1. How are you not getting this? What’s causing myocarditis? The spike protein. What makes the spike protein? Either rona or an mRNA/adenovirus vaccine telling your body to make the spike protein. So, the original point of what’s now turned into this stupid fucking red herring was if the flu is more dangerous to kids/folks under 30 than COVID itself is, why force them and their young, healthy, robust bodies with great circulation to take a “vaccine” (that doesn’t work), that instructs their young robust healthy bodies with great circulation to make a fuck ton of cytotoxic spike proteins? How many times have I asked why are we giving this vaccine to the young who are neither victims/vectors of COVID 19? Why would posting the VAERS data on myocarditis not be relevant? Why risk the fuck ton of spike when their bodies basically stop COVID in its tracks and give them a much more robust immunity? I can’t dumb it down more than that. Where is the disconnect? DOES ANYONE ELSE FIND THIS CONFUSING??? Please comment.
2. Ask and answered. I posted the proof. I even explained why it is such. Then posted a Mayo Clinic researcher saying the same thing as me. I also posted the data for vaccinated reinfection rate vs those who’ve recovered from COVID. So what exactly am I supposed to refute when you haven’t countered with anything? Are you arguing against multiple types of antibodies are produced? Are you arguing that there’s more/equal antigens for which the body produce to antibodies too with the contents/progeny of a vaccine? Do you doubt the Israeli health ministry’s data?
News flash: ignoring sources or even declaring an a priori dislike of those sources is not an argument. You have to argue the contents of those sources. So which is your argument? I’m waiting.
Another news flash: Every source is an “extreme” news source. The whole country polarized. This isn’t news. So. Ask yourself. What does the blaze have to gain by posting anti vax stuff? They certainly have a lot to loose. Almost all social media, especially the news sharing big dog in Facebook announced they remove any such anti vaccine stuff. Facebook is the bread and butter of news sites. So that hurts them for sure. This is in contrast to anyone mainstream, in which big pharma IS THE NUMBER 1 SPONSER OF. That’s Fox. That’s CNN. That’s MSNBC. When phizer says shut up and dribble, they do it.
Israel is the best case study for the vaccine. High vaccination rate, genetically diverse, but also large enough to be a cases study. Gibraltar is 100% vaccinated by mandate, and their numbers match Israel’s. Which they’re 100% vaccinated...so the virus should be extinct there right? Oh wait it’s not, they’re seeing a huge case spike.
Gibraltar Coronavirus update with statistics and graphs: total and new cases, deaths per day, mortality and recovery rates, current active cases, recoveries, trends and timeline.
www.worldometers.info
The UK is close to Israeli numbers. That’s 29% of deaths breakthrough after fully vaccinated. Also, notice how they couch all the UK data in “vaccine working as planned by lowering hospitalization/deaths”. Funny. Especially considering the delta is a much weaker strain.
With the PM on the verge of delaying 'Freedom Day', new analysis by Public Health England has revealed that 29 per cent of Covid deaths from the B.1.617.2 strain have had two injections.
www.dailymail.co.uk
Here’s a small study for the US in peer review now.
A study conducted by researchers in the United States has shown that among twenty patients with breakthrough infection following vaccination against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) – the agent that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) – all of the infections...
www.news-medical.net
Sheesh above isn’t good for your case.
Also I’ve already explained antibody counts and how they work. There’s an absurd amount of variables, and “na-na-an I have more antibodies than you” is not even close to a valid argument. It shows how little you actually knowabout the topic. It also shows how easily you fall for the propaganda pre print “study” you posted. How long after vaccination vs infection were the measurements taken. Very important. Remember, the body stops making antibodies after a few months, the memory T cell immunity is what’s important. WHICH antibodies were measured? It’s not necessarily the sheer numbers, it’s the range of antibodies. If the vaccine makes 1000 for the spike protein, and natural only makes 500 for the spike, but also 500 for this surface, and 500 for that surface bump, and 500 for this receptor...which is better? The pre print was just measuring antibodies for the receptor binding domain (antigen on the spike protein[you know, the one that’s different for the delta variant]). A comparable metaphor here would be “I have 1000 Disney dollars and you only have 400 of dollars and the equivalent of 400 dollars in pesos.” And we ain’t in Disneyland anymore with the delta variant. Plus, did I read correctly it’s only 9 volunteers? How is that even close to a proper sampling group? Also notice the line “The antibody profile induced by natural exposure differed from the profile induced after mRNA vaccination.” Um, remind me, which has more antigens, an entire virus, or just the spike protein of the virus? Okay, and remind me, did they list when they determined the subjects in the metadata study were infected? If you measure when you know Ab titers (a ridiculous measure to take to compare immunity) will be at their highest...say 3 months out...and not knowing when the control group (of which it is a scientific sin to call that a control group) was infected...wouldn’t that be kind of skewing results in your favor? That being said I wouldn’t be surprised if this gets published in the Journal of Shady Asian Massage Parlors, but that’s all you’ll hear Hannity talking about on Fox News for a week.
Going back to the metaphor...it’s not for lack of me explaining these subjects to you. I have. I’ve been saying Disney bucks only work in Disney, and we left Disney, and Florida as a matter of fact. We’re on our way to Mexico, so we’ll eventually need pesos. Yet you come back with a study that says, wow look at all these Disney bucks, with no understanding that this is a self own.
3. What? . Let me get this straight. You find your own supposition, that you invented just now, to be ironic. Cool. Well wouldn’t it be ironic if a penguin hunted a killer whale? I think that’d be even more ironic. I win. I’m sure plenty who push ivermectin have. I’m sure plenty haven’t. To me it doesn’t matter. Why? Because conservatively 90% of doctors in the US are sending COVID patients home with ZERO treatment, and telling them not to come back unless their lips are blue, which means their O2 sats are in the 80s. This. Is. An. Insane. Policy. No matter which way you slice it. But this is what 90% of physicians are doing in the US. Why? Because that’s what the “guidelines” say. However, the data does matter to me. The data I have been posting. And that you have been ignoring.
Let me remind you that phizer was the company behind the SCOTUS Kelo case. Let me just educate you on how fucked up this was. Phizer got the government, our government, to use eminent domain to push private citizens out of their houses. Let me repeat that. A private company got the government to use eminent domain, a clause only reserved for the government in cases of extreme necessity, to take away people’s homes and property from them. That’s a good bit easier than telling a country to just take it out of the guidelines, for a reduced price on such and such drug. Doesn’t mean they’re banning doctors from using ivermectin, just a little taking it out of guidelines. Their hands are clean, or at least they can justify them as clean. India, on the other hand, is coming after doctors who spread misinformation about ivermectin not being effective, with the death penalty...so explain that one to me.
And I only know of 1 study saying it shows little efficacy. 1 study that was ripped a new one. I know of 50 that say other wise. Why not you read those 50 and find something that you don’t like about their methodology? I provided to you the rebuttal (and the study itself), signed by 120 doctors, to the one study you’re citing. Why don’t you do the same? Just with one of those 50 that I posted.
Here’s the other thing. Ivermectin is one of the safest drugs on the planet. Safer than aspirin for Christ’s sake. 4 billion doses administered since the 70s. If the logic behind the masks is “they don’t cause harm so why not try it even if it only helps by 1% (the study cited by the NIH to justify mask guidelines)”...why doesn’t the same logic apply to ivermectin? We know how to safely administer it. It’s sold over the counter in other countries. So, if it shows just 1% efficacy (it in fact shows much much much much more) why not use it?
We didn’t need a double blind for remdisivir and COVID, nor dexylmethasone and COVID. Both don’t work. Yet that’s what our guidelines say to use. I’m all about a double blind for ivermectin. All the doctors who push it are. But that takes a MINIMUM of 20 million dollars for a study. And zero people are going to make at least 20 million off of ivermectin. So, whose rushing to sponser it? Also, why do we need too? It’s a pandemic. We didn’t need to for dexylmethasone when the NIH declared that as the steroid to use. DMTH doesn’t work. It doesn’t travel to the lungs (where it needs to be) well. Not when we have other steroids that do (methylpredinisone). Why aren’t your demanding the double blind for that???? You’re not. Nor is anybody else. Because it’s absurd to demand a double blind for everything in a pandemic. Nor do you need a double blind for a safe drug when randomized control will suffice, there are 29 of them for ivermectin. I’ve already shat on your absurd “wE nEeD a DoUbLe BlINd”. Why are we still talking about this. Tell you what. You come up with a reason why a double blind is necessary over 30 randomized controlled studies, for a drug that’s perfectly safe, during a pandemic. And try not to sound stupid doing it. I will be listening.
jamanetwork.com
c19ivermectin.com
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
.jpg)
