Covid-19 vaccination

Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
I don't even know where to start after reading all this nonsense, 3 family members die after taking the vaccine and you're like well they probably died from something else because vaccines can't kill people, how about you show some respect.

You shouldn't ridicule everyone who refuses to get vaccinated just because some of them believe in these crazy conspiracy theories.
It's also ironic that you accuse people of fear mongering tactics when that's exactly what you're doing when you talk about NOT taking the vaccine. You're gonna get hospitalized and either die or become chronically ill, probably wishing you get vaccinated. Guess what, vaccines aren't the only tool against a virus. You also have medicine. It's interesting how nobody has anything to say about this when I brought it up earlier.

Funny thing about medicine is when it's existing medicine that happen to also work well against covid, you get censored when you try to talk about it, but when it's a new medicine that's 40 times more expensive than a single vaccine shot, suddenly everyone's cheering. Here's a conspiracy theory for you, big pharma cares more about your money than your health. Don't be fooled just because the vaccines are 'free', that just means the government paid for it with YOUR tax money. I dare you to refute this, you can't because it's the truth.
Also, did you know that in the past, Pfizer had to pay $2.3 BILLION in a fraud settlement? But don't worry, your health is like, their #4 priority.

Science may not be static, but if you ignore research from the past just because it's a 'new' virus, even though it's very similar to gasp THE FLU, you're just re-inventing the wheel. Poorly.
Of course you're not allowed to compare it to the flu, because it's way, way worse. Like, literally (and I really do mean LITERALLY) in the same tier as ebola. This ridiculous attitude also prevents you from actually looking at past research and seeing what you can learn from it.
Lockdowns are not effective, this has been known for years, but when China did it at the start of the pandemic everyone just followed their lead.
Also if the science constantly changing, don't pretend that what we know currently is unquestionably the 100% accurate truth.

Now when cases are rising again, politicians and health """experts""" in my country act all surprised, how can this be happening!?!?
It's actually completely predictable this would happen, because the vaccines don't prevent transmission, and most measures (if they even have any effect at all) were dropped.
Wanna know a real 'non sequitor'? Cases go up => measures get taken => cases go down eventually. This must mean the measures are working!
No, again the cases are entirely predictable because it simply follows a seasonal pattern just like the flu.

I would post sources but I doubt anyone even bothers translating&reading them if they're not in english so I'll just say this:

Do your own research.
(Preferably with a search engine that doesn't censor your search results.)
 

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
16,854
Dying with the vaccine or dying FROM the vaccine? The latter isn't possible.
There are few such cases of deaths after vaccination but those are unfortunate things. That doesn't mean that fearing such a one in a trillion case should stop people from vaccinating leading to thousands more deaths instead.
"the vaccine contains microchips to control you" or "the vaccine is a method of population control" etc things that are verifiably false.
Delusional too.
Lockdowns are not effective
Actually, lockdowns stop the spread since people are supposed to stay home rather than circulate everywhere and spread the virus to make the pandemic continue. They hurt economies though but no restrictions means more deaths in the long run.
It's actually completely predictable this would happen, because the vaccines don't prevent transmission, and most measures (if they even have any effect at all) were dropped.
Vaccines help people get less worse symptoms/disease. That means, less hospitalization time, more free intensive care spaces for other (non-Covid-19) diseases.
 
Last edited:
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
Actually, lockdowns stop the spread since people are supposed to stay home rather than circulate everywhere and spread the virus to make the pandemic continue. They hurt economies though but no restrictions means more deaths in the long run.
Lockdowns don't stop the spread, there will always be essential workers who need to keep working during lockdown who will keep spreading the virus.
They also hurt not only the economy but people's mental health as well, so you have to ask yourself is it worth it just to slow down the spread a little.
I should also correct myself though, when I said lockdowns aren't effective I meant to say they're not cost-effective.

Vaccines help people get less worse symptoms/disease. That means, less hospitalization time, more free intensive care spaces for other (non-Covid-19) diseases.
Clearly they don't help enough if more measures are required again.
In a sane world people would be prescribed medicine after being tested positive, but instead everyone's doubling down on the vaccines and measures.
 

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
16,854
Lockdowns don't stop the spread, there will always be essential workers who need to keep working during lockdown who will keep spreading the virus.
That's better than mostly everyone spreading it.
They also hurt not only the economy but people's mental health as well, so you have to ask yourself is it worth it just to slow down the spread a little.
Get vaccinated and have a temporary lockdown. That's the best option currently.
Clearly they don't help enough if more measures are required again.
The important matter is they help rather than not at all and the statistics is rather significant on that.
In a sane world people would be prescribed medicine after being tested positive, but instead everyone's doubling down on the vaccines and measures.
Medicine that is proved to be effective is used otherwise it's wasting money on placebo. It's always the better option to prevent rather than have to treat. That goes for all diseases, not just viral ones.
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
That's better than mostly everyone spreading it.
Even at the height of the pandemic how large % of the population is actually infected with covid? Mostly everyone seems to imply it would be near 100%.
If that were the case we would all have natural immunity already and the pandemic would be over.

The only benefit of having less people spread it is to make sure there aren't too many patients for hospitals to handle, and there are more cost-effective measures to achieve that goal.

Get vaccinated and have a temporary lockdown. That's the best option currently.
Please explain why you think that's the 'best' option. What alternatives have you considered?

The important matter is they help rather than not at all and the statistics is rather significant on that.
They can also have side-effects, and especially for younger people this risk far outweighs the risks of getting seriously ill from covid, so for me personally I don't see why vaccines would help.

Medicine that is proved to be effective is used otherwise it's wasting money on placebo. It's always the better option to prevent rather than have to treat. That goes for all diseases, not just viral ones.
You also prevent by giving medicine before you get symptoms. The real money waster is vaccinating the entire population.

It's also hard to prove medicine is effective when big pharma sees no money to be made, because then who's going to fund the research?
Medicine that already exists is a lot cheaper due to patents and you don't have to give it to the entire population like vaccines so you also need less of it.
Also, unlike these covid vaccines, we actually know the long-term effects it can have.

Meanwhile if family doctors do a bit of their own research (with good results!) by prescribing medicine before people get sick, they get fined, deplatformed and censored, or even lose their job.
 

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
16,854
Even at the height of the pandemic how large % of the population is actually infected with covid? Mostly everyone seems to imply it would be near 100%.
If that were the case we would all have natural immunity already and the pandemic would be over.
Natural immunity has been proven to be less effective against Covid-19, thus more deaths that way.
What alternatives have you considered?
None. In the country I live in, the majority of people are not well educated for many reasons, mostly because of the government's eternal incompetence and the Church's dettachment from scientific reality. So, nice talk doesn't work here. Thus why restrictions are needed for people's own good and for those who got vaccinated as well since they can't get to hospitals to get treatment for other conditions due to mostly non-vaccinated Covid-19 patients occupying the beds.
They can also have side-effects, and especially for younger people this risk far outweighs the risks of getting seriously ill from covid, so for me personally I don't see why vaccines would help.
Side effects cases are way less than deaths from Covid-19 in unvaccinated people.
You also prevent by giving medicine before you get symptoms. The real money waster is vaccinating the entire population.
You don't just give medicine to people for preventive measures without proper logic. Any medicine has side effects and costs. You can't know when you have Covid-19 and no symptoms yet unless you get tested like daily or something which means waste of money.
It's also hard to prove medicine is effective when big pharma sees no money to be made, because then who's going to fund the research?
The actual conspiracy is that medicine works because it's based on science but people are people and will exploit any system, including health care ones.
Medicine that already exists is a lot cheaper due to patents and you don't have to give it to the entire population like vaccines so you also need less of it.
Also, unlike these covid vaccines, we actually know the long-term effects it can have.
Currently, there's no curable medicine for Covid-19 that deems the vaccine futile.
Meanwhile if family doctors do a bit of their own research (with good results!) by prescribing medicine before people get sick, they get fined, deplatformed and censored, or even lose their job.
Here, there's been cases of GPs promoting chicken soup and stuff like that. You gotta be extra careful. Some doctors are actually impostors or maybe not mentally stable for their jobs.

Anyways, since you're an anti-Covid-19 vaccination, watch this:

 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
Natural immunity has been proven to be less effective against Covid-19, thus more deaths that way.
Got any source on that proof? Because I recall the opposite being true...

None. In the country I live in, the majority of people are not well educated for many reasons, mostly because of the government's eternal incompetence and the Church's dettachment from scientific reality. So, nice talk doesn't work here. Thus why restrictions are needed for people's own good and for those who got vaccinated as well since they can't get to hospitals to get treatment for other conditions due to mostly non-vaccinated Covid-19 patients occupying the beds.
I can't judge the situation in your country but I'm shocked that your answer is "none", when I wasn't even asking what alternatives you think might be viable or something, but merely what alternatives you have considered, sounds like you're very close-minded in this regard which I find quite ironic.

Side effects cases are way less than deaths from Covid-19 in unvaccinated people.
Which is why I said "for me personally", because in my age group the opposite is true.

You don't just give medicine to people for preventive measures without proper logic. Any medicine has side effects and costs.
Replace 'medicine' with 'vaccine'.

You can't know when you have Covid-19 and no symptoms yet unless you get tested like daily or something which means waste of money.
Finally we can agree on something, testing is a waste of money.
You can still give medicine when people get mild symptoms and it will prevent the symptoms from getting worse.

Currently, there's no curable medicine for Covid-19 that deems the vaccine futile.
Define 'cure', if you mean a medicine that kills the virus you're probably right, but there's plenty of medicine that works by slowing/stopping the virus from replicating itself, which is good enough if you take them early during an infection and let your immune system do the rest.
Whether or not this is enough to deem the vaccines futile is literally just your opinion, no need to state it like it's a fact.

Here, there's been cases of GPs promoting chicken soup and stuff like that. You gotta be extra careful. Some doctors are actually impostors or maybe not mentally stable for their jobs.
What's wrong with chicken soup? Where I live it's very common to have when you have a cold, one might even say it's "common sense".
I've seen this attitude a lot, when the experts agree with you you "trust the science", if not they are mentally unstable...

Anyways, since you're an anti-Covid-19 vaccination, watch this:
I never claimed I was against vaccination, and I'm not gonna waste an hour of my time watching some random youtube video anyways.
The first 30 seconds already tell me enough, a bunch of anecdotes about "healthy" people suddenly getting seriously ill.
Without context you might even convince me the video was about vaccine side effects since there's a lot of anecdotal evidence about that as well, but of course a video like that wouldn't stay on youtube for very long...
Also I wonder how healthy these people really are/were, did they have any underlying illness (perhaps not even knowingly), what's their BMI, did they take vitamin supplements?
I have seen enough of these stories already anyways, unlike most people I don't live in a bubble, I get my daily news and information from multiple sources, so that I can form my own opinion instead of only reading state propaganda clickbait articles usually with titles as "here's what you should know" and "here's why this is a good/bad thing".
 

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
16,854
Got any source on that proof? Because I recall the opposite being true...
Well, the fact of the matter is, it's better to prevent the disease than risk getting sequelae from it.
I can't judge the situation in your country but I'm shocked that your answer is "none", when I wasn't even asking what alternatives you think might be viable or something, but merely what alternatives you have considered, sounds like you're very close-minded in this regard which I find quite ironic.
None because there aren't any viable ones. Thanks for the compliment. I assume you have a PhD in medicine too.
Which is why I said "for me personally", because in my age group the opposite is true.
Yeah but vaccinated people spread the disease less.
Replace 'medicine' with 'vaccine'.
It's not the same. Preventing is always better than treating. See polio and other vaccines for reference.
You can still give medicine when people get mild symptoms and it will prevent the symptoms from getting worse.
Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Statistics show vaccines are superior and on top of that you can be vaccinated and get medicine for even better disease control.
Define 'cure', if you mean a medicine that kills the virus you're probably right, but there's plenty of medicine that works by slowing/stopping the virus from replicating itself, which is good enough if you take them early during an infection and let your immune system do the rest.
The Delta variant is tricky and you can find yourself in a really dire situation in a matter of days-hours. So, medicine is a bit like spinning a coin with Covid-19.
Whether or not this is enough to deem the vaccines futile is literally just your opinion, no need to state it like it's a fact.
Show us studies that show better efficiency and better disease and death rate control of Covid-19 patients compared to vaccines.
What's wrong with chicken soup? Where I live it's very common to have when you have a cold, one might even say it's "common sense".
I've seen this attitude a lot, when the experts agree with you you "trust the science", if not they are mentally unstable...
If you think that chicken soup rather than actual medical means to treat/prevent Covid-19 is a sane solution, then yes, I think that would be a word to describe such people.
The first 30 seconds already tell me enough, a bunch of anecdotes about "healthy" people suddenly getting seriously ill.
Without context you might even convince me the video was about vaccine side effects since there's a lot of anecdotal evidence about that as well, but of course a video like that wouldn't stay on youtube for very long...
Also I wonder how healthy these people really are/were, did they have any underlying illness (perhaps not even knowingly), what's their BMI, did they take vitamin supplements?
I have seen enough of these stories already anyways, unlike most people I don't live in a bubble, I get my daily news and information from multiple sources, so that I can form my own opinion instead of only reading state propaganda clickbait articles usually with titles as "here's what you should know" and "here's why this is a good/bad thing".
So, I don't understand what's stopping you from taking an anti-Covid-19 vaccine then? It's statistically safer than Covid-19 itself.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 61
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,965
The vaccine is not a cure. It is to help train your immune system, which will not naturally recognise Covid 19 and its strains often until it is too late, to fight Covid 19.

Since Covid 19 is so much different from normal flus your immune system does not retain its ability to combat it that well. This is why booster pills and vaccines are helpful for those who fit a vulnerable profile. I do agree that much of it seems like "big pharma making money" but the reality is in the morgue, people are dying every day. Not hundreds, thousands of people, every day, who's life was almost certainly cut short due to covid 19. Once death rates from Covid approach 0 then I agree it is all a money making scam, but until then it is a very real threat and sadly people will profiteer from it with "repeat subscriptions".
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 61
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,965
The world is commercial. Yes they will make profit on selling vaccines and medication. Like how people make profit selling street lights that help keep you safe during the night, or by running the internet infrastructure which is core to your modern day life, or even on the food you buy.

This is not a case of the early day HIV/AIDS medication where millions of people died younger because they could not afford the medication. Most people should have already had the vaccine, which was being sold at cost price. It is not like there is/was a shortage of it for the last few months, with even teenagers and kids, the least vulnerable age group, having access to it in the UK.
 

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
16,854
 
Level 4
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
32
Warned for trolling
I don't even know where to start after reading all this nonsense, 3 family members die after taking the vaccine and you're like well they probably died from something else because vaccines can't kill people, how about you show some respect.

You shouldn't ridicule everyone who refuses to get vaccinated just because some of them believe in these crazy conspiracy theories.
It's also ironic that you accuse people of fear mongering tactics when that's exactly what you're doing when you talk about NOT taking the vaccine. You're gonna get hospitalized and either die or become chronically ill, probably wishing you get vaccinated. Guess what, vaccines aren't the only tool against a virus. You also have medicine. It's interesting how nobody has anything to say about this when I brought it up earlier.

Funny thing about medicine is when it's existing medicine that happen to also work well against covid, you get censored when you try to talk about it, but when it's a new medicine that's 40 times more expensive than a single vaccine shot, suddenly everyone's cheering. Here's a conspiracy theory for you, big pharma cares more about your money than your health. Don't be fooled just because the vaccines are 'free', that just means the government paid for it with YOUR tax money. I dare you to refute this, you can't because it's the truth.
Also, did you know that in the past, Pfizer had to pay $2.3 BILLION in a fraud settlement? But don't worry, your health is like, their #4 priority.

Science may not be static, but if you ignore research from the past just because it's a 'new' virus, even though it's very similar to gasp THE FLU, you're just re-inventing the wheel. Poorly.
Of course you're not allowed to compare it to the flu, because it's way, way worse. Like, literally (and I really do mean LITERALLY) in the same tier as ebola. This ridiculous attitude also prevents you from actually looking at past research and seeing what you can learn from it.
Lockdowns are not effective, this has been known for years, but when China did it at the start of the pandemic everyone just followed their lead.
Also if the science constantly changing, don't pretend that what we know currently is unquestionably the 100% accurate truth.

Now when cases are rising again, politicians and health """experts""" in my country act all surprised, how can this be happening!?!?
It's actually completely predictable this would happen, because the vaccines don't prevent transmission, and most measures (if they even have any effect at all) were dropped.
Wanna know a real 'non sequitor'? Cases go up => measures get taken => cases go down eventually. This must mean the measures are working!
No, again the cases are entirely predictable because it simply follows a seasonal pattern just like the flu.

I would post sources but I doubt anyone even bothers translating&reading them if they're not in english so I'll just say this:

Do your own research.
(Preferably with a search engine that doesn't censor your search results.)
I tried before you to warn our fellow wc3 friends but guess what? They insta deleted the message i wrote which was about the fraud that c0vid19 is and the whole thing about bioweaponised vaccines but people are just so blinded by the propaganda spread by television in their own country that they refuse to hear anything else than what the propaganda says. I really feel sorry for everyone believing the propaganda narrative and even more sorry for people who got inoculated, i even have irl friends who took it and they are already regretting it as the bioweapon starts to cause them life-threatening issues, not to mention that they were totally fine before taking it and once they took it they got the virus instantly, is no one of you guys watching football? Players are dropping like flies on the pitch, Barcelona star Serghio Aguero had to retire because he got inoculated, i honestly cannot understand how people can be so brainwashed refusing to believe the obvious. One wise guy once said "put the truth infront of the fool and watch him deny it".
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 61
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,965
Of the hundreds of millions of people who took the vaccine, a very few have had issues with it. Of course many people who took the vaccine have died, but those people died of natural causes which they would likely have done anyway with or without the vaccine.

Most people I know have had at least 2 doses of the vaccine. Of those people none of them have had any long term issues from it. I also would not trust anything claiming that the vaccines are dangerous or especially a "bioweapon" without strong, reputable, references. This is important to distinguish fact from opinion.
 
Level 7
Joined
May 26, 2017
Messages
127
Of the hundreds of millions of people who took the vaccine, a very few have had issues with it. Of course many people who took the vaccine have died, but those people died of natural causes which they would likely have done anyway with or without the vaccine.

Most people I know have had at least 2 doses of the vaccine. Of those people none of them have had any long term issues from it. I also would not trust anything claiming that the vaccines are dangerous or especially a "bioweapon" without strong, reputable, references. This is important to distinguish fact from opinion.


Let's turn it around... Why don't you contribute with strong and reputable references that COVID vaccines are not dangerous?
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
Of the hundreds of millions of people who got covid, a very few have had issues with it. Of course many people who got covid have died, but those people died of natural causes which they would likely have done anyway with or without covid.

Most people I know have had covid at least once. Of those people none of them have had any long term issues from it. I also would not trust anything claiming that covid is dangerous or especially a "bioweapon" without strong, reputable, references. This is important to distinguish fact from opinion.
 

Dr Super Good

Spell Reviewer
Level 61
Joined
Jan 18, 2005
Messages
26,965
Of the hundreds of millions of people who got covid, a very few have had issues with it.
Death tolls directly attributed to Covid19 range from 10 to 20 million and still rising, especially in the anti-vax community. Sources for this information include The Economist and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation which reported to the US president's administration at the time.

Actual death toll is potentially much higher due to unreported or knock on deaths. Many developing countries never entered lockdowns as they could not afford to and so brushed the entire existence of Covid under a rug as people died. Such countries often have low life expectancy so the impact of Covid likely falls as another disease or generally has less affect on such populations due to being comprised mostly of children and adolescences. Those who do die possibly are classed incorrectly as natural causes and not attributed correctly to Covid. There is no evidence that very few people have had issues with Covid, with mortality rates being as high as 28.3% in older people as referenced on Wikipedia.
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
I literally just copypasted your post and replaced vaccine with covid for the lulz but since you made a serious reply I'm gonna try one more time to try and convince you even though i know it's impossible.

If you look at excess deaths you will see that before vaccines there was none. Only after vaccines we started seeing excess deaths, even though with every new variant the symptoms get milder so you can't blame the virus. Idiots will tell you to look at covid deaths stats to see the vaccine is 'working' but if you look at all-cause deaths you see vaccinated people are actually dying more often. So instead of dying from covid people now die 'mysteriously and unexpectedly'. And if they don't die they 'rarely' get myocarditis, which is not rare at all since going by VAERS data using an URF of 41 you get this at an estimated rate of 1 in 317 for males age 16-17. What's the point of a vaccine if instead of dying from covid you will die of something else?

This 10 to 20 million estimate you say is bullsh!t, young healthy people don't die from covid. Only unhealthy and old people die, and they don't die from covid, but 'with' covid (I assume with 'directly attributed' you mean a positive PCR test, not very reliable IMO). Covid just pushed them over the edge, but even without they'd die eventually, especially old people (80+) since their age is already over the life expectancy. You say 10 to 20 million like it's a lot, but do the math, where I live every day roughly 500 people die, population is 17 million so worldwide every day 200000 die, that's 73 million every year, and we've been dealing with covid for two years now. So then covid is about 10% of all deaths, and again that includes dying 'with' covid.

It's funny you think the death toll may be underreported, if you ignore dying 'with' covid then it's actually the opposite.
I also wonder where you got the 28.3% from, wikipedia isn't actually a source, you'd know this if you ever had to write an essay in high school. Meanwhile from an actual source (dutch RIVM) the death rate from covid is only 0.5% for people age 80+, and even as low as 0.00001% for age 20 and lower. Did you count the zeroes? That's 1 in 10 million. Compare that to 1 in 317 from earlier, and you'd be insane to ever vaccinate a child with a covid vaccine. Meanwhile I recall you saying kids were 'smart' for wanting a vaccine when their parents were against it.

You'll probably keep shilling the vaccine though. I hope you can at least admit that young and healthy people should not be injected with this sh!t.
I have no opinion on injecting older or unhealthy people, if they wanna get jabbed they can get jabbed, though I would prefer it if they didn't get one for 'free' with my taxpayer money, and I'd especially appreciate it if you'd stop trying to force it on everyone else.

If you wanna keep arguing about this, I have bad news for you, I really don't, because writing posts like this takes at least an hour looking up all the stats and I have better things to spend my free time on. So instead I'll just let this site do the talking for me: The COVID World
 
Level 4
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
32
Death tolls directly attributed to Covid19 range from 10 to 20 million and still rising, especially in the anti-vax community. Sources for this information include The Economist and the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation which reported to the US president's administration at the time.

Actual death toll is potentially much higher due to unreported or knock on deaths. Many developing countries never entered lockdowns as they could not afford to and so brushed the entire existence of Covid under a rug as people died. Such countries often have low life expectancy so the impact of Covid likely falls as another disease or generally has less affect on such populations due to being comprised mostly of children and adolescences. Those who do die possibly are classed incorrectly as natural causes and not attributed correctly to Covid. There is no evidence that very few people have had issues with Covid, with mortality rates being as high as 28.3% in older people as referenced on Wikipedia.
You are using wikipedia as refference, that already is huge mistake. All the big social media and your local big national tellevision are controlled by the very same people creating the plandemic, including wiki, google, youtube, facebook, instagram, etc. You cannot get any proper information in those social medias because they repress the other point of view, which in this case says the truth. Wikipedia already demonised several great scientints including dr Vernon Coleman in which they refer to him as "conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer", wikipedia does not report any football deaths that have died due to the bioweapon. I do want to mention aswell that they are also creating the global warming by spraying our skies in every country, please get outside and take a look at your sky for atleast 3 days, you will see it yourself, its the big elephant in the room no one speaks about. Please do also check rumble.com , brandnewtube.com , orwell.city.
 

deepstrasz

Map Reviewer
Level 59
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
16,854
Let's turn it around... Why don't you contribute with strong and reputable references that COVID vaccines are not dangerous?
Me and others have posted links to studies from reputable scientists. There lies your answer.

@Dreamshock I recommend you watch this movie:

You are using wikipedia as refference, that already is huge mistake. All the big social media and your local big national tellevision are controlled by the very same people creating the plandemic, including wiki, google, youtube, facebook, instagram, etc.
Yet, you link a YouTube video.
 
If you wanna keep arguing about this, I have bad news for you, I really don't, because writing posts like this takes at least an hour looking up all the stats and I have better things to spend my free time on.
Ha ha, okay Tichondrius, you have better things to do.

All that Divine armor must really help you when dealing with the plague, too.

Edit: My apologies if comedy is not allowed here, but it seems to me I would rather have a thread arguing about the effectiveness of vaccination against the Plague of Undeath since this is a website focused on video games and not a place to get real world health information.

Anyway I'm a Wind Mage so if I got affected by the Plague of Undeath I would just wave it off using wind magic.
 
Last edited:
Level 20
Joined
Nov 18, 2012
Messages
1,615
I got a cut on my knee and then took the vaccine. I have extreme pain on my knee, therefore vaccines are bad.
Do you realise how stupid this sounds? The logic doesn't follow.
Take your Non sequiturs and false dichotomy elsewhere.
You are using wikipedia as refference, that already is huge mistake.
Why? Are you going to explain why or just point something out because you can? You could say this about anything else, youtube, or any paper in the internet.
Surely Wikipedia alone doesn't make it a solid and founded source, but it DOES add fuel to the idea, but that's not what you said.
All the big social media and your local big national tellevision are controlled by the very same people creating the plandemic, including wiki, google, youtube, facebook, instagram, etc.
All I hear is an attempt to discredit all sorts of info without any basis. Where do you think the sources of national television come from? From nothing? In this context, they come from the experts: scientists, virologists etc. What you're saying here is the likes of a flat earther.
You cannot get any proper information in those social medias because they repress the other point of view, which in this case says the truth.
First of all, who the hell uses facebook and instagram as a credible source?
Second of all, have you asked yourself all the possibilities for the reason they "repress" the other point of view"? Have you thought of "maybe it's just completely gibberish"? "Spreading false information"? Because I myself thought the possibility the reason the media could be "lying", but then if they were lying, then possibly the scientists also could be lying? The most likely scenario is no. Because you can't prove that.
Third of all, I don't care about the other point of view, I want the truth. A virus existing isn't a debate.
Wikipedia already demonised several great scientints including dr Vernon Coleman in which they refer to him as "conspiracy theorist and anti-vaxxer",
He doesn't need to be demonised, he is in fact a demon spreading unfounded claims.
wikipedia does not report any football deaths that have died due to the bioweapon.
what the hell is this? What bioweapon?
I do want to mention aswell that they are also creating the global warming by spraying our skies in every country, please get outside and take a look at your sky for atleast 3 days, you will see it yourself, its the big elephant in the room no one speaks about.
I do want to mention aswell they're also creating unicorns by fusion with exquisite materials in every country, please get outside and take a look at all unicorns flying around at least once a day, you'll see how big of a deal it is.

Do you even read what you write? This is the most unplausible crap I've ever seen. You claim that wikipedia is a mistake, but these random ass sites are better "rumble.com , brandnewtube.com , orwell.city"
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
Ha ha, okay Tichondrius, you have better things to do.

All that Divine armor must really help you when dealing with the plague, too.
Of all the things I said in my post you choose this useless little part at the end to make fun of me, and you know why? Because I put a lot of effort in my post, so you can't find anything wrong with the rest of what I said.
Also just FYI if you'd read my earlier posts in this thread you'd realize I wasn't trying to imply my time is more valuable than yours, it's rather that I don't want to waste my time talking to a brick wall since everyone here seems to only be interested in an argument, not a debate.

I got a cut on my knee and then took the vaccine. I have extreme pain on my knee, therefore vaccines are bad.
Do you realise how stupid this sounds? The logic doesn't follow.
Take your Non sequiturs and false dichotomy elsewhere.
Of course this sounds stupid because you intentionally put the event of getting cut BEFORE getting the vaccine.
If it was the other way around it'd be a silly anecdote but at least your argument would sound less dishonest.

Why? Are you going to explain why or just point something out because you can? You could say this about anything else, youtube, or any paper in the internet.
Surely Wikipedia alone doesn't make it a solid and founded source, but it DOES add fuel to the idea, but that's not what you said.
Wikipedia is like some random person saying some random thing on twitter. Anyone can edit pages after all.
If you want to use wikipedia to find credible sources use the references at the bottom of the page instead of referencing wikipedia directly, it's the same as when you find a source through google or some other search engine, you're not going to credit google as your source.

All I hear is an attempt to discredit all sorts of info without any basis. Where do you think the sources of national television come from? From nothing? In this context, they come from the experts: scientists, virologists etc. What you're saying here is the likes of a flat earther.
Tv/websites/etc usually parrot some other that has reported on it before. Usually the news comes from some international news agency like reuters.
Also scientists and virologists get filtered before they are used as a source, because the news agencies want to make sure what they say aligns with their narrative.
Look into the Great Barrington Declaration, you'll see there are plenty of scientists who disagree with the narrative you hear on tv.

First of all, who the hell uses facebook and instagram as a credible source?
Yet you see no issue with wikipedia as source?

Second of all, have you asked yourself all the possibilities for the reason they "repress" the other point of view"? Have you thought of "maybe it's just completely gibberish"? "Spreading false information"? Because I myself thought the possibility the reason the media could be "lying", but then if they were lying, then possibly the scientists also could be lying? The most likely scenario is no. Because you can't prove that.
You can literally prove they're lying by looking back at all the shit that has been said 1~2 years ago. You will find many of the things that were said back then have now proven to be lies.

Third of all, I don't care about the other point of view, I want the truth. A virus existing isn't a debate.
I heard there are several countries where scientists failed to prove the virus exists in court, forcing the judge to rule that the virus does not exist.
I haven't fact-checked this claim and I don't deny that the virus exists though, just saying there can be debate.
If you really want truth, how about you start by proving the virus actually exists.

He doesn't need to be demonised, he is in fact a demon spreading unfounded claims.
Did you know demonizing can get people killed? And if that happens, the blood is on your hands.

what the hell is this? What bioweapon?
Bioweapon can be used to refer to both covid and the vaccine.

Do you even read what you write? This is the most unplausible crap I've ever seen. You claim that wikipedia is a mistake, but these random ass sites are better "rumble.com , brandnewtube.com , orwell.city"
Try The COVID World
 
Last edited:
Of all the things I said in my post you choose this useless little part at the end to make fun of me, and you know why? Because I put a lot of effort in my post, so you can't find anything wrong with the rest of what I said.
Also just FYI if you'd read my earlier posts in this thread you'd realize I wasn't trying to imply my time is more valuable than yours, it's rather that I don't want to waste my time talking to a brick wall since everyone here seems to only be interested in an argument, not a debate.
I'm going to go out on a limb and be a little bit honest here, but your assessment of my reason why I said what I did is not correct. I did not choose that one part to make fun of you because I could not find anything wrong with the rest of your post. Rather, I did not actually read the rest of your post. My message was simply low-effort. Your later assessment that I did not read the entire rest of this thread is more correct. I was using this fun "What's new?" feature on Hive, and then I thought it was funny and out of place for people to use this website to discuss matters of legitimate clinical public health, even if it is an off-topic section.

I'm sure you know as well as I do that if we were in an in-person social setting dicussing this topic, generally I would not just start accusing people of being Tichondrius. The in-person social filter of the subconscious is a wonderful thing, and I'm sure you are a fine human being. But this is a forum site for video games, so I saw discussions regarding legitimate clinical public health as more of a comedy and social commentary. So I figured that if you're spending all this time working really hard on a serious post about this topic, but then publishing your post somewhere like a video game website where it is not nearly as relevant as if you published your findings on a public health website, this probably means it's more funny to you and less serious.

Now that I'm seeing that you appear to be maybe slightly offended by my statement rather than seeing it as the comedy I meant it for, I apologize, and I'll likely unwatch this thread. If it comforts you a bit, given that this is not an in-person setting, it would be fine with me if you want to accuse me of being Tichondrius or some other big baddie video game boss to get back at me. I may or may not read it, and if I do read what video game boss you compare me to, honestly I might appreciate it if you're spot on and I might get a good laugh.

But as I said, I meant no trouble. So I'll be unwatching this thread and probably not reply further. Good luck to you.

(If it helps you determine which video game boss I am, for the record, yes I am part of a family where we use peer pressure to make other family members get COVID19 vaccination. We do the same thing with measles and tetanus and whatever else are the required vaccinations in my country. I don't have a scientific background and I don't know how any of these vaccines work; I just go and get them.)
 
Level 12
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
652
Funny thing about medicine is when it's existing medicine that happen to also work well against covid, you get censored when you try to talk about it, but when it's a new medicine that's 40 times more expensive than a single vaccine shot, suddenly everyone's cheering.
Ivermectin? At doses safe for humans, it is not effective. Then we have mRNA, which was as close to cutting edge technology for vaccines in 2021 as we could've gotten. Imo the mRNA vaccine is better than the Adenovirus-based vaccines anyway, and cutting edge doesn't come cheap ;)


And oml, WHEN did "This doesn't completely prevent X, therefore X is bad" become the hill anyone's willing to die on? If seat belts were invented last year, congress literally would NOT be able to mandate you wear your seatbelt in your car.

Lockdowns help prevent hospitals reaching capacity and having to let someone with problems a hospital can treat die. What matters in highly contagious viruses is the R0, this game demonstrates that well; What Happens Next? COVID-19 Futures, Explained With Playable Simulations

And no, don't blame republicans for it. There are equally important issues Democrats will not stand behind, and in fact use their influence and power to prevent those issues from coming to fruition.

HOT TAKE: You can choose to be stabbed by those you know to be your enemies, or be stabbed by the enemies who have bought you into voting for them. Not! You can just not vote, or vote third party. Thing is, its a fool's errand in primitive voting systems like First-Past-The-Post. Many European countries have adopted models superior to this, like Ranked Choice Voting. Don't let the duopoly tear us apart! Fight for Ranked Choice Voting both locally and nationally! Political division has not been this great since the Civil War, so this isn't an issue you get to just shrug and say "other people will handle it". Read more about RVC here; Ranked Choice Voting - Yang2020 - Andrew Yang for President
 
Last edited:
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
Ivermectin? At doses safe for humans, it is not effective.
Source saying that it's not effective? Also ivermectin is just one example, there's also hydroxychloroquine, bromhexine, even just vitamin D might help.

Then we have mRNA, which was as close to cutting edge technology for vaccines in 2021 as we could've gotten. Imo the mRNA vaccine is better than the Adenovirus-based vaccines anyway, and cutting edge doesn't come cheap ;)
Why is mRNA better? Why are we still in this situation if the vaccines are so cutting edge.
And don't try to blame unvaccinated people, even in places with nearly 100% vaccination rate things haven't gone back to normal.

And oml, WHEN did "This doesn't completely prevent X, therefore X is bad" become the hill anyone's willing to die on? If seat belts were invented last year, congress literally would NOT be able to mandate you wear your seatbelt in your car.
It's not just that the vaccines don't completely prevent X, they can actually cause harm. I already argues about this in earlier posts, for young healthy people the risk outweights the benefits, and also in the study I linked earlier it shows that the vaccines actually make it more likely to get infected by omicron if your last shot was 3 months or longer ago.
Funny thing is, "This doesn't completely prevent X, therefore X is bad" can be said about medicine as well. You already admitted ivermectin is safe (unlike the vaccines) so why not at least try it.
 
Source saying that it's not effective? Also ivermectin is just one example, there's also hydroxychloroquine, bromhexine, even just vitamin D might help.


Why is mRNA better? Why are we still in this situation if the vaccines are so cutting edge.
And don't try to blame unvaccinated people, even in places with nearly 100% vaccination rate things haven't gone back to normal.


It's not just that the vaccines don't completely prevent X, they can actually cause harm. I already argues about this in earlier posts, for young healthy people the risk outweights the benefits, and also in the study I linked earlier it shows that the vaccines actually make it more likely to get infected by omicron if your last shot was 3 months or longer ago.
Funny thing is, "This doesn't completely prevent X, therefore X is bad" can be said about medicine as well. You already admitted ivermectin is safe (unlike the vaccines) so why not at least try it.
You realise that it's much better to just be vaccinated reducing the risk of serious health complications that suffering due to the virus and requiring such treatments? Also the Vitamin D thing is not what you think, the risk of serious health complications is significantly reduced if you have a healthy level of Vitamin D however, Vitamin D is not a treatment since it is incredibly easy to overdose on Vitamin D the studies compared levels of Vitamin D in people with COVID and showed that those with a healthy level of Vitamin D had a vastly reduced risk of health complications this =/= Vitamin D being a treatment.

Lol, you say don't try to blame unvaccinated people but that is literally the reason. There is nowhere with a near 100% vaccination rate from everything I can see the peak is ~70-80% in developed countries with the rest being below that. Also as for why mRNA is better I'd just recommend reading up about it yourself since it's actually very interesting.

Yes the vaccine can potentially cause harm but that chance of causing harm is magnitudes smaller than the risks due to COVID it's not even a fair comparison it's just ridiculous to try and equate them. Also no the risks for young healthy people does not outweigh the benefits, your cherry picked data does not say what you think it says. Again you make this claim the vaccines aren't safe compared to Ivermectin which is just not true. The vaccines are safe, if you can get it then get it unless you have some kind of allergy or your doctor tells you not to.
 
Level 12
Joined
Oct 18, 2013
Messages
652
Source saying that it's not effective? Also ivermectin is just one example, there's also hydroxychloroquine, bromhexine, even just vitamin D might help.
I'm not in any position to tell people which drugs to/to not take for COVID. However, the data is pretty clear in that vaccination (preferably mRNA imo since it has the lowest rate of severe side effects) is what works BEST at preventing hospitalization. That is the primary goal. Keep hospitals from reaching capacity.

"It's not just that the vaccines don't completely prevent X, they can actually cause harm. I already argues about this in earlier posts, for young healthy people the risk outweights the benefits,"
- I would argue the risk of vaccination most certainly does NOT outweigh the benefits. Vaccination of our youth could be the difference between having 100s of thousands of people with long-COVID and not. I'm also certain this is not something you would ever budge on because ceding ground is like forfeiting a war from an anti-vaxxers perspective.

" and also in the study I linked earlier it shows that the vaccines actually make it more likely to get infected by omicron if your last shot was 3 months or longer ago."
- I'll again assert that reducing infections isn't the end-game of vaccination. Reducing hospitalization is.

"Funny thing is, "This doesn't completely prevent X, therefore X is bad" can be said about medicine as well. You already admitted ivermectin is safe (unlike the vaccines) so why not at least try it.""
- Sure, you can argue that. My entire contention is that it is poor reasoning. I, personally, am never taking Ivermectin because the data I've seen demonstrates that doses where it is effective are past the therapeutic dosing for the drug.

bottom line
------------------

I'm not going to be the one proposing to people that we should give up lockdowns and masks, because you are then conceding that every immunocompromised person just has to deal with the consequences of our mishandling of the virus. Fuck that. If my implementation of R0-reduction measures prevents the death of ONE person, hell..if it buys 2 years of time for better medicine against COVID-19 to come about, THEN IT WAS WORTH IT FOR ME. In society, RIGHTS come with RESPONSIBILITIES. Your parents probably told you this when you first learned to drive. We have the RIGHT of free travel, but that is contingent on us as a society bearing the RESPONSIBILITY of not causing needless death and infection spread. Say that at 10 billion infections, COVID mutates into a much deadlier variant. Reducing R0 of COVID is the difference between the death toll we have now, and x10-100 that. Yeah, I'll put in place measures in my life to do what little I can to reduce the R0, it is the least I can do as a functional member of society. On one hand, the Biden administration mandating vaccination is NOT ideal. By virtue of the totality of impacts it has, I DO believe it will benefit society as a whole. I can swallow that fact without getting ass mad. Not everyone can. BUT, if you want a change in how governance is voted upon, ranting upon restrictions is not your end-game. Your end-game is fighting for RANKED CHOICE VOTING. Please, this is what the country needs more than anything presently.
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
You realise that it's much better to just be vaccinated reducing the risk of serious health complications that suffering due to the virus and requiring such treatments? Also the Vitamin D thing is not what you think, the risk of serious health complications is significantly reduced if you have a healthy level of Vitamin D however, Vitamin D is not a treatment since it is incredibly easy to overdose on Vitamin D the studies compared levels of Vitamin D in people with COVID and showed that those with a healthy level of Vitamin D had a vastly reduced risk of health complications this =/= Vitamin D being a treatment.

Lol, you say don't try to blame unvaccinated people but that is literally the reason. There is nowhere with a near 100% vaccination rate from everything I can see the peak is ~70-80% in developed countries with the rest being below that. Also as for why mRNA is better I'd just recommend reading up about it yourself since it's actually very interesting.

Yes the vaccine can potentially cause harm but that chance of causing harm is magnitudes smaller than the risks due to COVID it's not even a fair comparison it's just ridiculous to try and equate them. Also no the risks for young healthy people does not outweigh the benefits, your cherry picked data does not say what you think it says. Again you make this claim the vaccines aren't safe compared to Ivermectin which is just not true. The vaccines are safe, if you can get it then get it unless you have some kind of allergy or your doctor tells you not to.
Didn't mean to imply vitamin D is a treatment in the same way as ivermectin. But like you said having healthy levels greatly reduces risk so I thought it was worth mentioning.

When it was reported that Portugal has nearly 100% vaccination rate I literally predicted (not in this thread but to friends/family) it wouldn't stop the spread. Guess what, I was proven right.
"About 98 percent of all of those eligible for vaccines — meaning anyone over 12 — have been fully vaccinated, Admiral Gouveia e Melo said." In Portugal, There Is Virtually No One Left to Vaccinate
"Average number of new infections reported in Portugal each day reaches new high: Now reporting more than 21,200 daily" Portugal: the latest coronavirus counts, charts and maps
Now what, you gonna blame the children younger than 12 years for not getting vaccinated?

Covid has NO risk to young healthy individuals, I'm not interested in arguing about whether or not we should vaccinate unhealthy and old people.
Also please explain to me how am I cherry picking data? Is it because I actually look at the data by age group instead of putting everyone from 0 to 100+ years together then screaming LOCKDOWN LOCKDOWN because the 80+ people greatly impact the average in these stats?

Ivermectin has been around way longer than the covid vaccines, yet the latter has way more reports in VAERS.

I'm not in any position to tell people which drugs to/to not take for COVID. However, the data is pretty clear in that vaccination (preferably mRNA imo since it has the lowest rate of severe side effects) is what works BEST at preventing hospitalization. That is the primary goal. Keep hospitals from reaching capacity.

"It's not just that the vaccines don't completely prevent X, they can actually cause harm. I already argues about this in earlier posts, for young healthy people the risk outweights the benefits,"
- I would argue the risk of vaccination most certainly does NOT outweigh the benefits. Vaccination of our youth could be the difference between having 100s of thousands of people with long-COVID and not. I'm also certain this is not something you would ever budge on because ceding ground is like forfeiting a war from an anti-vaxxers perspective.

" and also in the study I linked earlier it shows that the vaccines actually make it more likely to get infected by omicron if your last shot was 3 months or longer ago."
- I'll again assert that reducing infections isn't the end-game of vaccination. Reducing hospitalization is.

"Funny thing is, "This doesn't completely prevent X, therefore X is bad" can be said about medicine as well. You already admitted ivermectin is safe (unlike the vaccines) so why not at least try it.""
- Sure, you can argue that. My entire contention is that it is poor reasoning. I, personally, am never taking Ivermectin because the data I've seen demonstrates that doses where it is effective are past the therapeutic dosing for the drug.

bottom line
------------------

I'm not going to be the one proposing to people that we should give up lockdowns and masks, because you are then conceding that every immunocompromised person just has to deal with the consequences of our mishandling of the virus. Fuck that. If my implementation of R0-reduction measures prevents the death of ONE person, hell..if it buys 2 years of time for better medicine against COVID-19 to come about, THEN IT WAS WORTH IT FOR ME. In society, RIGHTS come with RESPONSIBILITIES. Your parents probably told you this when you first learned to drive. We have the RIGHT of free travel, but that is contingent on us as a society bearing the RESPONSIBILITY of not causing needless death and infection spread. Say that at 10 billion infections, COVID mutates into a much deadlier variant. Reducing R0 of COVID is the difference between the death toll we have now, and x10-100 that. Yeah, I'll put in place measures in my life to do what little I can to reduce the R0, it is the least I can do as a functional member of society. On one hand, the Biden administration mandating vaccination is NOT ideal. By virtue of the totality of impacts it has, I DO believe it will benefit society as a whole. I can swallow that fact without getting ass mad. Not everyone can. BUT, if you want a change in how governance is voted upon, ranting upon restrictions is not your end-game. Your end-game is fighting for RANKED CHOICE VOTING. Please, this is what the country needs more than anything presently.
I don't know about the hospitalization stats but I do know that all-cause deaths are higher for vaccinated than unvaccinated.
If the primary goal is to prevent hospitalizations then we should encourage people to live healthily, not live in constant fear and stress which is bad for your health. Take vitamin D and work out from time to time.

I think I already ceded enough ground by saying I only care about young and healthy people getting their freedom back. You can jab old and unhealthy people as much as you want, I don't really care.

I think you greatly overestimate long-COVID, and you fail to consider that vaccines can cause harm as well, especially for young people.

If you dont care about infections that's fine, but know that most governments do care since it can be used to predict the hospitalizations in the near future.

You again seem to be ignoring the costs of the measures and only looking at the potential benefits. Is it really worth it to prevent the death of one person if it also causes 10 more to commit suicide? Not to mention the economic impact.

You're imagining a second marek's disease but you don't even seems to realize that that was caused by the vaccine being leaky, which the covid vaccines are as well. This means that the virus is able to mutate in a vaccinated person.

Why are you making these random numbers up, 10 to 100 times more deaths? It's easy to compare different countries with different measures and even states in the USA, you'll see the measures hardly have any impact.
I guess it's kinda hard to blame you for that though, even in my small af country which is smaller than a state in the USA we (the government) only look at our own data, maybe our neighbours sometimes, but if you look worldwide, well, it might change your mind if you actually do some research.
 
Funny how you complain about someone else making up numbers whilst creating scenarios and situations up to suit your narrative.

Of course the vaccine has more VAERS reports than Ivermectin, think about it for longer than 2 seconds and it is self-evident why that is.

Also according to all data I can find Portugal is at ~90% fully vaccinated.
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
Funny how you complain about someone else making up numbers whilst creating scenarios and situations up to suit your narrative.

Of course the vaccine has more VAERS reports than Ivermectin, think about it for longer than 2 seconds and it is self-evident why that is.

Also according to all data I can find Portugal is at ~90% fully vaccinated.
The only number I made up was about the suicides and that was a hypothetical question in response to some other made up scenario.

If you don't want to compare VAERS data from ivermectin and covid vaccines then how about you compare it with other non-covid vaccines? The message is still the same.

I literally gave a source saying it's 98%, only reason I can think of why you get 90% now is because you doesn't count as vaccinated anymore if you don't get a booster lol.
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
Lol in your source it doesn't even say 98%. Or as far as I read before a paywall popped up.
Step 1: Install adblocker/noscript
Step 2: Ctrl+F "98 percent" not "98%"

And yes the article also says only 86% of the TOTAL population is vaccinated which is why I immediately followed up asking if you think children 12 years and younger should be vaccinated too, since CLEARLY they are to blame...

The MSM loves to misrepresent data, when the cases in Portugal were low they say "look 98% (of those eligible) are vaccinated, that means it's working!", but now when cases are high "we only vaccinated 86% (of total population), we must boost everyone and vaccinate the children!".

Now look at the article again, notice it was posted oct 1st 2021, only 3 months ago.
"“We believe we have reached the point of group protection and nearly herd immunity,” he said. “Things look very good.”"

So now that you can't blame unvaccinated people anymore, let me guess, you're gonna blame omicron.
That's fine, but if we can't stop the pandemic by vaccination due to new variants, then how will we ever end this pandemic?
 
I'm not implying anything. You're the one saying I can't put blame on the unvaccinated when Omicron originated in a country where a large enough percentage of the population aren't fully vaccinated because for whatever weird reason you think that because Portugal has a 98% vaccination rate that should somehow prevent variants from arising in other parts of the world. All these mental gymnastics in order to justify your nonsensical narrative. Come on man, this stuff isn't hard.
 
Level 16
Joined
Jan 1, 2018
Messages
672
I'm not implying anything. You're the one saying I can't put blame on the unvaccinated when Omicron originated in a country where a large enough percentage of the population aren't fully vaccinated because for whatever weird reason you think that because Portugal has a 98% vaccination rate that should somehow prevent variants from arising in other parts of the world. All these mental gymnastics in order to justify your nonsensical narrative. Come on man, this stuff isn't hard.
Then what point were you trying to make asking where omicron originated?

The only point I was trying to make is that 98% vaccination rate doesn't prevent omicron from causing record numbers of infections. I never said it prevents new variants from emerging in other parts of the world.

I'm not the one doing any mental gymnastics, I simply look at the data and from that conclude that the mainstream narrative is wrong.
 
Top