all have short term memory it seems when it comes to the details of COVID. I remain angry with too much of the data forever locked in my mind that I can't forgive.
 
WesleyInman said:
mRNA aka the jab can alter your DNA.



In 6 hrs in this study...



Invalid Link Removed
Click to expand...

I posted this elsewhere, not having seen this thread. To expound on that:

Remember when they swore up and down the vax spike remains localized in the injection site, does not go systemic, and is quickly excreted from the system?

They lied.

Invalid Link Removed

Detection of recombinant Spike protein in the blood of individuals vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2: Possible molecular mechanisms

Abstract
Purpose: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic prompted the development and use of next-generation vaccines. Among these, mRNA-based vaccines consist of injectable solutions of mRNA encoding for a recombinant Spike, which is distinguishable from the wild-type protein due to specific amino acid variations introduced to maintain the protein in a prefused state. This work presents a proteomic approach to reveal the presence of recombinant Spike protein in vaccinated subjects regardless of antibody titer.

Experimental design: Mass spectrometry examination of biological samples was used to detect the presence of specific fragments of recombinant Spike protein in subjects who received mRNA-based vaccines.

Results: The specific PP-Spike fragment was found in 50% of the biological samples analyzed, and its presence was independent of the SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibody titer. The minimum and maximum time at which PP-Spike was detected after vaccination was 69 and 187 days, respectively.

Conclusions and clinical relevance: The presented method allows to evaluate the half-life of the Spike protein molecule "PP" and to consider the risks or benefits in continuing to administer additional booster doses of the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccine. This approach is of valuable support to complement antibody level monitoring and represents the first proteomic detection of recombinant Spike in vaccinated subjects.
Click to expand...

So 50% of people are turned into what seems to be permanent spike-producing factories; the limitation was simply the study end, not the end of spike production, which continued past the duration of the study.

Here's the best part:

It is possible that the mRNA may be integrated or re-transcribed in some cells.2.
Click to expand...

I remember:

Invalid Link Removed

No, the vaccines cannot change your DNA.

Two of the COVID-19 vaccines approved for emergency use authorization by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration use mRNA, or messenger RNA, to instruct your body to build the coronavirus' spike protein. Your body then produces antibodies to combat the coronavirus when it encounters it later. Learn more about how antibodies work.

mRNA is very fragile, and it's very quickly degraded once inside the body. That's one of the reasons why these vaccines must be so carefully preserved at very low temperatures and why you need two doses.

Additionally, DNA is stored in the nucleus of your cells. mRNA vaccines are designed to do their work outside of the nucleus and have not been observed to interact with the nucleus. Learn more about how mRNA vaccines work.
Click to expand...

Invalid Link Removed

mRNA isn't the same as DNA, and it can't combine with our DNA to change our genetic code
Click to expand...

Seems like they're very sure about something that actually isn't for sure at all, and (purposely) misrepresenting it to the public (to increase vax acceptance for $$).
 
Then there's this:

Invalid Link Removed

BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in children alters cytokine responses to heterologous pathogens and Toll-like receptor agonists
Andrés Noé1,2* Thanh D. Dang1 Christine Axelrad1 Emma Burrell1 Susie Germano1 Sonja Elia2 David Burgner1,2,3 Kirsten P. Perrett2,3,4† Nigel Curtis1,2,3† Nicole L. Messina1,3†
1Infection, Immunity and Global Health, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia
2Infectious Diseases Unit, The Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
3Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
4Population Health, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Parkville, VIC, Australia
Background: Vaccines can have beneficial off-target (heterologous) effects that alter immune responses to, and protect against, unrelated infections. The heterologous effects of COVID-19 vaccines have not been investigated in children.

Aim: To investigate heterologous and specific immunological effects of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination in children.

Methods: A whole blood stimulation assay was used to investigate in vitro cytokine responses to heterologous stimulants (killed pathogens, Toll-like receptor ligands) and SARS-CoV-2 antigens. Samples from 29 children, aged 5-11 years, before and 28 days after a second BNT162b2 vaccination were analysed (V2 + 28). Samples from eight children were analysed six months after BNT162b2 vaccination.

Results: At V2 + 28, interferon-***947; and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 responses to S. aureus, E. coli, L. monocytogenes, BCG vaccine, H. influenzae, hepatitis B antigen, poly(I:C) and R848 stimulations were decreased compared to pre-vaccination. For most of these heterologous stimulants, IL-6, IL-15 and IL-17 responses were also decreased. There were sustained decreases in cytokine responses to viral, but not bacterial, stimulants six months after BNT162b2 vaccination. Cytokine responses to irradiated SARS-CoV-2, and spike glycoprotein subunits (S1 and S2) were increased at V2 + 28 for most cytokines and remained higher than pre-vaccination responses 6 months after BNT162b2 vaccination for irradiated SARS-CoV-2 and S1. There was no correlation between BNT162b2 vaccination-induced anti-SARS-CoV2-receptor binding domain IgG antibody titre at V2 + 28 and cytokine responses.

Conclusions: BNT162b2 vaccination in children alters cytokine responses to heterologous stimulants, particularly one month after vaccination. This study is the first to report the immunological heterologous effects of COVID-19 vaccination in children.
Click to expand...

This is diminished response to viruses and bacteria; the viral response remained suppressed for the duration of the study (6mo), with no end in sight.

A generation of kids is ****ed.
 
Mask mandates are coming. Someone pushed my buttons today, I typed out this response, and figured some here might find it useful in countering the bullshit. Do not comply.

I'm triggered.

1) As above, just because 'people do it' doesn't mean its effective. It's also traditional to wear a garlic clove when in the presence of vampires. Here, we have a significant number of doctors admitting they do it for no good reason at all:

Invalid Link Removed

A contemporary questionnaire-based study, which attempted to assess the attitudes of surgeons, revealed that 96% of responders wore facemasks.1 About equal numbers did so with the primary aim of protecting the patients compared to protecting themselves. However, it was also found that 20% of responding surgeons wore the mask for the sole purpose of respecting tradition. Furthermore, 30% of responding surgeons felt that masks could make surgery more difficult by increasing breath condensation on spectacles, endoscopes and microscopes and thereby obscuring vision.
Click to expand...

The study goes on to demonstrate that even in clinical setting with proper usage, masks have little evidence to support the current level of usage on the medical field.

Invalid Link Removed

Unmasking the surgeons: the evidence base behind the use of facemasks in surgery


Abstract
The use of surgical facemasks is ubiquitous in surgical practice. Facemasks have long been thought to confer protection to the patient from wound infection and contamination from the operating surgeon and other members of the surgical staff. More recently, protection of the theatre staff from patient-derived blood/bodily fluid splashes has also been offered as a reason for their continued use. In light of current NHS budget constraints and cost-cutting strategies, we examined the evidence base behind the use of surgical facemasks.

Examination of the literature revealed much of the published work on the matter to be quite dated and often studies had poorly elucidated methodologies. As a result, we recommend caution in extrapolating their findings to contemporary surgical practice. However, overall there is a lack of substantial evidence to support claims that facemasks protect either patient or surgeon from infectious contamination. More rigorous contemporary research is needed to make a definitive comment on the effectiveness of surgical facemasks.
Click to expand...

Here is a clinical trial showing NEGATIVE effects of masking:

Invalid Link Removed

Abstract
It has never been shown that wearing surgical face masks decreases postoperative wound infections. On the contrary, a 50% decrease has been reported after omitting face masks. The present study was designed to reveal any 30% or greater difference in general surgery wound infection rates by using face masks or not. During 115 weeks, a total of 3,088 patients were included in the study. Weeks were denoted as "masked" or "unmasked" according to a random list. After 1,537 operations performed with face masks, 73 (4.7%) wound infections were recorded and, after 1,551 operations performed without face masks, 55 (3.5%) infections occurred. This difference was not statistically significant (p greater than 0.05) and the bacterial species cultured from the wound infections did not differ in any way, which would have supported the fact tha the numerical difference was a statistically "missed" difference. These results indicated that the use of face masks might be reconsidered. Masks may be used to protect the operating team from drops of infected blood and from airborne infections, but have not been proven to protect the patient operated by a healthy operating team.
Click to expand...

Cochrane is not supportive:

Invalid Link Removed

Medical/surgical masks compared to no masks

We included 12 trials (10 cluster RCTs) comparing medical/surgical masks versus no masks to prevent the spread of viral respiratory illness (two trials with healthcare workers and 10 in the community). Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza=like illness (ILI)/COVID=19 like illness compared to not wearing masks (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84 to 1.09; 9 trials, 276,917 participants; moderate-certainty evidence. Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 compared to not wearing masks (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.42; 6 trials, 13,919 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported (very low-certainty evidence).
Click to expand...

2) There was no general recommendation on what masks are most effective, and in fact Jerome Adams, the Surgeon General posted a video tutorial on how to make cloth masks. No masks stop covid, but cloth masks, um, stop it the least (and some INCREASE aerosolization).

3) There was no consensus on how to properly wear and use masks, people essentially did it all wrong. Reality:

Medical professionals sterilize, don PPE, enter a sterile area to do a specific short term task, leave, take PPE off and dispose of, then resterilize.

VS

The public uses a wide variety of masks, from cloth to medical to n95 to grandma's coffee table doily. They don't sterilize before or after putting them on, they reuse them endlessly, they touch they mask, their child, the gas pump, put it in their pocket with their keys, hand their keys to their spouse, etc. IF you believe SARS-Cov-2 is the worstest pandemic in history, as many seem to, and you believe masks are filtering those virions and saving you from death, why the everlasting **** would you do all of the above with the biohazard-laden mask?

In short, it's because you're a fucking moron with 0 intellect. Moreover, there is a study where doctors and nurses were trained AGAIN on how to don an N95, then tested after they put them on. Two thirds did not put them on correctly, and those are trained professionals.

Invalid Link Removed

Conclusions: All male and female nurses wearing surgical masks failed to pass OSHA and AIHA criteria. Global fit factor of the proposed FFP3 filtering respirators was decreased and worse in male than female nurses.
Click to expand...

LOL! 'Medical professional'....there are very few of these. Mostly, there are people who mindlessly parrot what they were told to say in an extended, super-expensive 7yr brainwashing session.

What do you think the general publics rate of success is?

No one was instructed to shave their facial hair, which completely negates the filtration of a mask. You could wear a $3 Amazon mesh glitter mask, and get hi fives as you entered the mask mandatory location due to the power of your virtue signaling.

3) Smart people quickly found the OSHA-type studies on masks, airflow, sneezes//coughs/expiration, and particle behavior. Let me summarize:

Cloth masks block 10-30% of particles expelled in a sneeze/cough.

As Abraar Karan, an infectious diseases doctor at Stanford University, explained to New York magazine in December, cloth masks and face coverings don’t filter aerosols — the particles through which the coronavirus spreads — particularly well; they can escape from an infected person and easily be inhaled if both parties are wearing cloth face coverings.
Click to expand...

Medical masks block 30-50%. N95's are supposed to block 95%, but they don't: how much they block depends on how well it's worn, which is not well at all, but let's say 50-75% for the general public.

You might be thinking '75% is a lot, and worthwhile'. You're wrong.

The average sneeze expels 50-200 MILLION particles, from large, clearly visible globs, to invisible to the naked eye virion-sized particles.

It's been shown that 1 virion can theoretically infect with some diseases, but we have immune systems that work, and in general a healthy person would require exposure to 1000-5000 SARS-Cov-2 virions to be infected.

So, if your best case mask scenario blocks 75% of 50 MILLION, you still have 12.5 MILLION virions floating around. You need 1k-5k to infect. Can you do math/statistics?

If you understand airflow dynamics, and what happens to the smaller droplets as the moisture evaporates, and how the remaining virions float around a room and remain airborn for extended periods.....

Well, it's actually not hard to understand at all why this was a stupid fucking circle-jerk from the start, and these known facts are why, at first, Fauci et al said openly that masking is a ridiculous premise.

Let's quantify all this with hard numbers from Norway:

Invalid Link Removed

Non-medical facemasks include a variety of products. There is no reliable evidence of the effectiveness of non-medical facemasks in community settings. There is likely to be substantial variation in effectiveness between products. However, there is only limited evidence from laboratory studies of potential differences in effectiveness when different products are used in the community. Given the low prevalence of COVID-19 currently, even if facemasks are assumed to be effective, the difference in infection rates between using facemasks and not using facemasks would be small. Assuming that 20% of people infectious with SARS-CoV-2 do not have symptoms, and assuming a risk reduction of 40% for wearing facemask, 200 000 people
would need to wear facemasks to prevent one new infection per week in the current epidemiological situation.
Click to expand...

........
Click to expand...
 
4) Use your own eyes/ears. Masks work so well we're going into our what, 7th wave of covid? I know, I know, I've played this game before: you're gonna say 'iT'S bEcaUse wE didN'T MasK HarD EnoUgH'. Wrong again.

Invalid Link Removed

5) the environmental effects are profound, yet ignored. The same people that want you to stop eating meat, drive an electric car, stop using gas appliances, and stop using straws, totally ignores the environmental disaster they created with mass masking and testing. Billions of people used hundreds of billions of masks and rapid tests; medical and N95 masks are plastic, and each rapid test comes in a box, with a plastic swap wrapped in plastic, a plastic test strip wrapped in mylar lined plastic, a plastic dripper, and a massive paper foldout. Mountains of this **** went into the oceans and beyond, but zero mention of that. Eat your bugs, peasant!



Masks did one positive thing, and one only:

Invalid Link Removed

Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety
Click to expand...

In other words, covidiots are anxious, pussified headcases who needed a magical talisman to survive a cold. So please, have a clove of garlic with your mask.....bitch.
Click to expand...
 
...
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20230916-163505-187.png
    Screenshot_20230916-163505-187.png
    508.9 KB · Views: 14
Invalid Link Removed

Efficacy and safety of in-hospital treatment of Covid-19 infection with low-dose hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin in hospitalized patients: A retrospective controlled cohort study


Highlights
•
Retrospective study of 3885 patients (352 treatment, 3533 control).

•
Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin versus standard of care.

•
OR for mortality in the treatment group was 0.635 vs controls. This survival benefit was consistent in all age groups.

•
No torsade de pointes or malignant ventricular arrhythmias observed during treatment.

Conclusion
Treatment of COVID-19 using a combination of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin was safe and was associated with a statistically significant mortality benefit in the treatment of COVID-19 infection in hospitalized patients. Our findings do not support the current negative recommendations regarding this treatment.
Click to expand...

Oh. Another lie bites the dust.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top