Tonight my local hospital looked like a Chinese Hospital

a reply to: TheRedneck

You have good advisers Redneck i am glad you and wife choose to not get the jab .


Ivermectin is still pretty damn good drug IMO , in case getting too sick .


Ivermectin's Effectiveness Proven Again; 72% Efficacy

originally posted by: TheRedneck
he confided in me that he had 20 patients die suddenly of myocarditis with no symptomatic warning signs that he could pick up on in one month. Every single one was vaccinated shortly prior to their death. He also said if he were to raise a red flag, his medical license could be pulled.

All I can say is let's see the data. I'm not dead set on my view here. If the vaccine is doing this to one doctor, then we are talking millions of dead from the vaccine, so at some point the data will come. You also suggest above that your doctor sees this issue as shortly after the vaccine, so how about a year later?

You might want to dig past the MSM reports. Yes, much of what is reported anecdotally is also exaggerated, but at least it is not filtered through a narrative.

Well first I don't use MSM, and lately I have just used the links that the anti-vac side uses in their arguments since they also claim some MSM ignorance level with me all the time. It is funny when I point out things in their own links that support me and not them, they tend to grow silent and not answer my questions about it. This tells me they do not actually read the whole reports and just cherry pick a few things to fit their narratives.

Conversely, when an issue begins becoming apparent we test more.

Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Will you bet your life on the answer to that? Should others do so?

What was the baseline before the vaccines? There wasn't one since we did not test every male between 15 and 30 for Myocarditis, as example, to set a baseline. In the Phase 3 testing they found 5 in the vaccine group and 4 in the placebo group for Pfizer, and actually 2 in the vaccine group and only 1 in the placebo group for Moderna. This any way you look at it also tells us if you test you will find it all over. The next talk about this was with Israel who did massive testing on their whole population, and they found about 75 Myocarditis out of 4.5 million people. Then we have studies of 350 million shots in the 15 to 24 age groups, so where are all the dead bodies if your doctor is average and there are 20 million dead somewhere. We need data and to suggest it is a worldwide coverup with 10s of millions dead hidden from the rest of us is not a path I'm likely to go down.

There is no time limit on truth. The debate will be over when the truth is allowed to come out and transparency is restored to the medical field, however long that takes. Come to think of it, considering present conditions, that might actually take 1.5 centuries.

In this case I'm only talking about the BS that "it's not a vaccine!"

Prior to the re-definition, a vaccine was a drug that was intended to protect one against infection, with a success ratio approaching 100%. Yes, there could be breakthrough cases, but such cases were rare; now it is actually common for one to get a severe case of the very disease they were "vaccinated" against, to the point that even a regulated MSM cannot cover up the fact and has admitted that the vaccinated can still catch, transmit, and suffer severe effects from the disease regardless of vaccination status.

That there is BS as we have many shots called vaccines for 100 years that do not meet your old definition but were still called a vaccine. It's all a stupid game and only used to suggest mRNA cannot be a vaccine, but instead is an "experimental gene therapy" to generate fear porn and label it all bad to support their anti-vacc narratives. It's like calling people you do not like Nazis to support one's arguments to try and demonize them to prove one's point. Call it whatever we call the yearly flu shot as that is basically what it has turned into.

Similarly, mRNA allows us to manufacture simpler drugs that are not actually drugs, but are genetic material our bodies then use to create the desired substances. It is a delivery mechanism, not in itself a drug. It actually has profound possibilities in combating cancer.

Wow! So, are you suggesting we might need to reset definitions as new medicines are created? As I said I have no issues in calling it whatever, but the side that screams it is not a vaccine have ulterior motive for suggesting that and I just do not want to play their game.

a reply to: Kenzo

We have something even better than Ivermectin. Monoclonal antibodies are available now for the Chinese virus, and they work extremely well. The only problem? Joe Biden made it extremely difficult to get them.

Why would someone trying to stop a disease restrict a proven cure?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

It`s criminal and evil to prevent people get it .

As they try pevent people getting effective treatments, it smells awfully a lot like plan to cull off masses

a reply to: Xtrozero

All I can say is let's see the data.

Good luck. All the data is being guarded very carefully by those in charge, the same people who wanted to mandate the "vaccine." Let me ask you this: if you knew you would be fired and blackballed, as in never able to work at the kind of job you do for the rest of your life, if you said certain things, would you say them? Especially knowing that others had tried and were all fired, blackballed, ridiculed, and dismissed as crackpots? Well, that's exactly what doctors are being told will happen if they do not do as they are told.

So you cannot get "the data" any more than I can get "the data." One must be a doctor to be able to "get the data," which means one cannot disseminate "the data" openly without becoming not a doctor.

Well first I don't use MSM

We all use MSM. One cannot completely separate themselves from the MSM narrative today unless one lives in a log cabin in the middle of the woods with no communication whatsoever. You are posting from a computer on the Internet; you have communication by definition. It's one thing to say "I don't watch CNN," but this line about "I don't listen to the MSM" is simply dishonest. Of course you do. So do I. I try to resist and question the narrative; you are not doing so. That's the only difference.

What was the baseline before the vaccines? There wasn't one since we did not test every male between 15 and 30 for Myocarditis, as example, to set a baseline.

We still don't. We test based on suspicions.

Why was this question not asked when there was all the concern over Chinese virus positive test results? We did not test everyone then either. If one listened to reports, one could hear how 30%, 40%, or more test results came back positive. One did not hear how 30%, 40%, or more test results from people with symptoms came back positive, but that was what was really happening.

The baseline can be seen if one looks at causes of death then compared to causes of deaths now. The incidence of death from myocarditiis has increased significantly. Asking for a baseline of cases in the entire population is just a way to discount what data is available.

In this case I'm only talking about the BS that "it's not a vaccine!"

According to the CDC, a "vaccine" now does not have to prevent any infections, just lessen the symptoms. So where's the "baseline" that shows how many people would get what level of symptoms without the vaccine compared to present figures?

Answer: there isn't one. There can't be one. It's all faith-based on the words of those who have already lied and changed the definition to prevent the use of the term "vaccine" from being another demonstrable lie.

There's your BS. The "clot shot" is not a vaccine by any definition commonly used before the CDC changed the definition.

That there is BS as we have many shots called vaccines for 100 years that do not meet your old definition but were still called a vaccine.

I'll grant that some people also called the annual flu shot a "vaccine" as well, but I never did. It wasn't a "vaccine"; it was a "flu shot"... a proactive treatment. People still regularly got the flu, people still regularly transmitted the flu, and people still regularly died from the flu. It was always a proactive treatment.

I have never had a flu shot in my life. I practically never have the flu... maybe once every 5-10 years, and then it's so mild it rarely even slows me down. I have intentionally gotten vaccinations before of my own free will, like the time I realized I was at risk for tetanus (stepped on a rusty nail what come out of rotten cedar... do you know how long it takes cedar to rot?). I promptly went straight to a doctor and asked specifically for a tetanus vaccination.

But people are calling me "anti-vax." Hint: just because someone calls something something, it does not make that something into said something.

It's all a stupid game and only used to suggest mRNA cannot be a vaccine, but instead is an "experimental gene therapy" to generate fear porn and label it all bad to support their anti-vacc narratives.

That's an outright lie. Maybe you actually believe that, but if so you have been ignoring everything hat has been said. I'm really getting tired of having to say the same thing over and over and over because no one actually reads what I post. I have been accused of bringing in a fair amount of "snark" into threads... this is why! No matter what I say, no matter how I say it, no matter how many times I say it, those trying to debate me seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge the simplest statements.

mRNA is a PROCESS, not a DRUG!

Can you understand the difference? Do you have the mental capability to read those words? I think you actually do, but by damnation, I wish you would demonstrate it! Stop arguing what you think I meant to say and start aguing what I actually say!

It's like calling people you do not like Nazis to support one's arguments to try and demonize them to prove one's point.

And I see people with your exact same views doing this all the time. Please stop doing it, but moreso, please stop thinking because you do it others must do so as well.

Maybe if you stopped doing it so often, you'd stop expecting others to do it.

Call it whatever we call the yearly flu shot as that is basically what it has turned into.

Exactly! But when it was introduced, it was "Just take the shot and you'll never have to worry about the virus. We'll stop it in its tracks."

Then it was, "Just take the shot and you might get sick but you won't spread it."

Then it was, "Just take the shot and the symptoms will be less. You won't die."

Then it was, "Just take another shot because the immunity doesn't last long."

Then it was, "Just take these boosters on a regular basis to stay protected."

Then it was, "Just take the shot and less people will die."

Now all I hear is "Just take the shot. No promises. Just take the shot."

But evidence is screaming the whole time that "just taking the shot(s)" can cause some pretty serious health problems, and if anyone questions why we are being forced to take a shot that can and has caused pretty serious health problems they are obviously "anti-vax." That's a lie; most people expressing concerns have no problem with previous vaccinations. Anyone who reports that there are some health concerns long-term is automatically a "quack" or "anti-science"; that's a complete lie, because the very basis of science is to look at and question all the data.

Might as well call us all "Nazis." Oh, wait... you just admitted that happens.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Kenzo

I've never been one to really subscribe to the "killing off the population" idea... just seems someone who craves power would also want more people to exercise that power over. But damn if what you say doesn't start ringing true the further into the future we go.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck

Good luck. All the data is being guarded very carefully by those in charge, the same people who wanted to mandate the vaccine.

I might believe this if it was somewhat isolated, but we are talking 13 billion shots all over the world. This means there should be massive serious reactions and deaths to the vaccine in EVERY country on earth, but somehow the data is all being suppressed. I just do not buy it and see this as an excuse to only explain why the data everywhere doesn't show this unless you go to Bitchute and watch a few people "in the know".

Also, don't forget to like them and support them, also please buy their natural cures...

Remines me of why we have no physical proof of aliens... "it's all just a government coverup" These are easy and convenient excuses to explain why your data is not there.

We all use MSM. One cannot completely separate themselves from the MSM narrative today unless one lives in a log cabin in the middle of the woods with no communication whatsoever. You are posting from a computer on the Internet; you have communication by definition. It's one thing to say "I don't watch CNN," but this line about "I don't listen to the MSM" is simply dishonest. Of course you do. So do I. I try to resist and question the narrative; you are not doing so. That's the only difference.

You know what I mean, and this isn't what people are suggesting when they try and suggest one is an MSN/CNN main news sheeple. I don't follow mainstream articles that are typically bias one way or the other, but boy does the other side of the coin. Once again, I have many times explain the pros and cons of the vaccine based on actual studies.

Why was this question not asked when there was all the concern over Chinese virus positive test results? We did not test everyone then either. If one listened to reports, one could hear how 30%, 40%, or more test results came back positive. One did not hear how 30%, 40%, or more test results from people with symptoms came back positive, but that was what was really happening.

At the start no one knew anything and everything we talk about up to today has been a learning process over the last two years that showed afterwards where we F'ed up big time and where we might have been correct. That learning process is still going on...

The baseline can be seen if one looks at causes of death then compared to causes of deaths now. The incidence of death from myocarditiis has increased significantly. Asking for a baseline of cases in the entire population is just a way to discount what data is available.

I'm not asking for a baseline, I'm saying there was no baseline to start with, so let's look at the myocarditis deaths and serious events data together. I'm just not finding what a few are suggesting.

According to the CDC, a "vaccine" now does not have to prevent any infections, just lessen the symptoms. So where's the "baseline" that shows how many people would get what level of symptoms without the vaccine compared to present figures?

The world calls it a vaccine, most vaccines do not meet what you and others are suggesting is the old definition though they were all still called a vaccine... It's just BS...

But people are calling me "anti-vax".

I have used it too as an easy way to identify a group or person. I personally do not mean it in a negative way and only apply it in COVID vaccine posts, so I'm not suggesting they are against all vaccines, though some are.

That's an outright lie. Maybe you actually believe that, but if so you have been ignoring everything hat has been said. I'm really getting tired of having to say the same thing over and over and over because no one actually reads what I post. I have been accused of bringing in a fair amount of "snark" into threads... this is why! No matter what I say, no matter how I say it, no matter how many times I say it, those trying to debate me seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge the simplest statements.

There are a few that basically say it every other post they post, so yes, they continually use it, and it gets old. Others constantly repeat something over and over about being a denier and big pharm shrill. I to have people that address only one line of a post of mine while ignoring the rest saying it is incoherent or something. People are so locked in their view they see nothing else but their view and ignore anything that might be inconvenient to their view. The vaccine hesitant side is a hell of a lot more aggressive and extreme in their views and replies.

mRNA is a PROCESS, not a DRUG!

Can you understand the difference? Do you have the mental capability to read those words? I think you actually do, but by damnation, I wish you would demonstrate it! Stop arguing what you think I meant to say and start aguing what I actually say!

Yes, I agree and have said with you agreeing that the mRNA process can be used for many things. All I'm saying is in this case with COVID it was a process to develop SARs-2 spike protein in the effort to stimulate some level of immunity to the virus. I'm not stuck on the word. but it is what the world calls it. If you or others want to refer it as the "clot shot" then have fun with that I'm not going to argue the point as I know what you are talking about.

In the beginning I argued it wasn't a drug either, but that is what everyone calls it so I just use it too, so people know what I'm talking about. I still don't see it as a drug though.

Maybe if you stopped doing it so often, you'd stop expecting others to do it.

What have I called anyone to included you?

Then it was, "Just take the shot and less people will die."

Now all I hear is "Just take the shot. No promises. Just take the shot."

From the beginning of all this I have said the goal should have been to help boost the old and high-risk groups and let everyone else decide. The vaccine did help those groups, but the government didn't stop there, and we got the draconian results. I have also said that anyone under 40 and healthy does not need it as the risk to reward is just not there. Not sure what else you want me to say on that.

Might as well call us all "Nazis." Oh, wait... you just admitted that happens.

I'll call you an ass, but never a Nazi...

You know I used that as only an example as to how people can support their narratives by applying a negative label to the other side, and not suggest anyone is one...lol geez

originally posted by: TheRedneck

I've never been one to really subscribe to the "killing off the population" idea... just seems someone who craves power would also want more people to exercise that power over. But damn if what you say doesn't start ringing true the further into the future we go.

TheRedneck

The interesting part to this idea is if that was a goal then they would want to kill off most of the old as the young are always needed as worker bees. Go all Logan Run on everyone except for the small number in power. The other side is they just do not need to as we face a serious population collapse in the next 50 years or so. Also, they really messed up with such a weak virus..lol

So much of what we have seen in this draconian rule is more a virtue signaling event from the left to say unless you use a mask, hide in your house and get vaccinated like we do then you are all evil, and we are the good ones because that is what good people do. The huge push back with alternate meds has more to do with Trump bringing them up as maybe a direction to help and Fauci and the left saying they are all bad just to attack Trump and then turning them into something stupid like suggesting Trump had people eating fish tank cleaner, or taking horse drugs etc.

I think that whole event greatly impacted any efforts to suggest other treatments are available to include monoclonal antibodies, and all of that I feel really delayed clinical trials to determine the effectiveness of other treatments.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: TheRedneck

I've never been one to really subscribe to the "killing off the population" idea... just seems someone who craves power would also want more people to exercise that power over. But damn if what you say doesn't start ringing true the further into the future we go.

TheRedneck

The interesting part to this idea is if that was a goal then they would want to kill off most of the old as the young are always needed as worker bees. Go all Logan Run on everyone except for the small number in power. The other side is they just do not need to as we face a serious population collapse in the next 50 years or so. Also, they really messed up with such a weak virus..lol

So much of what we have seen in this draconian rule is more a virtue signaling event from the left to say unless you use a mask, hide in your house and get vaccinated like we do then you are all evil, and we are the good ones because that is what good people do. The huge push back with alternate meds has more to do with Trump bringing them up as maybe a direction to help and Fauci and the left saying they are all bad just to attack Trump and then turning them into something stupid like suggesting Trump had people eating fish tank cleaner, or taking horse drugs etc.

I think that whole event greatly impacted any efforts to suggest other treatments are available to include monoclonal antibodies, and all of that I feel really delayed clinical trials to determine the effectiveness of other treatments.

They definitely want more people as resources continue to run out. Just listen to Yuval Noah Harai, Klaus Schwabs right hand man.

Oh...wait...

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

They definitely want more people as resources continue to run out. Just listen to Yuval Noah Harai, Klaus Schwabs right hand man.

Oh...wait...

I guess it comes down to the timeline they are trying to accomplish any of this. In 50 years as example China will most likely go from 1.6 billion to like 600 million, much of the rest of the world will follow the same path outside of Africa. America will stay the same or grow just due to immigration only as we have not had a plus in population growth from births to deaths ratios in decades.

a reply to: Xtrozero

I might believe this if it was somewhat isolated, but we are talking 13 billion shots all over the world. This means there should be massive serious reactions and deaths to the vaccine in EVERY country on earth, but somehow the data is all being suppressed.

Not in every country. Russia does not use the Pfizer/Moderna mRNA "vaccines." We're not sure what China uses, but there are reports that it is not the same thing we use (which, incidentally, is made in China and "assembled" in other places; China makes the materials used in the formulation of the Pfizer/Moderna "vaccines").

I'm not going to even put forward the claims that it is not happening everywhere in the Westernized nations. Do you really think we in the USA know what's really going on in other countries? For crying out loud, there are so many inconsistencies over the Russia/Ukraine conflict I can't keep track of who is killing who. And that's a major conflict that we (supposedly) have vested interests in!

Everything we know in the USA is filtered through the US MSM.

I don't follow mainstream articles that are typically bias one way or the other, but boy does the other side of the coin.

That would be all of them. And while we're here, just because someone believes one thing that isn't true, it does not follow that everything they say is automatically false.

At the start no one knew anything and everything we talk about up to today has been a learning process over the last two years that showed afterwards where we F'ed up big time and where we might have been correct. That learning process is still going on...

I'm not convinced we (as in our leaders) were dealing with an unknown. We the people certainly were. But any attempt to learn has been met with constant resistance. How does one learn when any action outside officially sanctioned responses is illegal? Remember hydroxychloroquine? Many front line doctors had great success treating cases with a combination of it, zinc, and some other supplements. Hydroxychloroquine has been used for decades with precious few ill side effects as long as well-known contraindicators are taken into account. Yet suddenly it was said to be this highly dangerous drug and finally was outlawed... literally outlawed... for treatment based on flawed studies by the CDC that refused to duplicate the treatments being touted.

Monoclonal antibodies work. Donald Trump was given them when he was diagnosed with the virus, and he recovered just fine in a few days. I have two members of my extended family, both elderly, both high-risk, both in poor health, who contracted severe cases and went to the hospital. Their condition was deteriorating until they received monoclonal antibody treatments. At that point, they immediately both began improvements and were released in days. They are both still alive and well. About the time they received their treatments, Biden directed the CDC to restrict monoclonal antibody use. Now they're almost impossible to get.

I'd like to know where those "successes" in fighting the virus are. I see no difference in the number of severity of cases between the "vaccinated" and "unvaccinated," but every single thing we have done in consideration of this "plandemic," whether it be official actions to "prevent the spread" or "remove disinformation," has made it worse.

Every. Single. Action.

Now you want others to trust these "vaccines" that show no noticeable difference, have reports of severe side effects in a minority of people, and have been the subject of multiple attempts to force them on the people by those who have been literally supporting the virus itself all this time? Not gonna happen. I want proof, open, absolutely transparent proof, of their efficacy and safety first, and so far nothing about them is transparent... including the ingredients!

I'm not asking for a baseline, I'm saying there was no baseline to start with, so let's look at the myocarditis deaths and serious events data together. I'm just not finding what a few are suggesting.

There are death statistics going back decades. They all show a sudden increase in heart disease that correlates with "vaccine" use.

The world calls it a vaccine, most vaccines do not meet what you and others are suggesting is the old definition though they were all still called a vaccine

Yes, they do. And I don't care what "the world" called something. I know what the term meant during my lifetime, and it was indeed consistent with what I have been saying. Finding someone somewhere who uses an incorrect term is playing semantics. You''ll play that game by yourself. The official change in the CDC definition, coinciding with the introduction and failure of the "vaccine" to meet the old definition, is not a conspiracy theory. It happened. It is documented.

I personally do not mean it in a negative way and only apply it in COVID vaccine posts, so I'm not suggesting they are against all vaccines, though some are.

More semantics.

All my life I have heard of people who did not trust the various vaccines that were offered... many were highlighted in the media when they contracted a severe, often deadly, pathogen due to not being vaccinated. The term thus took on a connotation of someone being "unscientific" and engaging in needlessly risky behavior. Thus, applying that same label now to someone who resists an obviously questionable injection based on scientific questions about future effects that are not being addressed is an attempt to socially pressure them into silence.

Whether or not you personally mean to do so is irrelevant. You play right into the hands of those who do have such nefarious intent when you use the same twisted language.

The vaccine hesitant side is a hell of a lot more aggressive and extreme in their views and replies.

Of course they are! They are under direct assault!

The same thing applies to every instance where society has tried to force others to do something against their will. That's called "human nature." One does not become overly defensive against threats that do not exist... one becomes overly defensive against threats that do exist.

All I'm saying is in this case with COVID it was a process to develop SARs-2 spike protein in the effort to stimulate some level of immunity to the virus.

No.

What you were saying by calling the mRNA process a "drug" is that any drug which uses the mRNA process is the same. It is not. Words have meanings, and the misuse of words, intentionally in this case I believe, is a known methodology to try and control public opinion. I call people out when they misuse words in such a manner, because I do not want the issues twisted into something they are not. When you do not call people out, but instead acquiesce to their methodology, you support that methodology, intentional or not.

>> continued >>

>> continued >>

The vaccine did help those groups, but the government didn't stop there, and we got the draconian results.

I cannot make that statement. Remember the elderly couple I mentioned above? They were both fully "vaccinated," wore masks and gloves everywhere they went outside their home, didn't leave their property for months (had supplies delivered, stopped attending church, etc.), and followed every single precaution they could possibly follow. Both contracted a serious case of the virus and required hospitalization.

My wife and I were never "vaccinated," did not change our routine, refused to wear face masks, and attempted to live our lives as though nothing changed. We caught it, too... two days later we're back at full speed and never even considered calling a doctor... much less an ambulance. I just had a physical checkup yesterday: except for the heart issues, I'm otherwise healthy as a horse.

I'll call you an ass, but never a Nazi...

That would probably be more accurate.

You know I used that as only an example as to how people can support their narratives by applying a negative label to the other side, and not suggest anyone is one...lol geez

I didn't claim otherwise. I said you admitted that others use it thusly.

You did insinuate the claim that I am "anti-vax."

--- combining two responses since this one went long ---

The interesting part to this idea is if that was a goal then they would want to kill off most of the old as the young are always needed as worker bees. Go all Logan Run on everyone except for the small number in power. The other side is they just do not need to as we face a serious population collapse in the next 50 years or so. Also, they really messed up with such a weak virus..lol

All valid points on the face, agreed. Which is why I struggle with the idea that the virus was an attempt at population control. If anything,I think it would have been more an attempt at control of the population. And it appears to have succeeded.

So much of what we have seen in this draconian rule is more a virtue signaling event from the left to say unless you use a mask, hide in your house and get vaccinated like we do then you are all evil, and we are the good ones because that is what good people do.

It is obvious to me that this is precisely what the result has been. We live in a society that can no longer think in terms of analogs... everything is either "good"or ""evil" and that determination can be made based on spurious metrics. The concept that someone can be a fierce adversary on one issue and a steadfast ally on another is alien to most people.

We also have leaders who have demonstrated, time after time again, that they will use every opportunity to mandate whatever the issue du jour happens to be. Consider the recent uproar over outlawing gas stoves: this was instigated by a finding that the fumes can adversely affect those with asthma. That's a legitimate concern for some people. The proper response would be to launch a public education campaign, require advisory stickers on new gas stoves, and perhaps assist those in need who want/need to transition to electric stoves. But what do we do? We try to ban gas stoves for everyone!

We have to get past this notion of using government force over every issue if we wish to survive as a free people. Otherwise, someday someone is going to try and force me to eat those little alien trees, aka weeds, and I'm gonna leave a damn crater where the USA used to be. You don't pull on Superman's cape; you don't pee into the wind; you don't mess with the Lone Ranger, and you don't feed TheRedneck broccoli!


TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
we in the USA know what's really going on in other countries?

We are interconnected at a massive level never seen before, so yes... If anything, if people were dying at some high level we surely would know as that is exactly what sparks the internet, or we are back to the world hiding it all... If it bleeds it reads has been a truism for 500 years...

I'm not convinced we (as in our leaders) were dealing with an unknown.

Well, the initial reactions for the first year was like throwing darts at a dart board labeled with 100 different reactions and doing whatever the dart landed on, so no I do not think anyone but maybe China knew anything for a good while.

Remember hydroxychloroquine? Many front line doctors had great success treating cases with a combination of it, zinc, and some other supplements. Hydroxychloroquine has been used for decades with precious few ill side effects as long as well-known contraindicators are taken into account. Yet suddenly it was said to be this highly dangerous drug and finally was outlawed... literally outlawed... for treatment based on flawed studies by the CDC that refused to duplicate the treatments being touted.

That was only said because Trump suggested it in his daily briefs and we both know anything Trump says the left fights hard to say it is wrong, and they did. He said it and they attacked him and then everyone even remotely agreeing with him. Look at the liberals here on ATS that posted stupid crap about Trump telling people to drinking fish tank cleaner and taking horse meds. That all was 100% attack on Trump that turned into an attack on the so-called Trump cult.

I don't see this as planned as much as an evolution of the woke left.

I'd like to know where those "successes" in fighting the virus are.

I just don't think you really want to look. The first year with the vaccine we saw a big shift as to whom went to the hospitals, and it was like 95% unvacced. Add with the high risk and old were vacced this added even more to the crazy level this showed us how the vaccine was helping people to include the old and high risk to not get so ill they need to use the hospital. I made about a dozen or so posts with this data throughout the first year too.

but every single thing we have done in consideration of this "plandemic," whether it be official actions to "prevent the spread" or "remove disinformation," has made it worse.

Sure OK, I agree...

Now you want others to trust these "vaccines" that show no noticeable difference

It truly did, but you forgot or something or just cared not to see it. I don't really care if people trust the vaccine, I really do not care if they get it and for many I would say don't. If you are old or high risk I would say good luck in rolling the dice, but it is your decision.

There are death statistics going back decades. They all show a sudden increase in heart disease that correlates with "vaccine" use.

As example, when was the last time we saw something like Isriel testing their whole population for Myocarditis? That is what I'm talking about. When have we seen in the US were all men ages 15 to 24 tested as a whole group for Myocarditis to see how that even plays out naturally at even the lowest levels with that age population, never. So today we test them all and wow we see it in both the vacced group and unvacced group. Shocking.... I say this as I also see that spike protein in general can increase risk with either the vaccine or virus, but many here don't want to suggest that the virus is worse than the vaccine, why not? That vacc will kill you! Virus? oh that is nothing ...lol total BS

Yes, they do. And I don't care what "the world" called something. I know what the term meant during my lifetime, and it was indeed consistent with what I have been saying. Finding someone somewhere who uses an incorrect term is playing semantics. You''ll play that game by yourself. The official change in the CDC definition, coinciding with the introduction and failure of the "vaccine" to meet the old definition, is not a conspiracy theory. It happened. It is documented.

Well good, think we kicked this dead horse long enough...

Thus, applying that same label now to someone who resists an obviously questionable injection based on scientific questions about future effects that are not being addressed is an attempt to socially pressure them into silence.

What would you like to be called? Anti-vacc is just easier to type than vaccine hesitant.

Whether or not you personally mean to do so is irrelevant. You play right into the hands of those who do have such nefarious intent when you use the same twisted language.

The vaccine hesitant side is so much worst in if you disagree with them even a little then you have zero math skills, your IQ is too low to understand, Big Pharma shrill, a denier because you can't accept that you got the vacc, and about a dozen more negative libels, so cry me a river...

What you were saying by calling the mRNA process a "drug" is that any drug which uses the mRNA process is the same. It is not. Words have meanings, and the misuse of words, intentionally in this case I believe, is a known methodology to try and control public opinion. I call people out when they misuse words in such a manner, because I do not want the issues twisted into something they are not. When you do not call people out, but instead acquiesce to their methodology, you support that methodology, intentional or not.

It's your damn side that insists it is a drug, I just do not care as long as we understand what we mean, so start with the vaccine hesitant side with you word police efforts.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
I cannot make that statement. Remember the elderly couple I mentioned above? They were both fully "vaccinated," wore masks and gloves everywhere they went outside their home, didn't leave their property for months (had supplies delivered, stopped attending church, etc.), and followed every single precaution they could possibly follow. Both contracted a serious case of the virus and required hospitalization.

But that isn't what we saw on a grand scale. I have said many times we are also talking about groups with one foot in the grave already, so looking at the data for the first year the unvacced was 95% of whom went to the hospitals even with most of the old and high-risk groups vacced.

All valid points on the face, agreed. Which is why I struggle with the idea that the virus was an attempt at population control. If anything,I think it would have been more an attempt at control of the population. And it appears to have succeeded.

I agree with control as their desire and the left just mindlessly went with it as some crazy level. Well let's see how they like it when it isn't them pushing the control buttons...

don't feed TheRedneck broccoli!

I like broccoli, so I'll eat yours, but it's the bugs for me...lol Had to eat them in survival school, so I really do not want to make them a mainstream diet for me.