Quote:
Originally Posted by lilylivered
|
Kill me. Now. Please.
Dude....please stop. You just sound more and more inane with virtually every thing you say. You have no concept of the science involved here. None. And if by some chance you are trying to be witty....whew. That sure ain't workin....
But if yer gonna insist on keeping this up...next time, make sure you also reference the most important part of that linck, which you conveniently do not:
"
These findings demonstrate that such cases and hospitalizations have occurred in New York State, but at levels substantially lower than among unvaccinated people."
This was an absolutely
CLASSIC example of the process of picking and chosing facts and quotes to feed your agenda.... and the bullshit that is just adding to the confusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Withnail
The Pfizer shot contains aborted fetal cells. Please tell me why...
|
WTF? Are you really asking this?
First let me clarify:
there are no fetal cells in the vaccines. They were used to develop the vaccines. Not manufacture them.
But why were they used at all? Well...if yer too lazy to look it up...many vaccines have been developed using fetal cells. Other drugs, too. They are usually used in the early developmental stages. They come mostly from two cell lines that have been around for decades, i.e. there is no ongoing "harvesting" of aborted fetuses to replenish the supply of these cells - they just grow more of them from descendants of the original lines.
Now...if you're asking "why" from an
ethical standpoint...well, I'm hopin yer not gonna get all hypocritical here. Cuz you and your kids have undoubtedly been vaccinated with products developed with these same fetal cell lines. Rubella. Hep A. Chickenpox. So unless you're gonna tell me you now oppose all of those too...
But wait! You gotta stop using Tylenol, Ibuprofen, Motrin, Sudafed, Ex-Lax....and even mutherfukkin Preparation H too!
Cuz..yup, you guessed it...all used these same lines of fetal cells in development.
(some would argue that fuckin hookers tain't zackly ethical either...)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatCity
what is VAERS?
"effective" = why did the definition of "fully vaccinated" get changed? If it is "effective" it would prevent you from getting COVID. You can't say it minimizes the impacts of if you get it when its already has a 99.9% survival rate.
you're using the metric of volume of message to support the position. WHO/WHAT controls the access to the message and are they responsible for SUPPRESSING opposing views?
|
Whoa! A newcomer to the threAd! And with 4 "likes" to his post already! Which must have all been osd, cuz I can't understand 10 percent of this post....
But for the one part I thinck I understand...Where TF did you get this "99.9" percent figure?
Never mind. I know. It is one of the most commonly twisted pieces of misinformation out there. YES....it is that high for younger ages. But decreases as you age. Overall survival rate for the U.S. population appears to be about 98.3 percent. Meaning 1.7 percent die. Of a disease that is outrageously contagious. Damn. That sucks.
But even if your "99.9" figure was correct, your statement that "You can't say it minimizes the impacts of if you get it" just proves you do not understand probability and statistics. And trust me...neither you nor anyone else here wants me to 'splain that further. (BTW...it isn't intended as an insult either - virtually no one here understands it - it IS a hook board, after all...)
Thanks for playing though.
.