My vaxxed son who is living in Berlin has COVID. That’s now my son, dad, daughter (un-vaxxed), son-in-law, and brother-in-law. Very surprised I haven’t got it, given that I work at a ski resort, go to Vegas all the time, and haven’t got the booster.
Printable View
My vaxxed son who is living in Berlin has COVID. That’s now my son, dad, daughter (un-vaxxed), son-in-law, and brother-in-law. Very surprised I haven’t got it, given that I work at a ski resort, go to Vegas all the time, and haven’t got the booster.
Either way, you’ll live.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayjami
some people are described as having super human immune systems who are unable to catch covid. Maybe you're one of them. The days of having any fear about this should be long past for most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayjami
Nearly half of people who've had it are asymptomatic so there is a good chance if you;ve been around a lot of people whove had it you;ve got it as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by country978some people are described as having super human immune systems who are unable to catch covid. Maybe you're one of them. The days of having any fear about this should be long past for most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayjami
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2787098
There is an internet rumor that heavy pot smokers are immune, but I’ve known a few that have caught it. There is also a chance I got it and never knew.Quote:
Originally Posted by country978some people are described as having super human immune systems who are unable to catch covid. Maybe you're one of them. The days of having any fear about this should be long past for most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jayjami
never mind already posted
Anyone who got vaxxed is fucked. Sorry vax bros…
Peter McCollough lol
Kids are back to school today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pablo
Tomorrow is the last day of mask season.
:popcorn
New Pfizer documents prove Covid less lethal than the flu, vaccines are deadly
Vancouver Times was granted exclusive access to the documents, and can confirm that Pfizer knew that Covid was less lethal than the flu, and that the vaccines could kill, maim, and cause long-term side-effects.
https://vancouvertimes.org/index.php...es-are-deadly/
CONSPIRACY THEORIES!Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
Site appears to be down now.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwaiCONSPIRACY THEORIES!Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
I'M SURE ITS JUST A COINCIDENCE
EDIT: site back up
PFIZER VACCINE 30x MORE DEADLY THAN COVID
https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads...experience.pdf
4th shot looks like a fail.
It also might cause "T cell exhaustion", a phemonenon where T cells become less effective when they constantly see antigens in the body. This phenomenon definitely occurs in situations of cancer and HIV. Could repeated vaccination cause it, too? There's some fear of that, but no proof yet.
It is important that the T cells work well against COVID, because they are the biggest factor in preventing severe disease.
I don't want to cause T cell exhaustion just to get a small boost in efficacy against symptomatic Omicron. I'll be skipping the 4th shot for now.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hs...th-covid-shot/
will you be taking the 5th? 6th? 7th?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
how far will Druff go
I follow the actual science, not the left or mainstream media science.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwaiwill you be taking the 5th? 6th? 7th?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
how far will Druff go
Hence...
I was against lockdowns. I was against masking.
I took 3 shots of the vaccine because all were demonstrated to be effective.
I am not taking a 4th shot because it is not very effective, and it also might have a downside.
That is how logical people do things. Sheep do what they're told by one side or the other.
:popcornQuote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffI follow the actual science, not the left or mainstream media science.Quote:
Originally Posted by dwai
Hence...
I was against lockdowns. I was against masking.
I took 3 shots of the vaccine because all were demonstrated to be effective.
I am not taking a 4th shot because it is not very effective, and it also might have a downside.
That is how logical people do things. Sheep do what they're told by one side or the other.
Why was the definition of “vaccine” changed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The first shot you took had a downside greater than it’s upside.
this is where Druff will come back and say "people my age were dying!!!""Quote:
Originally Posted by devideeWhy was the definition of “vaccine” changed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The first shot you took had a downside greater than it’s upside.
when 90% of covid deaths are 65 and over and like 50% of them were over 75
:popcorn
That's not at all true for someone in their late 40s.Quote:
Originally Posted by devideeWhy was the definition of “vaccine” changed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The first shot you took had a downside greater than it’s upside.
You didn’t answer my question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan DruffThat's not at all true for someone in their late 40s.Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
The survival rate for someone 49 or younger is over 99%.
Based on newly released data the downside of the vax clearly greater than the upside for someone in that age range.
:popcornQuote:
Originally Posted by devideeYou didn’t answer my question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The survival rate for someone 49 or younger is over 99%.
Based on newly released data the downside of the vax clearly greater than the upside for someone in that age range.
druff willingly injected aids into himself
and Khalwat injected his own children
:lol2
Kids under 15 years old had a 1 in 2.3 MILLION chance of dying from covid.
All you vaccinated science project subjects can chew on this. Now we know why all the Pfizer big dogs cut bait and sold all their stock. Might be indictments coming.
https://twitter.com/afshineemrani/st...eUHKUJ-ozgVV3w
https://twitter.com/afshineemrani/st...eUHKUJ-ozgVV3w
https://twitter.com/afshineemrani/st...eUHKUJ-ozgVV3w
Quote:
Originally Posted by NaturalBornHustler
DO IT FOR THE GREATER GOOD
Do you actually want the answer?Quote:
Originally Posted by devideeYou didn’t answer my question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
The survival rate for someone 49 or younger is over 99%.
Based on newly released data the downside of the vax clearly greater than the upside for someone in that age range.
MRNA vaccines. They function like traditional vaccines, but they are not killed or weakened infectious organisms.
Also no one changed the meaning of vaccine. Only what qualifies as vaccination. None of the previous vaccines prevent infection or produce immunity (they increase the chance though) and the previous wording just claimed that it strived for it. Protection is a broader category that even autists can understand.
:lol2Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickDo you actually want the answer?Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
MRNA vaccines. They function like traditional vaccines, but they are not killed or weakened infectious organisms.
Also no one changed the meaning of vaccine. Only what qualifies as vaccination. None of the previous vaccines prevent infection or produce immunity (they increase the chance though) and the previous wording just claimed that it strived for it. Protection is a broader category that even autists can understand.
right on cue the CDC fan boy reenters the thread after a month of silence to defend these shit "vaccines"
At this rate it's not really an issue. There could be a point where it is. Say yearly flu shots for instance don't do it. Every six months should be still very safe. Four months mostly safe. Once a month, fuck no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
These type of vaccines introduce antigens that stay for 2 weeks at most and they start declining very quickly after the injection. The vaccine introduced antigens have no mechanism for replication.
Hiv and cancers start of slow. Amount of antigens start increasing relatively soon and they never leave the system. That's what chronic means in that context.
You'd be at a bigger risk with getting 6-8 colds a year.
For several diseases, I am pretty sure vaccination completely prevents infection (eg. smallpox, polio).Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickDo you actually want the answer?Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
MRNA vaccines. They function like traditional vaccines, but they are not killed or weakened infectious organisms.
Also no one changed the meaning of vaccine. Only what qualifies as vaccination. None of the previous vaccines prevent infection or produce immunity (they increase the chance though) and the previous wording just claimed that it strived for it. Protection is a broader category that even autists can understand.
How effective a vaccine is at preventing infection has a lot to do with the type of virus, what cells it affects, and what type of memory response the vaccine elicits. Because SARS-COV-2 is a Coronavirus it was always likely that (like flu) vaccine efficacy would be limited. But saying no previous vaccine prevent infection or produces immunity just isn't true at all.
I imagine a main issue with the 4th shot being a fail is the the virus has mutated to the point where the mRNA vaccines targeted at the spike protein of the original variant aren't specific enough anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickAt this rate it's not really an issue. There could be a point where it is. Say yearly flu shots for instance don't do it. Every six months should be still very safe. Four months mostly safe. Once a month, fuck no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
These type of vaccines introduce antigens that stay for 2 weeks at most and they start declining very quickly after the injection. The vaccine introduced antigens have no mechanism for replication.
Hiv and cancers start of slow. Amount of antigens start increasing relatively soon and they never leave the system. That's what chronic means in that context.
You'd be at a bigger risk with getting 6-8 colds a year.
Also, there is the issue that Omicron variant is mild enough that no one is getting sick enough that extra vaccination (or any vaccination at all for children) does anything. Which is a main reason we never bothered trying to develop vaccines against any other endemic cold viruses.
At some point if SARS-COV-2 evolves into a more virulent variant, it may be necessary to actually develop a new vaccine specifically against that variant, rather than keep trotting out the original Pfizer/Moderna mRNA vaccine against the spike protein.
T cell exhaustion is something that happens over decades against continuous antigen exposure, so like Gimmick said I dont think that will be an issue with SARS-COV-2 vaccination, even with an annual shot.
:lol2Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
so many conspiracy theories!
Nope. Sure it works when it works, but for smallpox that was only around 95% time. The way smallpox works that's still plenty enough to eradicate it almost completely. Polio is still around though. Fairly sure i covered this with "they increase the chance though" line. With some vaccines it's a lot and with others it's less. It's just a variation of "60% of the time, it works every time".Quote:
Originally Posted by KalamFor several diseases, I am pretty sure vaccination completely prevents infection (eg. smallpox, polio).Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmick
How effective a vaccine is at preventing infection has a lot to do with the type of virus, what cells it affects, and what type of memory response the vaccine elicits. Because SARS-COV-2 is a Coronavirus it was always likely that (like flu) vaccine efficacy would be limited. But saying no previous vaccine prevent infection or produces immunity just isn't true at all.
:lol2Quote:
Originally Posted by gimmickNope. Sure it works when it works, but for smallpox that was only around 95% time. The way smallpox works that's still plenty enough to eradicate it almost completely. Polio is still around though. Fairly sure i covered this with "they increase the chance though" line. With some vaccines it's a lot and with others it's less. It's just a variation of "60% of the time, it works every time".Quote:
Originally Posted by Kalam
cope
Something Verminaard could help with regarding the source of this meme.Quote:
Originally Posted by devidee
https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73/htm
"each dose contains 30 µg of BNT162b2 in a volume of 0.3 mL, which makes the local concentration at the injection site at the highest 100 µg/mL"
Why would they think the above statement is true? It's literally impossible to scale concentration upwards with physical objects. If you inject 30 micrograms the concentration can never exceed 30 micrograms.
I guess it makes as much sense as them using Huh7 cells as representative of how the vaccine would behave in the liver. Fairly sure the vaccine is the least of your worries if you have liver cancer.
Before Huh7 line it wasn't possible to culture hep-c in a lab. After that there have been other cell lines that also work. In general fun stuff happens with most positive-stranded RNA viruses when you douse Huh7 with them. Another popular positive-sense RNA virus would the cov2. It appears everything is better with cancer.
The only minor issue with using cancerous cells for studying anything is that there's a lot of noise you need to clear. Cytopathic responses is one of those. That just means structural changes in the host cell. Different cell lines have different responses. Using a cell line that is known to be very susceptible to all kinds funky stuff related to RNA viruses seems a bit suspicious.