NOW it all makes sense.....

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

So Salty you’d agree that hospitals should not have been forced to take care of the unvaxxed that got ill with Covid right? What about insurance companies paying for the unvaxxed? Should they have been allowed to cancel coverage.

Let’s go with your position that people should not have had any mandates. Employers surely should have had the free choice to fire unvaxxed if they believed it was a better financial choice for them if fewer people were at risk of lost time from work, right?

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... Exactly.

### Salty

exactly right my salty mate! unless our esteemed barrister thinks it's right for insurance companies to deny clams of valid premium payers?

[Salty Again]

... You mean the ones who pay premiums and then
develop cancer or another bad illness?

... Yes, that's bad and wrong to cancel their policy.
... "SUE the Bastards!"

... No different with Co-vid... Whether you're vaxxed or not.

#### Salty

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... You mean the ones who pay premiums and then
develop cancer or another bad illness?

... Yes, that's bad and wrong to cancel their policy.
... "SUE the Bastards!"

... No different with Co-vid... Whether you're vaxxed or not.

#### Salty

denying medical coverage to patients who paid their medical premiums who weren't vaxxed for non-covid related medical issues like cancer killed almost as many as covid.


it was illegal, unconstitutional and immoral.

[1blackman1]

Originally Posted by Salty Again

... You mean the ones who pay premiums and then
develop cancer or another bad illness?

... Yes, that's bad and wrong to cancel their policy.
... "SUE the Bastards!"

... No different with Co-vid... Whether you're vaxxed or not.

#### Salty

Very different from Covid, if there’s a known preventative measure for a disease the insurer has every right to decide to hedge their risk and drop their insured if that person refuses the treatment. Aren’t we all for capitalism and the market. Surely there’s a market for some insurer option that says they will provide coverage to the unvaxxed, just likely to be more expensive.

I’m all for allowing the market to dictate. If you wanna make bad choices, I shouldn’t have to subsidize that for you. People wanted to not get vaxxed, cool, the govt and hospitals shouldn’t eat their treatment cost or let them lay up in hospital bed for weeks and months. Allow them to sink or swim in the comfort of their home. Employer doesn’t want to risk time loss at work, fire the unvaxxed and allow them to work someplace without that concern.

As an example, we instituted vax requirement at our firm early on through early 2022 and got everyone back in the office. We lost 2 staff and 1 atty on their principles and our time loss was minimal. Another similar sized firm located here without a vax requirement had significant time loss by staff and attorneys due to several outbreaks over the past 3 years having a real financial impact.

Let the market work

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Maybe you are unaware of "pre-existing conditions" and how they are treated in "The Market Place". For example: let's say you are an older, black male that is morbidly over weight, you are likely to have diabetes. And you do know that is a highly likely scenario. Don't you? Yet you are still covered:

Health benefits & coverage

Coverage for pre-existing conditions
All Marketplace plans must cover treatment for pre-existing medical conditions.

• No insurance plan can reject you, charge you more, or refuse to pay for essential health benefits for any condition you had before your coverage started.
• Once you’re enrolled, the plan can’t deny you coverage or raise your rates based only on your health.
• Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) also can't refuse to cover you or charge you more because of your pre-existing condition...

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Very different from Covid, if there’s a known preventative measure for a disease the insurer has every right to decide to hedge their risk and drop their insured if that person refuses the treatment. Aren’t we all for capitalism and the market. Surely there’s a market for some insurer option that says they will provide coverage to the unvaxxed, just likely to be more expensive.

I’m all for allowing the market to dictate. If you wanna make bad choices, I shouldn’t have to subsidize that for you. People wanted to not get vaxxed, cool, the govt and hospitals shouldn’t eat their treatment cost or let them lay up in hospital bed for weeks and months. Allow them to sink or swim in the comfort of their home. Employer doesn’t want to risk time loss at work, fire the unvaxxed and allow them to work someplace without that concern.

As an example, we instituted vax requirement at our firm early on through early 2022 and got everyone back in the office. We lost 2 staff and 1 atty on their principles and our time loss was minimal. Another similar sized firm located here without a vax requirement had significant time loss by staff and attorneys due to several outbreaks over the past 3 years having a real financial impact.

Let the market work

So who you jive'n with your Kosmic Debris?

[1blackman1]

It’s not a pre-existing condition. It’s a refusal to take preventative measures. What you quoted has nothing to with what I stated.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

It’s not a pre-existing condition. It’s a refusal to take preventative measures. What you quoted has nothing to with what I stated.

It is not only a pre-existing condition, it is a self inflicted condition. Eating the Krispy Kremes cased it. Ignoring the Doctor's warnings caused it. Lack of will power caused it. Quit eating the donuts they said, you'll be fine they said. Faggit about it you said. Yet you will still be covered by insurance...

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Found this SubStack article very revealing. The whole vaxx vs anti-vaxx, besides being as stupid as "I am the science - the one - the way - the only way"; all boils down to insecurity and avoiding being defeated on the field of play. Chicken-shits.

This guy went to the conference and asked a few polite questions to some of the esteemed colleagues there. Some answers were astounding as much as they were revealing. Emphasis mine in the snippets.

From the Belly of the Beast...
I attended the 23rd World Vaccine Congress in Washington DC. This is what I saw and heard...
Madhava Setty Apr 10, 2023

...An American pediatrician chaired the roundtable. He opened the discussion with a request for ideas on how to counter vaccine hesitancy.

I had one:

“It’s obvious that the Krispy Kreme doughnuts and travel restrictions are carrots and sticks that have only partially worked. Those that remain hesitant are steadfast in their position because they have looked harder than most.

“They aren’t believing rumors. They are listening to credentialed physicians and scientists who have authored numerous peer-reviewed papers and who happen to be COVID-19 vaccine critics. Why don’t we engage them openly and see what they have to say?”

Katie Attwell, Ph.D., a professor from the University of Western Australia whose interest is in vaccine policy and uptake, shot down that idea. I didn’t know who she was at the time. I did manage to speak with her personally later in the week. Her rebuke was curt and to the point, “We cannot give any voice to the critic,” she told me. “Once the public sees them on equal footing with us they may believe what they are saying.”

Implicit in her strategy is the idea that the public cannot separate information from misinformation. Truth, in her mind, cannot stand on its own. It needs to be identified by those who know better...

So when it comes to science: They are the science - the one - the way - the only way. Any notion of debating the science is verboten! Nyet! Because, what if people believed "the other guy"? What if they had points to make that they couldn't respond to? What if their own position sucked and the peons saw it? Eeeeeeeek!

Since head-to-head competition is Right Out, as they might actually loose the debate, then what? No problemo. Reeducation will surely work. From the Tactics of the Lame: Label them, then figure out how to attack them directly. So they actually spent a lot of money (by they I mean the Big Pharmas) to analyze them and break them into smaller groups to assail.
...

...
Once a person is properly categorized, “personalized messaging” can be used to bring them back to “reality.” According to the abstract of his study:

“Just as precision medicine treats individuals, this study of 3000 parents (inclusive of all demographics) in the USA sought to identify the most effective personalized messaging to address vaccine hesitancy among parents. First, it sought correlations between: demographics; stated specific reasons for vaccine hesitancy; cognitive biases; cognitive styles; identity-linked worldviews; and personality traits.

“Second, it tested 16 messages in the form of mini-narratives, each embodied with a behavioral science principle, to find if certain messages resonated better than others depending on the many factors above.”

I later asked him how he would respond to someone who looked at the trial and observational data and found that it told a different story about the vaccines’ safety. He smiled, “Oh, those are the ones that have a higher need for cognitive closure. Yes. They are stuck because they cannot move forward if there is any uncertainty.”...

Ya catch that? The opposition is "stuck", not that their position may be "weak". Because - They are the science - the one - the way - the only way. Any notion of debating their science is verboten! Nyet!

Eat the bugs, own nothing and like it - or else. Capiche Comrade?!?

[adav8s28]

Originally Posted by Tiny

The word "vaccine" is not mentioned in the paper a single time. The vaccines earlier on prevented many from getting COVID, and later prevented them from getting severe disease. This is another example where you and Why_Yes_I_Do turn logic on its head, and attribute the effects of the disease to the vaccine. Which I guess isn't as strange as your links that attribute every random death to the vaccines.

Here is my gift to you and to Why_Yes_I_Do. Since you haven't been able to come up with anything that supports your contention that the vaccines are possibly worse than the disease, I've come up with two papers for you. Now IMHO they only support that for younger people. For older people like SpeedRacer and, to a lesser extent, me, getting the vaccines was clearly a good idea.

https://www.cell.com/trends/molecula...914(22)00103-4

https://www.preprints.org/manuscript...50/v1/download

The second paper, by the Norwegians, which hasn't been accepted for publication by a journal, has some real weaknesses, which I'd be happy to point out if you're interested. I haven't spent much time with the first paper.



Yes, that's a real risk if you get COVID, the disease. Thankfully, by getting the vaccines and boosters, all the way through the bivalent shot, I've probably avoided the disease, and if not whatever I had was asymptomatic. As such, my mental capacity is undiminished.



Should I resuscitate the thread, to add to the list? You were good to play along with that!

Your recent recommendation that people consider leaving the USA before the Progressives take over could be worth every bit of your 100K fee, at least for those of us who pay income taxes.



LOL. There's a guy who works out in my gym who turned 90 a couple of months ago. For his age, he was extremely fit. He'd do over 100 pounds on the bench press, leg lift and leg curl machines. He came down with COVID at his birthday party. Then his wife did. He's still on oxygen, and his wife is barely getting around. Now he did get the vaccine, and also around Septempber of 2021 the first booster. But nothing after that.

He told me he darn well wishes he'd gotten more jabs.

SpeedRacer has a lot more examples.




Adav8s28, you're a smart guy. I don't understand why you're always compelled to stretch the truth to support the Democratic Party Manifesto.

Officially, around 400,000 people died during Trump's watch, and over 700,000 since Biden took over.

Thank goodness for Pfizer, BioNTech, Moderna, the Trump Administration's Operation Warp Speed, and brave human guinea pigs like SpeedRacer and his wife. Thanks to them, we got the mRNA COVID vaccines into peoples' arms in record time, and hundreds of thousands of lives were save.

(For those who don't know, SpeedRacer and his better half participated in the Pfizer trials, back in 2020.)



SpeedRacer, I assume like me, you've gotten the first bivalent booster? Are you inclined to get the second any time soon?

I'm probably going to hold off as long as infection and fatality rates stay low. The CDC's not recommending a second bivalent booster at this time, unless you're immunologically compromised or really old.

@Tiny, I believe your numbers are incorrect regarding the number CoVid 19 deaths under Trump and Biden.

First thing lets compare Trump's last 12 months in office to Biden's first 12 months in office. So, we are comparing a time frame of Jan 21, 2020 - Jan 20th, 2021 for Trump and Jan 21, 2021 - Jan 20, 2022 for Biden. The first CoVid death was Feb 20, 2021 so you really only have an 11 month period for Trump.

From the link below for those time period:

Trump - 441,588 CoVid deaths

Biden - 452,877 CoVid deaths

In both time periods the a majority of the deaths were from people who did not get one of the Vaccines. So, if you look at a time period of equal time the number of deaths are about the same. Which was the point of my prior post. It had nothing to do with politics. You are still tied for first place as the best amature virologist on Eccie.Net.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

[ManSlut]

Originally Posted by Cheap Charlie

I swear. Every covid vaxed person I know has lost much of their cognitive ability. People I used to have meaningful, intelligent conversations with can no longer engage in an intellectual exchange. It's almost as if they are devolving. The spike protein crosses the blood brain barrier as well. I honestly feel sorry for COVID vaxed people. They will never be our equal. They can never rejoin our club. What's weird is that they(the vaxed) can't even recognize the overall decline that's taking place inside them. Only an unvaxed person can see it (the decline). Even though we see their obvious decline, we have to keep our mouths shut and pretend not to notice. It's the weirdest thing. You can't discuss the vax with anyone who doesn't share your vax status. It's the most taboo topic in the world. Enormous courage and intuition was required to resist the vax tyranny that ensued after vax development. The COVID vax really was an IQ test. If you took it, you failed.

Well, don’t have a conversation with your dumbass con-man leader Trumper, he’s fucked up every way - he’s had the jab and he’s had severe COVID!!…But he was a narcissistic dumbass before the COVID outbreak, so it’s hard to prove exactly how much more retarded he’s gotten being how he has always refused to have his IQ tested.

I can only imagine a conversation between Cheap Charlie & Trumpy, talk about paranoid schizophrenia, mixed with mental retardation?

[ManSlut]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Did any of you anti-vaxxers actually READ the article? There is no mention of vaccines.

"A new study from Europe underlines the potential long-term implications of COVID-19 infection among patients with a mild to moderate form of the disease not requiring hospitalization.

Results of the study, which assessed data from 443 COVID-19 positive patients Hamburg City Health Study COVID program who underwent multiple organ assessments 9.5 months after infection, suggest those who recovered from mild to moderate SARS-CoV-2 infection exhibited signs of subclinical multi-organ affection related to cardiac, pulmonary, thrombotic, and renal function."

So if a person has had Covid, that person is more likely to have post-Covid negative reactions. And those that are unvaccinated are more likely to contract Covid.

+1 LMAO

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Very different from Covid, if there’s a known preventative measure for a disease the insurer has every right to decide to hedge their risk and drop their insured if that person refuses the treatment... Let the market work

So now comes the market to work. Appears the market and it's associated marketing didn't pan out after all. The stock price tumbled. It's now time for a change - back to the past even.

No I'm not talking about Bud Light. We're talking about vaccines, technically a gene therapy in this case. Turns out the plan is changed. It wasn't paying out. They went from a possible 70% take rate for the 2 shots of an experimental use authorization (EUA), which shielded all parties from liability, to mandatory requirement for a non-informed consent, actually first ever, mRNA gene therapy. However, the booster after booster take rate dropped to below 17%. Another loss for the marketing teams.

Time to change horses. Of course, many may have missed this Okey-Doke shuffle by way of vociferous distractions in the LambSCREAM media. Dunno, war in the grifting and money laundering capital of the world or indictment of a former Presided on expired statute of limitations misdemeanors. What ever.

Staff Edit - Image Removed - Biomed1

FDA simplifies COVID vaccine schedules, withdraws authorization for older COVID-19 vaccines targeting virus' original strain

Vaccine uptake has slowed to a crawl in the U.S...

The Food and Drug Administration authorized a second omicron-targeted bivalent COVID-19 booster vaccine for people over 65 or who are immunocompromised, the agency announced Tuesday.

The agency also said any adult who has not yet been vaccinated will get one dose of an updated bivalent shot, rather than starting with the original vaccine and receiving the bivalent shot as a booster. The FDA is withdrawing authorization for those older COVID-19 vaccines targeting the original strain of the virus.

It's part of an overall move to simplify the COVID-19 vaccination process, the agency said in a statement. United States regulators are shifting towards a flu shot-like model for COVID-19 vaccines, where people get a single shot every year that's updated annually to match the virus strain predicted to be in circulation.

"At this stage of the pandemic, data support simplifying the use of the authorized mRNA bivalent COVID-19 vaccines and the agency believes that this approach will help encourage future vaccination," Peter Marks, director of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, said in a statement.

The original COVID-19 vaccine was matched against the first strain of the virus first identified in Wuhan, China. That strain of the virus is no longer circulating — the omicron variant and its sub variants are the predominant strains throughout the world. The bivalent shots target both that original strain and the omicron variant. They were first authorized as booster doses in fall 2022 and research shows they offer stronger protection against infection and serious illness from omicron than the original shot...

..."Simple and clear messaging is critical when it comes to ensuring vaccine uptake," he said. "Moving to a model that resembles the yearly flu shot campaign will help focus messaging and help increase population immunity ahead of a potential fall surge."

FDA advisors will meet in June to discuss updating the vaccine composition for fall 2023...

So there you have it -- an annual flu shot (gene therapy) that they will do their best guess on in advance - just like the do with the other flu. Rumor also has it that they have reduced the percentage of active ingredient by up to 75%, but I've not verified that.

One might wonder what the efficacy of previous flu vaccines has been. About 43% through the years according to the CDC. The same CDC that just made the above changes BTW.

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

According to the CDC, aka serial liars, typical flu vaccines run around 36%-60% effective. Effective for what is murky, i.e. effective from preventing infection or hospitalizations.
Anyway here is their chart - notice the interesting annotation below it


*2020-2021 flu vaccine effectiveness was not estimated due to low flu virus circulation during the 2020-2021 flu season.

Did ya catch that?!? No flu during the 'rona. Say wha??

FWIW: CDC Seasonal Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Studies

Anyway, this new/old idea has been brewing most of 2023

An FDA committee votes to roll out a new COVID vaccination strategy

...A committee of advisers to the Food and Drug Administration voted unanimously on a proposal to simplify the nation's strategy for vaccinating people against COVID-19.

The recommendation is that future COVID-19 vaccines should be interchangeable: no matter whether you're getting your first dose or a booster, the vaccines would all have the same formulation targeting the same viral strain or strains, regardless of the manufacturer. The vote was unanimous: 21-0.

In addition, the committee considered (but didn't vote on) proposals to have an annual COVID vaccination schedule, much like the U.S. has for the flu. If this happens, most people would be advised to get just one shot every fall with a new vaccine that's probably been re-jiggered to try to match whatever variant is predicted to be spreading each winter. This would mean Americans would no longer need to keep track of how many shots they've already gotten or when.

The idea behind the revamp is to make vaccination less complicated and confusing. The ultimate goal would be to get more people vaccinated...

But this time, Socialism will actually work, but you can trust them this time Right Comrade?

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Debating science is how science evolves. Censoring debate is how science and consequently - people, die.

Omicron a wolf in sheep's clothing



Dedicated to all the courageous Canadian and American truckers and to the doctors who support them in their vitally important fight against vaccine mandates and immunologic discrimination.


Will Omicron induce herd immunity or will it enable SARS-CoV-2 to transition into variants capable of potentiating ADE in vaccinees?

Could Omicron metamorphose into a wolf in sheep’s clothing?

Given the high and steadily increasing vaccine coverage rates in large parts of the world and the ongoing mass vaccination of children and continuation of booster campaigns, I am of the opinion that Omicron has the capacity to evolve into a much less benign variant, regardless of whether or not infection prevention measures are relaxed or lifted.

A coronavirus (CoV) can only replicate and mutate. The widely held belief that during the course of a pandemic viruses tend to become more infectious but less virulent is a myth—one kept alive by those who don’t understand the evolutionary dynamics of a pandemic. The latter are fully dependent upon the outcome of the interplay between the virus and the host immune system at a population level. Abiding by this ‘rule’ is the sole qualifier necessary to be an expert of viral pandemics. For several months I’ve been warning that continued mass vaccination and high vaccine coverage rates would prevent SARS-CoV-2 (SC-2) from generating sufficient herd immunity to control, let alone end, the current pandemic (1, 2, 3). The advent of Omicron hasn’t changed my mind, on the contrary!

Now that mass vaccination campaigns have quickly rendered the virus resistant to the adaptive immune response (cfr. Omicron), I am fearful that this may have a snowball effect. I’ve been postulating that the mechanism of innate immune adaptation to viral exposure (i.e., through a process of epigenetic changes referred to as ‘training’) is compromised in the vaccinated population and I am now predicting that the resulting burden of infectivity will cause massive population-level immune pressure on Omicron. In an attempt to overcome high immune pressure on Omicron’s infectiousness, natural selection of viral mutants that are capable of resisting both the acquired SC-2-specific and the CoV-reactive innate immune response in vaccinees is likely to occur. To understand why I fear that the growing vaccine coverage rates that we’re witnessing in large parts of the world could ultimately promote the propagation a new type of variant that has the capacity to fully resist both types of SC-2-directed immunity in the vaccinated population, one must turn to the ‘rule’ mentioned above:

While the vast majority of healthy unvaccinated individuals continue to resist Omicron’s high infectious pressure by virtue of the ongoing training of their innate immune effector cells (4, 5), a steadily increasing number of vaccinees are now becoming more susceptible to vaccine breakthrough infection and contracting C-19 disease. Although resistance of Omicron’s receptor-binding domain (RBD) to vaccinal anti-S antibodies (Abs) is thought to diminish suppression of innate Abs and therefore enables a predominantly mild course of the disease, a subset of the S-directed Abs may still be able to bind to immunogenic domains situated outside of the RBD of the S protein. Abs directed at the N-terminal domain, for example, have been reported to interact with lipid rafts on target cells via multivalent interactions (6, 7). As multi-specific innate Abs (i.e., IgMs) are known to bind to S using the same type of multivalent interaction, it is reasonable to assume that even non-neutralizing vaccinal Abs still have the capacity to compete with relevant innate Abs for binding to SC-2. It is, therefore, entirely possible that even non-neutralizing vaccinal Abs outcompete innate B1a cell-derived Abs for binding to SC-2, particularly under the following circumstances:

1. In the case innate immune effector cells had no opportunity to adapt to viral exposure prior to being short-circuited by vaccinal S-specific Abs (e.g., in case of high-speed mass vaccination programs conducted in populations with relatively low infection rates)
2. In the case of C-19 vaccination of children. Although present in high quantities, innate Abs in children are largely naïve (i.e., antigen (Ag)-inexperienced) and therefore prone to being outcompeted by S-specific vaccinal Abs (Note: subjects with naturally acquired Abs are endowed with trained innate immunity as naturally acquired Abs result from the virus breaking through their innate immunity)
3. In the case of recent C-19 boosting of vaccinees or subjects who previously recovered from C-19 disease or in the case of re-vaccination with an updated (i.e., anti-Omicron) vaccine. In either case, previously vaccine-induced Abs will be recalled. The recall results in high titers of anti-S Abs which have no neutralizing capacity towards Omicron. It has been reported that—due to antigenic sin—even anti-Omicron vaccines primarily recall Abs directed at the S protein of the Wuhan lineage (8).

Consequently, it becomes obvious that the continuation of mass vaccination campaigns now increasingly targeting children and focusing on booster shots (or Omicron-specific vaccinations) will result in a significant fraction of the vaccinated population compromising their innate B1a-derived Abs (IgMs). There can be no doubt that accelerated mass vaccination campaigns followed by booster shots at intervals as short as 4-5 months and complemented by C-19 vaccination of children will lead to a higher incidence of disease in the vaccinated population...

A lot of what he covers has pretty much come to pass. His voice was trampled upon by the disinformation society pretty roundly FWIW: Would you have guessed they guy was a Veterinarian? Luckily for us, the Pole Dancer at Snopes was there to besmirch him and lead the charge. BTW: The FDA and CDC kinda-sorta dropped the original vaccines and are now planning on a more best guess of the coming variant (just about exactly like we've done for the flu for DECADES) injection (albeit an unproven gene therapy) each year versus the one and done, then boost, boost again, rinse and repeat - but not really done because it didn't work scheme.

Geert Vanden Bossche Stokes Fear of COVID-19 Vaccine To Promote His Own Flawed ‘Solution’
Anti-vaccine activists are promoting a veterinarian's claim that the only way to prevent a future COVID-19 vaccination-related calamity is through a product he claims to have invented.

On March 6, 2021, a Belgian veterinarian named Geert Vanden Bossche published an open letter "to all authorities, scientists and experts around the world" asserting that, in his expert analysis, the current global COVID-19 vaccination program will "wipe out large parts of our human population." The way to avoid this purported calamity, Vanden Bossche asserts, is for scientists to pay more attention to his own invention — a "universal vaccine" that uses the body's innate immune system to kill SARS-CoV-2.

Perhaps no more tired a trope exists in the world of faux cures than the "I have found a problem that no other scientist in the world has thought of and only my untested and unproven cure can stop it" gambit. Vanden Bossche has been able to avoid allegations of peddling such a cure — at least in the credulous anti-vaccine community — because his resume legitimately includes stints at companies or initiatives involved in vaccine development, including The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Since 2014, however, he has been trying (apparently unsuccessfully) to develop his so-called universal vaccine. A company claiming to develop such a product is currently registered to an address identified on Yelp as his veterinary practice.

Vanden Bossche's scientific argument in broad terms is that the current COVID-19 vaccines, through a mechanism analogous to antibiotic resistance, will create mutant variants of the virus that escape the protection of those vaccines. This problem will be exacerbated, he claims, because people who have been vaccinated (and/or social distancing and staying inside during the pandemic) will be less capable of fighting off those strains than someone who has not been vaccinated. As we explain below, this scenario is speculative, scientifically flawed, logically inconsistent, and belied...

So I wonder if I wonder <strokes goatee...> Did the current COVID-19 vaccines, through a mechanism analogous to antibiotic resistance, create mutant variants of the virus that escape the protection of those vaccines after all? Why_Yes_I_Do. And imma thunk'n the FDA and CDC do too - behind closed doors.