Covid Jab Follies: The more you know.

[Hawkeye10]

Barack also was not required to get the same vaccine you did. Oh, he got a vaccine, but it did not contain the same things...


Nobody among the Elite, Congress, TLAs, and the Illegals, was required to get the same vaccine, spike protein and all... that we were required to take.


Everyday, I am in extreme pain, because of the protein neuro-shealth inflammation. One day, it will stop my heart.


I will not forgive or forget.


-

What is the story on that? I heard that the Death Jab program was fully a DOD program and that the overlords who run the Swamp gave something like 4,000 important revolution members exemptions from the jabs.....they got jabbed for the propaganda program but actually took saline.

Is that the story you heard?

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Taichiliberal]

From your article, heart inflammation was higher “although the condition was still extremely rare”.

See that? EXTREMELY RARE.

Not only was it extremely rare, the outcomes were almost always positive with no long lasting effects.

Your same dumbfuck claims. The same rebuttals by me. And even your own citations.

Give it up, pally boy. Your horse is dead.

an increase noted 3 years ago. in the interim you've had an increase in cardiac & pulmonary deaths among young athletes after a general jab mandate. but do continue to split hairs & bray like a blinders wearing jackass.

 

[domer76]

an increase noted 3 years ago. in the interim you've had an increase in cardiac & pulmonary deaths among young athletes after a general jab mandate. but do continue to split hairs & bray like a blinders wearing jackass.

Extremely rare. And you know nothing about causation on any young athlete deaths. Merely, more anecdotal BS.

 

[domer76]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1771584087817322702

https://twitter.com/x/status/1781367713463447814

Cancer Doctor Issues Urgent Warning

The mRNA COVID-19 shots “should be completely banned! If they’re going to be used for anything, it has to be what they are, gene therapies.”

Prof. Angus Dalgleish says there is a “fundamental flaw” with COVID-19 shots, and the flaw is that “it carries on for an indeterminate period of time.”

What that means is the modified mRNA containing N1-methyl-pseudouridine (m1Ψ) allows the mRNA in the COVID shots to last in the body for an indefinite period of time, leading to an uncontrolled amount of spike protein production.

The bottom line: There is a great likelihood that the shots are causing cancer.

• Spike protein inhibits the activity of tumor suppressor genes.

• Spike protein interferes with BRCA, which keeps ovarian and breast cancer in check.

• The N1-methyl-pseudouridine (m1Ψ) in itself leads to immune suppression. Without the immune system working in full force, it creates conditions conducive to rapid cancer growth—or what some people refer to as “turbo cancer.”

As such, Prof. Dalgleish says:

“You should never use them [mRNA shots] in the general population as vaccines because they’re not.”

“They [COVID shots] should be completely banned!”

Nope, the removal of that 2-3 year old tweet is meaningless. The FDA just chose to no longer mess with that dead horse.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Extremely rare. And you know nothing about causation on any young athlete deaths. Merely, more anecdotal BS.

Please don't attempt to condescend like you're some sort of amateur "expert". Things stop being "rare" when they start becoming "periodic". Only a complete idiot or company wonk would try to dismiss the connection between past and current events as "anecdotal". Either get acquainted with the definition of the word or just STFU, as I'm embarrassed for you.

 

[domer76]

Please don't attempt to condescend like you're some sort of amateur "expert". Things stop being "rare" when they start becoming "periodic". Only a complete idiot or company wonk would try to dismiss the connection between past and current events as "anecdotal". Either get acquainted with the definition of the word or just STFU, as I'm embarrassed for you.

Odd, I’ve never seen the word “periodic” when it comes to a peer reviewed article regarding the myocarditis rate. Only “rare”. Or “extremely rare”.

The anecdotal part, idiot, is when you try to make the claim that every young athlete that has experienced some sort of heart ailment and at some time in the past has also been vaccinated, that it’s caused by the vaccine.

Here’s the way it works, dumbfuck. Just because a black cat crossed your path and you got hemorrhoids a month later does not mean the cat was the cause. That’s your logic.

 

[Taichiliberal]

Odd, I’ve never seen the word “periodic” when it comes to a peer reviewed article regarding the myocarditis rate. Only “rare”. Or “extremely rare”.

The anecdotal part, idiot, is when you try to make the claim that every young athlete that has experienced some sort of heart ailment and at some time in the past has also been vaccinated, that it’s caused by the vaccine.

Here’s the way it works, dumbfuck. Just because a black cat crossed your path and you got hemorrhoids a month later does not mean the cat was the cause. That’s your logic.

So you put your brain on hold until you read it in print? Hmm, then care to explain why in the year or two past the mandated vaccine drive in various parts of the society you have a noticeable increase in reported cardiac related deaths among relatively young/healthy folks?

But since you want to play games, I'll use your rules. Look up the raw number (or percentage) of deaths due directly to covid vaccine for the last 2 years (each year).

Oh, and if you're going to try and debate, learn to honestly and accurately relate what other people write. I never said "every athlete with a heart problem was definitely caused by the vaccine. I'm pointing to the FACT of the increase in such that correlates with the mandate for professional and college kids (if not in some high schools). You keep harping on the official admittance that such is "rare". I merely point out that the in the last 2 years the "rarity" is becoming more periodic. Just do a simple combination from various studies. Case in point: Nationwide, vaccination is credited with preventing about 3.2 million deaths in its first two years. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20240415/Oregon-study-finds-no-clear-link-between-mRNA-vaccines-and-sudden-cardiac-deaths-in-young-people.aspx

Only a true "dumbfuck" would just blow off a "known" 3.2 million deaths as trivial. Neither you or I know exactly how many people did not have Covid but got vaccinated against it. Add to that how many of those people are suffering bad side effects down the line? We can blow off everything as "natural" occurrence, but you can't ignore common factors.

But I suspect you will, so you'll now just regurgitated the SOS. Carry on.

 

[domer76]

So you put your brain on hold until you read it in print? Hmm, then care to explain why in the year or two past the mandated vaccine drive in various parts of the society you have a noticeable increase in reported cardiac related deaths among relatively young/healthy folks?

But since you want to play games, I'll use your rules. Look up the raw number (or percentage) of deaths due directly to covid vaccine for the last 2 years (each year).

Oh, and if you're going to try and debate, learn to honestly and accurately relate what other people write. I never said "every athlete with a heart problem was definitely caused by the vaccine. I'm pointing to the FACT of the increase in such that correlates with the mandate for professional and college kids (if not in some high schools). You keep harping on the official admittance that such is "rare". I merely point out that the in the last 2 years the "rarity" is becoming more periodic. Just do a simple combination from various studies. Case in point: Nationwide, vaccination is credited with preventing about 3.2 million deaths in its first two years. https://www.news-medical.net/news/20240415/Oregon-study-finds-no-clear-link-between-mRNA-vaccines-and-sudden-cardiac-deaths-in-young-people.aspx

Only a true "dumbfuck" would just blow off a "known" 3.2 million deaths as trivial. Neither you or I know exactly how many people did not have Covid but got vaccinated against it. Add to that how many of those people are suffering bad side effects down the line? We can blow off everything as "natural" occurrence, but you can't ignore common factors.

But I suspect you will, so you'll now just regurgitated the SOS. Carry on.

Your horse is dead. Not even ivermectin will help it.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Your horse is dead. Not even ivermectin will help it.

We have been betrayed.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Taichiliberal]

Your horse is dead. Not even ivermectin will help it.

translation: Old Domie has run out of any logical/factual/rational response beyond childish retorts.

Oh and FYI: Ivermectin (along with numerous vitamin & mineral supplements) sure as hell saved my life during a 1 month stay in the hospital with Covid (lost 40 pounds, could not eat or sleep for weeks, had air tube in my nose to breath for about 2 weeks, remdesivir and baricitinib having little to no effect). But of course you won't believe me or any other testimony ... you'll even deny such valid reports from The Lancet, who grudgingly admit to positive results https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00239-X/fulltext

Carry on, bunky.

 

[domer76]

translation: Old Domie has run out of any logical/factual/rational response beyond childish retorts.

Oh and FYI: Ivermectin (along with numerous vitamin & mineral supplements) sure as hell saved my life during a 1 month stay in the hospital with Covid (lost 40 pounds, could not eat or sleep for weeks, had air tube in my nose to breath for about 2 weeks, remdesivir and baricitinib having little to no effect). But of course you won't believe me or any other testimony ... you'll even deny such valid reports from The Lancet, who grudgingly admit to positive results https://www.thelancet.com/journals/eclinm/article/PIIS2589-5370(21)00239-X/fulltext

Carry on, bunky.

A really pathetic study. You don’t read your own citations, do you?

First, the sample size is anemic. Started out with 30, ended with 20. Out of the 30, 6% had to drop out because of adverse reactions. Overall, adverse reactions were over 40%.

The patients were hospitalized with no co-morbidities. So, they were relatively healthy, unlike many hospitalized COVID patients. They had to be treated within 5 days with heavy doses. Continuing heavy doses.

Here’s the deal, moron. Had they received a vaccine with much fewer adverse reactions, they would have stayed out of the fucking hospital in the first place. The same goes for you, idiot. I got COVID, the nasty delta variant, about 7 months after my initial vaccine. My immunity was down after 7 months, but it was sufficient to keep me OUT OF THE HOSPITAL.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Lionfish]

 

[Taichiliberal]

A really pathetic study. You don’t read your own citations, do you?

First, the sample size is anemic. Started out with 30, ended with 20. Out of the 30, 6% had to drop out because of adverse reactions. Overall, adverse reactions were over 40%.

The patients were hospitalized with no co-morbidities. So, they were relatively healthy, unlike many hospitalized COVID patients. They had to be treated within 5 days with heavy doses. Continuing heavy doses.

Here’s the deal, moron. Had they received a vaccine with much fewer adverse reactions, they would have stayed out of the fucking hospital in the first place. The same goes for you, idiot. I got COVID, the nasty delta variant, about 7 months after my initial vaccine. My immunity was down after 7 months, but it was sufficient to keep me OUT OF THE HOSPITAL.

Right, so the Lancet gives information that's contrary to your belief system, and now suddenly the study is "pathetic"? From the article: 45 participants were recruited (30 to IVM and 15 controls) between May 18 and September 9, 2020

Apply your logic to ALL the trials that "proved" Covid vaccines worked as a preventative in any form (regarding test subject size). From the very beginning, you had relative same size on some, larger on others AS THE DISEASE PROGRESSED.

And your myopic excerpts make an ASSUMPTION. See, as I said earlier, THERE IS NO CONCLUSIVE RECORD OF HOW MANY "HEALTHY" PEOPLE GOT JABBED, LET ALONE USED IVERMECTIN IN THEIR TREATMENT.

Remember toodles, wonks like you and the "officials" said that ivermectin was INEFFECTIVE....period. I used 2-3 pills a day that was geared for someone around my (deteriorated) weight for about 5 days that seriously turned my trajectory around.

From the article. Pay attention to detail, genius:
Drugs such as ivermectin can be used to target viral entry or viral replication mechanisms in host cells, as well as to modulate the innate immune responses, to achieve indirect antiviral activity in vivo. Mechanisms essential for viral infection, such as nuclear transport or intracellular signal transduction, among others, have been indicated as better targets to identify broad-spectrum antiviral agents, with some advantages over direct-acting antivirals targeting viral components.
In summary, our findings support the hypothesis that IVM has a concentration dependent antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 and provides insights into the type of evaluations to be considered in the assessment of antiviral drugs for the control of COVID-19. Follow-up trials to confirm our findings and to identify the clinical utility of IVM in COVID-19 are warranted.

Once again for the cheap seats: the discussion was about the creeping increase in cardiac/pulmonary deaths/illness among healthy people who got jabbed. I never said EVERYONE is going to suffer these fates. My point from the OP relates to what the MSM and medical status quo is furiously trying to ignore. Your story is your story (good for you), and mine is mine. GTFU and deal with it.

 

[domer76]

Right, so the Lancet gives information that's contrary to your belief system, and now suddenly the study is "pathetic"? From the article: 45 participants were recruited (30 to IVM and 15 controls) between May 18 and September 9, 2020

Apply your logic to ALL the trials that "proved" Covid vaccines worked as a preventative in any form (regarding test subject size). From the very beginning, you had relative same size on some, larger on others AS THE DISEASE PROGRESSED.

And your myopic excerpts make an ASSUMPTION. See, as I said earlier, THERE IS NO CONCLUSIVE RECORD OF HOW MANY "HEALTHY" PEOPLE GOT JABBED, LET ALONE USED IVERMECTIN IN THEIR TREATMENT.

Remember toodles, wonks like you and the "officials" said that ivermectin was INEFFECTIVE....period. I used 2-3 pills a day that was geared for someone around my (deteriorated) weight for about 5 days that seriously turned my trajectory around.

From the article. Pay attention to detail, genius:
Drugs such as ivermectin can be used to target viral entry or viral replication mechanisms in host cells, as well as to modulate the innate immune responses, to achieve indirect antiviral activity in vivo. Mechanisms essential for viral infection, such as nuclear transport or intracellular signal transduction, among others, have been indicated as better targets to identify broad-spectrum antiviral agents, with some advantages over direct-acting antivirals targeting viral components.
In summary, our findings support the hypothesis that IVM has a concentration dependent antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 and provides insights into the type of evaluations to be considered in the assessment of antiviral drugs for the control of COVID-19. Follow-up trials to confirm our findings and to identify the clinical utility of IVM in COVID-19 are warranted.

Once again for the cheap seats: the discussion was about the creeping increase in cardiac/pulmonary deaths/illness among healthy people who got jabbed. I never said EVERYONE is going to suffer these fates. My point from the OP relates to what the MSM and medical status quo is furiously trying to ignore. Your story is your story (good for you), and mine is mine. GTFU and deal with it.

Your 30 IVM dropped to 20. Out of the original 30, 2 (6.7%) dropped out due to adverse effects. After that, there were 43% adverse reactions. That’s in healthy patients with NO CO-MORBIDITY. Compare that the EXTREMELY RARE occurrences with the vaccine.

As I said, stupid fuck, the vaccine KEEPS YOU OUT OF THE HOSPITAL so that you don’t need other treatments .

 

[Taichiliberal]

Your 30 IVM dropped to 20. Out of the original 30, 2 (6.7%) dropped out due to adverse effects. After that, there were 43% adverse reactions. That’s in healthy patients with NO CO-MORBIDITY. Compare that the EXTREMELY RARE occurrences with the vaccine.

As I said, stupid fuck, the vaccine KEEPS YOU OUT OF THE HOSPITAL so that you don’t need other treatments .

Repeating your myopia won't make your conclusion magically true, genius. You should note what was explained BEFORE you homed in on the chart: Enrolment started on May 18 and finished on September 9 2020, with 45 participants recruited among 4 participating hospitals. As planned, 30 were randomized to the IVM group and 15 to the untreated control group. Two subjects withdrew consent in the IVM group; in 1 case due to a mild rash and nausea after 1 dose of IVM and the other due anxiety after 2 doses; in both cases, adverse events resolved spontaneously; the remaining 28 subjects in the IVM group completed treatment. One case in the control group was withdrawn from the study due to the initiation of lopinavir on day-5 due to disease progression and another was lost to follow-up after the visit on day-7. In addition, ten cases, seven in the IVM group and three controls, presented viral load below the limit of quantification (<10 copies/reaction) at baseline. All these cases remaining undetectable in most samples through the follow-up and excluded from the efficacy analysis. The remaining 32 cases (20 treated and 12 control) constitute the efficacy analysis population.
Now stop projecting your mental status, as I don't think you're a true "dumb/stupid fuck", just a establishment wonk with delusions of intelligence beyond what you're truly capable of (i.e., critical thinking). I'll pick this up tomorrow. Carry on.

 

[domer76]

Repeating your myopia won't make your conclusion magically true, genius. You should note what was explained BEFORE you homed in on the chart: Enrolment started on May 18 and finished on September 9 2020, with 45 participants recruited among 4 participating hospitals. As planned, 30 were randomized to the IVM group and 15 to the untreated control group. Two subjects withdrew consent in the IVM group; in 1 case due to a mild rash and nausea after 1 dose of IVM and the other due anxiety after 2 doses; in both cases, adverse events resolved spontaneously; the remaining 28 subjects in the IVM group completed treatment. One case in the control group was withdrawn from the study due to the initiation of lopinavir on day-5 due to disease progression and another was lost to follow-up after the visit on day-7. In addition, ten cases, seven in the IVM group and three controls, presented viral load below the limit of quantification (<10 copies/reaction) at baseline. All these cases remaining undetectable in most samples through the follow-up and excluded from the efficacy analysis. The remaining 32 cases (20 treated and 12 control) constitute the efficacy analysis population.
Now stop projecting your mental status, as I don't think you're a true "dumb/stupid fuck", just a establishment wonk with delusions of intelligence beyond what you're truly capable of (i.e., critical thinking). I'll pick this up tomorrow. Carry on.

Do this, Einstooge. You stick with ivermectin AFTER you’re hospitalized and I’ll stick with the vaccine to remain out of the hospital