Denmark jumping the seeding wagon: Vax even the small kids...

So this is where I draw the line.

I'm content with applying this experiment to myself, since in the immediate moment, me being vaccinated helps me more than it does bad.
I foresee problems with travelling and maybe even working if not vaccinated once they have finished the first round and didn't get enough to join in.

But I'm not ok with the kids.

See here's the thing; they are trying too hard now. It feels like that annoying person on mainstreet trying to push a mobile sub that is way to expensive in the long run.

A few days ago they were venting that.. hm.. maybe we should suggest people vaccinating their 12-16 year olds? So they did...
The argument was by doing so, we would gain 3% of flock immunity.

Today, the health department just thought out loud, that you know, maybe 12-16 isn't enough. We should probably do the small kids as well.

Like I said, I'm ok being test subject, even if it might end bad in 20 or so years. But I cannot for the life of me, see the rational in vaccinating my kids with this pre-approved phase 3 drug.

Besides, I think their argument is challenged by everything they have said themselves so far:
- Virus will keep mutating and we can't be sure this vaccine covers it continously

- Kids seem to do way better than adults when infected, even spreading less (confirmed by british study that showed that kids immunesystem and runny noses actually had a positive effect on the severity of their infection)

- The reason for vaccinating was to prevent saturation of the health sector, and now those at risk have all been vaccinated, so.....

- Yesterday, the Danish equivalent of the CDC flat out said, that the Pfizer has shown to give good protection against even the Delta vaccine after 2nd jab, and well, that's what those at risk has gotten so...?


So, where is the argument for the kids? Not gonna allow this.

-

Oh... and I can see that Pfizer is currently in the midst of testing the vaccine on kids as small as 6 months, my word

And people make fun of Christians for their blind faith.

a reply to: flice

The risk to anyone under the age of 25 is about the same risk as being alive. But hey, vaccines aren't about stopping people getting ill, they're now superior to our own natural immunity, so we should disregard that natural immunity and pump ourselves full of sh!t, the future of which is absolutely certain*



* - Assumes that the definition of future is now, not later or any distant time after that.

Denmark is Tribe of Dan=Phoenician Navy=Luciferian death cult=rulers of our world.

a reply to: flice

5 stars and a double high five.

Based on the data released to date, here is no strong scientific argument for vaccinating children.

What is herd immunity (rhetorical)? And when you consider the infected + vaccinated + ivermectin use, arent we there? How do you even get herd immunity from a vaccine that is yet to conclusively document the prevention of transmission? If someone could kindly address that with a reference that doesnt include 'maybe, probably, theoretically, or if' in the conclusion, I'd be genuinely interested in reading it.

a reply to: flice

I hope these folks read history on what happens when you forcefully vaccinate people with experimental medications.

*hint it doesn't work out well for them*

a reply to: flice

It’s disgusting and needs to be prevented. There seems to be a disturbing willingness to shoot children up with questionable vaccines. This reminds me of the mmr vaccine. I’m not an anti anti-vaxxer - I’ve had both AstraZeneca - but when there’s an alternative approach why risk it on kids. With mmr why couldn’t we choose (in the U.K.) between that jab or getting the 3 jabs separately? Surely that could’ve been made possible if the will was there from tptb. But with one of those 3 options not allowed in the U.K. it was naked blackmail.

Now an alternative is allow heard immunity to develop in the children, since the governments have made it repeatedly clear when it suited their agenda that children are at incredibly low risk. The risk to adults is still there, but mitigated by their vaccinations. But even if vaccinations didn’t mitigate risk from variants we don’t risk untested vaccines on kids until we’re certain of the outcomes. I imagine those making these decisions won’t be getting their own kids vaccinated for some time yet, just like I bet these elite didn’t go jabbing their own kids with mmr, since they had the recourses to get the 3 separate jabs.

Note: I’m not saying I’m certain mmr was causing the issues it was accused of, but there were enough question marks to justify giving people the choice of 3 separate jabs if they desired. I guess they’d spent a packet of treasury money on mmr and made promises to the suppliers and these were the true criteria informing the refusal to provide an option.

originally posted by: Butterfinger
And people make fun of Christians for their blind faith.

Amen brother!
This blind trust in human institutions seems like a desperation measure to me. It's as if they know subconsciously that they are rife with corruption and have no scruples yet still believing they serve the public as they once did. Change is a constant and sadly that applies to the organizations we have come to depend on.

a reply to: myselfaswell

I gave up trying to understand all this crap.

I have a friend that came to me today, all distraught, because she has not been allowed to see her granddaughter for over three months.

A kid in her elementary school was diagnosed with having COVID, so the children in the class had to go on a ten day quarantine. Seven days out they tested her again and she was still positive. They thought at first they had just tested her too early. So they tested her again at fourteen days out, she was still positive, and it continues. She has never had a single symptom.

It has now been 90 days out and they are still treating her as a typhoid Mary. My friend is very upset.

I found this article that I thought may shed some light on a possibility, and maybe make her feel better. She said it did, and I am glad, because it just provided me with a thousand more questions, and a ton of possibilities.

Per the CDC, for persons recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection, a positive PCR without new symptoms during the 90 days after illness onset more likely represents persistent shedding of viral RNA than reinfection. If such a person remains asymptomatic during this 90-day period, then any re-testing is unlikely to yield useful information, even if the person had close contact with an infected person.

The 90-day Post COVID-19 Window Explained
uknow.uky.edu...

a reply to: flice

Y'all put 'The Secret' on it.

"Children and adolescents tend to have milder disease compared to adults, so unless they are part of a group at higher risk of severe COVID-19, it is less urgent to vaccinate them than older people, those with chronic health conditions and health workers.

More evidence is needed on the use of the different COVID-19 vaccines in children to be able to make general recommendations on vaccinating children against COVID-19."

22Jun2021
www.who.int...