About Half The Cases Are Vaccine Failures

a reply to: lordcomac

Heart inflammation, blood clots, or paralysis, or one of the other 50+ side effects?

Come get your untested mRNA shots and join the experiment!

Come one, come all!

Sorry, just can't take humanity seriously anymore lol.

a reply to: RussianSpy

You mean the same side effects that happen with Covid, only much more often?

Military tested over 400,000 people that got vaccinated and found 20 cases of heart damage. Study out of Germany found over 60 cases in 100 people they tested who were covid positive, most of whom required no hospitalization.

Wont be getting the 'vaccine' over allowing my natural immune system to do it designed job, the cheerleaders will not convince me otherwise. I am healthy and my only ill effects are listening to morons pleading with me nonstop to take an experimental gene therapy all over a failure of a weaponized flu bug.

Keep your koolaid to yourself, please!

a reply to: RussianSpy

Sounds like the list of side effects that are given very fast during the miracle pills advertising on TV, you know "ask your doctor for this pill to feel better" but the warning from the pills tells otherwise.


Our medical community has gone out of hand in the name of profit making.

The title to this OP coincides with what I'm hearing from people that work in Healthcare. Had an ER nurse as a customer last week saying she was seeing as many vaccinated as un- vaccinated showing up with symptoms in the ER, and that 4 of the six she moved from ER to ICU had both shots.

Separately, I'm starting to see data that symptomatic vaxed people are testing positive at lower CT values than unvacced. Low to mid 20s for vaxxed and high 20s to low 30's for unvaxxed. My layman's thoughts are lower Ct positive equals higher viral load. Does this mean that the vaxed carry a higher viral load before showing symptoms because of the resistance the vax does offer? And, wouldn't this make the vaxed that get infected more likely to spread it than the non?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

Unfortunately we have 2 sets of crazies on both sides who leave no room for the voice of reason and sanity.

Yep. I have a joke about vaccines, but half of you won't get it.

originally posted by: paraphi

originally posted by: Doctor Smith
Your natural antibodies are superior to the vaccine. If you have recovered from the disease and have the antibodies you would be a fool to take the vaccine. They've been misinforming you all along as always to get you to take the vaccines.

Your natural immunity to Covid - gained if you have contracted the disease - is not necessarily better than vaccine-caused immunity. There are numerous factors, including the length of time since first contracting the disease, as immunity reduces over time.

Natural immunity differs from vaccine-given immunity.

It's wrong to say natural antibodies are superior.

It would be better to take the vaccine, even if you think you have natural immunity.

On alternatives to vaccinations, I favour rubbing cow manure and honey on my cheeks having eaten a slug - it's a tried and tested Medieval remedy.

Natural immunity is always better. And lasts longer with no booster shots. Anyone that tells you differently, run from them as fast as you can. And do the opposite of whatever they want you to do.

Since they officially told the masses that you had to still get the vaccine even after being immunized. That was a good sign that the vaccines should not be trusted. And the fact that all other safe and effective treatments were demonized by the shill gas lighting media.

a reply to: jefwane

The title to this OP coincides with what I'm hearing from people that work in Healthcare. Had an ER nurse as a customer last week saying she was seeing as many vaccinated as un- vaccinated showing up with symptoms in the ER, and that 4 of the six she moved from ER to ICU had both shots.

That's a good indicator the mRNA vaccines don't work. And likely to do more damage as good.

Separately, I'm starting to see data that symptomatic vaxed people are testing positive at lower CT values than unvacced. Low to mid 20s for vaxxed and high 20s to low 30's for unvaxxed. My layman's thoughts are lower Ct positive equals higher viral load. Does this mean that the vaxed carry a higher viral load before showing symptoms because of the resistance the vax does offer? And, wouldn't this make the vaxed that get infected more likely to spread it than the non?

If that's a PCR test I would agree with your conclusions. With my upper tier layman knowledge. Of course PCR tests are said by some to be somewhat inaccurate and you can throttle them to get whatever result you want.

Plus those vaccinated are said to be able to cause the non vaccinated to get sick. By the shedding of the protein spike. And the breast milk of the vaccinated women are said to have killed infants due to the infants immune response.

a reply to: Doctor Smith

Then you must love that the vaccinated still get infected with delta but have milder symptoms. People that would die survive and get natural immunity. Seems perfect.

www.israelnationalnews.com...

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chris_stibrany

The vast majority are those who are older or at risk, such as patients with a transplant history. Medications are usually treating symptoms keeping them alive until the infection passes, and then medications for whatever damage has been caused during the infection. Different people have different presentations so there is no one size fits all treatment course.

My floor doesn't get much in the way of minor illness, everyone we get is extremely sick, or post op observation.

My wife is an RN as well, neuro, her experience is similar to mine. We have both had a few patients there due to serious issues because of the vaccine, but many many more who have come because of those same issues from covid.

So are your vaccinated patients also predominantly elderly as well or are they more diverse?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Nyiah

Literally nothing in your post had anything to do with my post. Nothing in my post had anything to do with how I work as a nurse as it has nothing to do with the subject. My post was about data and actual clinic experience, your post contained neither, wonder why?

His post likely stems from your repetitious replies of “I’m a nurse I know more than you”
Just a thought

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: Chalcedony
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

It is great that these vaccines prevent serious effects and hospitalization. However, that is not the metric by which "protocols" and "restrictions" are decided. Cases are the metric being used to implement restrictions, not hospitalizations or deaths. So how do we ever get to the end when the vaccine still allows cases to spread?

Well everyone keeps talking about natural immunity being the best thing ever and will prevent further infections. So I imagine a vaccine that keeps people alive will result in people living to get natural immunity.

Because people keep wrongly suggesting a lab created antidote is better than natural antibodies when that has never been the case before

a reply to: PeteMitchell

“Lab crated antidote” is not good eh? What about Insulin?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Doctor Smith

Then you must love that the vaccinated still get infected with delta but have milder symptoms. People that would die survive and get natural immunity. Seems perfect.

Sources? Since that’s your thing and all

originally posted by: MDDoxs
a reply to: PeteMitchell

“Lab crated antidote” is not good eh? What about Insulin?

Can you point where insulin is an antibody or an immune response
Secondly, do we encourage EVERYONE to take insulin because there’s a potential risk to develop diabetes?
Furthermore your body natural develops insulin in most cases. It’s not something just man made out of nowhere