Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 22:47:12 GMT -5
And why wouldn't it be, the contract states that vaccine's effectiveness or side effects were not known at the time it was issued, and all countries signed it and obliged to combat any attempts to disparage the vaccine. Basically, the vaccine was bought before testing properly started. Your peer-reviewed medical study is of no consequence, since it must have come later than the vaccine was bought and began being used on masses. My peer-reviewed study? What the fuck are you talking about? The study came out in December of 2020. When was this made?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 22:51:15 GMT -5
Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
Fernando P. Polack, M.D., Stephen J. Thomas, M.D., Nicholas Kitchin, M.D., Judith Absalon, M.D., Alejandra Gurtman, M.D., Stephen Lockhart, D.M., John L. Perez, M.D., Gonzalo Pérez Marc, M.D., Edson D. Moreira, M.D., Cristiano Zerbini, M.D., Ruth Bailey, B.Sc., Kena A. Swanson, Ph.D., et al., for the C4591001 Clinical Trial Group* www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2034577Why not read a real document regarding the efficacy of the vaccine in instead of embarrassingly retarded conspiracy websites.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 23:10:42 GMT -5
Here is a recent study of the efficacy of the vaccines against the new Delta variant. Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant
Jamie Lopez Bernal, F.F.P.H., Ph.D., Nick Andrews, Ph.D., Charlotte Gower, D.Phil., Eileen Gallagher, Ph.D., Ruth Simmons, Ph.D., Simon Thelwall, Ph.D., Julia Stowe, Ph.D., Elise Tessier, M.Sc., Natalie Groves, M.Sc., Gavin Dabrera, M.B., B.S., F.F.P.H., Richard Myers, Ph.D., Colin N.J. Campbell, M.P.H., F.F.P.H., et al. www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 23:13:08 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2021 23:51:04 GMT -5
One more thing... There are still some people who I care about that are not currently able to, or still unwilling to take the vaccine. But once that changes, I don't give a flying fuck if other people don't want to take it. Have the choice. Do I think it is dumb to not take it? Yeah, but I am not here to act like anyone's father. I only care about protecting my clan. Vaccinated people can still spread it, so if you want to hang with me, and you catch it, it's on you. I know it is all good for me. At that point I wouldn't care to wear a mask, since all my people are good, and won't be infected by me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2021 1:18:35 GMT -5
Wish fucking Pubmed linked articles that could be accessed without purchasing any special kind of access. Could find nothing on Cochrane. Ah, well, it does. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7745181/(title: Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine ) This was the one that isn't free: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33524290/(title: "The BNT162b2 (BioNTech/Pfizer) vaccine had 95% efficacy against COVID-19 ≥7 days after the 2nd dose ") Haven't read through myself YET, but am going to read later. Ah wait, the first one is the same article you linked. Apologies. You perhaps used the Pubmed index too, just chose a different link. Well, that should be actually credible. EDIT: Nejm is the source, so you actually found the source study. Well, if it is cited by pubmed, it is good. I just didn't know what the hell Nejm is by itself and whether it should be trusted, unless I can use known indexes such as Cochrane and Pubmed, cause being linked from there means they are verified/trusted.
|
|
|
Post by dr_st on Jul 30, 2021 1:42:12 GMT -5
As far as I know, Israel is quoted to have paid double, not "magnitudes" more. The 30 years figure is correct, though. It violated the Emergency Use Authorization by ignoring ivermectin as a legit, effective treatment because the United States is contractually obligated to fuck over it's own people at the behest of Pfizer. Here we go with ivermectin again... Yes, I'm sure there is a miracle drug which all the countries in the world are collectively ignoring because the US signed a contract with Pfizer. While in reality, ivermectin showed some signs of effectiveness, but they were insufficient to be a game-changer. And this also makes me think there is some political shit involved in not accepting Russian vaccine by EU and Russia not accepting anything else but their own. Except in Russian case, Russia actually does the right thing. This comes to mind: bash.im/quote/466397 But, if I remember correctly what I learned, Sputnik-V is an adenovirus vector vaccine. It differs from the mRNA vaccines in that there is one extra step - instead of the mRNA manufacturing the protein directly - the host cell extracts the mRNA from the adenovirus first, and then proceeds to manufacture the protein. After that, the mechanisms are very similar.
|
|
BIG DICK NIGGA
this post is a lie about my bodily proportions
Major Arlene obsessed, 100% verified freakazoid. AKA bzzrak
Posts: 2,296
|
Post by BIG DICK NIGGA on Jul 30, 2021 4:28:48 GMT -5
@vigilantdoomer tried sci-hub for those articles?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2021 7:15:45 GMT -5
Wish fucking Pubmed linked articles that could be accessed without purchasing any special kind of access. Could find nothing on Cochrane. Ah, well, it does. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7745181/(title: Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine ) This was the one that isn't free: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33524290/(title: "The BNT162b2 (BioNTech/Pfizer) vaccine had 95% efficacy against COVID-19 ≥7 days after the 2nd dose ") Haven't read through myself YET, but am going to read later. Ah wait, the first one is the same article you linked. Apologies. You perhaps used the Pubmed index too, just chose a different link. Well, that should be actually credible. EDIT: Nejm is the source, so you actually found the source study. Well, if it is cited by pubmed, it is good. I just didn't know what the hell Nejm is by itself and whether it should be trusted, unless I can use known indexes such as Cochrane and Pubmed, cause being linked from there means they are verified/trusted. "The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) is a weekly medical journal published by the Massachusetts Medical Society. It is among the most prestigious peer-reviewed medical journals[1][2] as well as the oldest continuously published one.[1]" en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_England_Journal_of_MedicineHarvard medical school has been submitting papers to them since the 1800s. www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM189701141360222
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2021 7:52:22 GMT -5
Here is a recent study of the efficacy of the vaccines against the new Delta variant. Effectiveness of Covid-19 Vaccines against the B.1.617.2 (Delta) Variant
Jamie Lopez Bernal, F.F.P.H., Ph.D., Nick Andrews, Ph.D., Charlotte Gower, D.Phil., Eileen Gallagher, Ph.D., Ruth Simmons, Ph.D., Simon Thelwall, Ph.D., Julia Stowe, Ph.D., Elise Tessier, M.Sc., Natalie Groves, M.Sc., Gavin Dabrera, M.B., B.S., F.F.P.H., Richard Myers, Ph.D., Colin N.J. Campbell, M.P.H., F.F.P.H., et al. www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34289274/Here is the pubmed.gov submission for this other one. You just need to search the DOI serial number. example for this one: DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2108891 Which is useful for finding other sources for papers that are behind paywalls on some websites.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2021 8:41:03 GMT -5
For those few bold users who are fighting against mandatory vaccination and soy totalitarianism, there is an update on "sense of awareness" blog that leaks documents relating to Pfizer. senseofawareness.com/2021/07/31/pfizerleak-exposing-the-pfizer-manufacturing-and-supply-agreement-the-brazilian-job-day-56/Note this doesn't dispute the findings that Pfizer actually works made by scientific community. This is written in terms of contract between manufacturer and purchaser, and the purpose is 1) to idemnify the manufacturer 2) suppression of competing vaccines 3) in event further progress made by scientific community (better cure found, revised views on purchased vaccine efficacy), ensure the money flow continues. So strictly put, this isn't anti-vax. It rather reveals how vaccine manufacturers try to establish unlawful monopoly in circumvention of the existings acts that protect the right to better medicines. A Big Pharma conspiracy, strictly speaking. Manufacturers don't even give a fuck if their shit is found to work by scientific community or not, they are going to ensure their money flow anyway. The thing is, there are actually laws that would normally allow to end the contract if better stuff is found! And these fuckers deliberately make it sure they can't be applied (good luck applying them if the manufacturer is in another country, and their laws are different). And you would have thought, why the fuck is manufacturing is outsourced somewhere else besides where it was invented. As I said before, there is political shit interfering with the quest for cure, and even if I want humanity to be culled anyway down to 500 million people and no more, it still is complete shit there is antagonism instead of cooperation in the field of developing a vaccines. Hopefully the system of proprietary and patented stuff eventually collapses on itself. Science that benefits the humanity must belong to the humanity, not to the money-driven actors. Also: the reason that I hate humanity so much is that if allowed to combat anything Nature throws at them, there is no reason for the richest downfall or even the downfall of consumerism. Threats external to humanity that are beyond it's power are the only thing that can break the degenerate patterns of modern society, which may result in certain people waking up and starting acting in a way they wouldn't as they were like on a travelator. Our cultural and technical evolution, I believe, was driven by these external calls, and while we might seem to have accelerated "technical progress" within the last century, this wasn't were it should have been, but rather a progress of enslavement technology. That is, it didn't happen where it ought to happen, but because of the pandemic, money was finally poured where it's due (development of vaccines), certain regimes reached the breaking point even if didn't fall (Belarus'), etc. There is a lot of good stuff that pandemic - not the lockdowns - has brought us. Yet that is not to say that government's and farmacies haven't adapted to the situation, and that's what concerns me - I wish it was beyond their power to do anything, as it would have brought their demise then.
Unfortunately, humans got too powerful for the current monsters in the power and shitload of money to fall over some pandemic. And you thought I was just ranting... I was ranting, but I have a reason. Only an external challenge could break the current way of things, and I wish Nature could still have been that ultimate challenge, out of range of any government or any other human-made power structure.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2021 8:53:53 GMT -5
And the next thing: yes, Pfizer works. But is what you are shot with the same as what was presented to scientific community? If there is stuff in contract that doesn't hold manufacturer accountable for fraud, you can't be sure. Remember if manufacturer is in another country the purchasing agency won't be able to break the contract and get refund and reparations. It can only throw it away. And if the purchasing agency is in itself an intermediary providing vaccine to institution administering vaccine and not the institution itself, will it be willing to do it? Or even bother to check for it realness in such condition?
|
|
|
Post by dr_st on Aug 1, 2021 14:20:08 GMT -5
I suspect that a lot of the "awful clauses" people now find in the Pfizer contracts, and a lot of the "glaring flaws" in the clinical trials, are things that have always been the norm in the vaccine industry, and simply have never been under such scrutiny before. For example: in event further progress made by scientific community (better cure found, revised views on purchased vaccine efficacy), ensure the money flow continues. Seems to me like a pretty standard thing affecting a specific deal. Pfizer signed contracts with various governments for the production and purchase of a certain number of vaccines. My understanding is that all this says is that the purchaser cannot cancel the contract just because they found something better. Just like if you agreed to buy 10 million CPUs from Intel over the course of a year, then 3 months later, AMD comes up with a better product, there may be a clause in your contract with Intel that says you still must pay and receive the rest of the CPUs, and you cannot abort the deal. It does not mean you are obligated to continue buying from them indefinitely. So unless I see something that tells me that the Pfizer contract says you must buy from them more and more vaccines, forever (or for 10 years or so), I don't see a problem with it. And the next thing: yes, Pfizer works. But is what you are shot with the same as what was presented to scientific community? Well, this is a question you can ask about every medication and every food product and everything else of this nature. You must have a certain degree of trust to enjoy the benefits of the modern world, where you don't have to produce yourself everything you consume, top-to-bottom.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2021 21:09:02 GMT -5
You must have a certain degree of trust to enjoy the benefits of the modern world, where you don't have to produce yourself everything you consume, top-to-bottom. Agreed, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to trust and thus enjoy every benefit at the cost of my future demise. Somewhere I have to draw the line - or lines, or other planes in whatever multidimensional space I'm drawing my threat model in. Anyway, there is a reason to scrutinize the vaccine that targets to defeat or, at the very least, protect vaccinated from ongoing pandemic in a way others don't get scrutinized. The reason being chance to encounter disease is high, and higher still if we want to have our life uninhibited by social distancing, curfew laws, and non-functioning cafees as well as train outdoors, or even in the fitness centers indoors. It's not even just lazy leisure time, the sport activity (required to stay healthy) and the competitions (required to maintain a goal for people like me to do any sports) are also impacted. To me that was the issue of the lockdown, me no longer able to train outside which was instrumental to maintaining my physical and mental health. So, given that I do accept that pandemic exists, that the issue is widespread, and because my immunity - just as everyone's who obeyed the orders - was compromised by the lockdown (by depriving me of regular physical activity, at least the levels I need), the issue of whether the vaccine deployments in the field - and not the one in the papers - works, is important. I'm getting the vaccine available in my country after all (second shot awaits), although it is not Pfizer (because it is not available).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2021 22:11:25 GMT -5
Also, the thing with vaccine is that people are pushed by the governments to vaccinate themselves, so of course great scrutiny is warranted, compared to some optional flu vaccine that many don't take. So it's not "a degree of trust to enjoy the benefits", it's a question of freedom. Essential rights to travel and to enter a lot of things are being denied to those who don't take vaccine, and for such a vaccine to be acceptable, it DOES have to have a contract that ALLOWS purchaser to sue, to refund and do other nasty things to manufacturer, in return for nasty things discovered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2021 22:38:28 GMT -5
Tucker Carlson reacts to changing recommendations on COVID-19 protocols, in "Tucker Carlson Tonight" show hosted on Fox News. video.foxnews.com/v/6265938485001Tucker Carlson starts by why the fuck do vaccinated people required to wear mask still, and why vaccinating England didn't prevent the second lockdown. He also states the people enforcing the rules don't follow them, provides video of government officals taking off masks for the photo, and then goes on to debunk vaccine coercion. I have no special interest in Tucker Carlson. To me he is someone who was supported on this board by a pro-vax guy, and now Tucker Carlson is talking anti-vax points (in a narrow sense of anti COVID-19 vaccine enforcement, not general anti-vax which would be bullshit). Or rather than anti-vax, he is talking scepticism towards efficacy of anti-COVID vaccines deployed (a more honest point). Also, the leak guy posted to his channel - I'm following it on Telegram - that Tucker Carlson quoted from his leaked document (he posted a video excerpt), but it seems that if that is true, it is not from this video. I only sought the video to confirm whether Tucker Carlson indeed quoted from the leak guy, haven't so far found a confirmation. It might be some other video still.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 9:33:16 GMT -5
The leak guy linked this as having the excerpt he published earlier, where Tucker Carlson quotes from his leaked document. www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-this-isnt-about-the-science-heres-proofthe part that quotes leaked document states late, at 19:00 something And yes, Tucker Carlson draws conclusion that claims of "science" behind the vaccine are just lies backed by administrative force. Maybe he hasn't seen the nejm or pubmed submission? Somebody've got to tip him on that. Overall summary: - "COVID mask guidelines and mandated vaccines - Democrats just don't want to give up the power" - 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' host explains why nation is confused about latest COVID guidance - (my own impression) Most of the video Tucker Carlson is busy exposing CDC lying in direct contradiction to statistics It's also possible to read the transcript over there. Search for this quote occuring within his speech:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 10:35:10 GMT -5
Also, however your science flies, I'm strongly against vaccine passports. This is a die-hard human rights issue.
I'm also against lockdowns. Life is not sacred, freedom is more important than life. Kill me rather than imprison me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 11:38:02 GMT -5
By the way, I thought I misheard, but it is in the transcript: Tucker Carlson called Fauci of CDC "the man who created COVID himself". I'm starting to doubt Tucker Carlson would be any better fit for the president than any of the post-Bush era. Are all your politicians fucking clowns? I guess I could have been a politician. Stop calling me fucking schizo, BIG DICK NIGGA, you could just wish me a career in politics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 11:57:42 GMT -5
Tucker Carlson reacts to changing recommendations on COVID-19 protocols, in "Tucker Carlson Tonight" show hosted on Fox News. video.foxnews.com/v/6265938485001Tucker Carlson starts by why the fuck do vaccinated people required to wear mask still, and why vaccinating England didn't prevent the second lockdown. He also states the people enforcing the rules don't follow them, provides video of government officals taking off masks for the photo, and then goes on to debunk vaccine coercion. I have no special interest in Tucker Carlson. To me he is someone who was supported on this board by a pro-vax guy, and now Tucker Carlson is talking anti-vax points (in a narrow sense of anti COVID-19 vaccine enforcement, not general anti-vax which would be bullshit). Or rather than anti-vax, he is talking scepticism towards efficacy of anti-COVID vaccines deployed (a more honest point). Also, the leak guy posted to his channel - I'm following it on Telegram - that Tucker Carlson quoted from his leaked document (he posted a video excerpt), but it seems that if that is true, it is not from this video. I only sought the video to confirm whether Tucker Carlson indeed quoted from the leak guy, haven't so far found a confirmation. It might be some other video still. Yeah, my opinion on him started to change with his stance on the vaccine. I liked him, originally because he pointed out the hypocrisies and absurdities with politicians, far-left activists, and he would report on facts about crime, illegal immigration, antifa and rioting. But for example when recently said that Facui created covid, is proof to me that he is just saying what his viewers want to hear to cash in. I am on the right for most things. But I think it is stupid that vaccine skepticism has become a politically right-wing position. In fact, I have demonstrated why it shouldn't be, considering much of it comes from RFK Jr. and pre-Biden Democrat election rhetoric. Nevertheless, the optics are that it is a right wing position, the Democrats and people like Tucker are making sure of that. Perception is power.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2021 12:49:34 GMT -5
Yes, sadly he is playing a politician's game: "say what you need to say (to fool public into giving you political power), do what you want to do (once you have the power)". In autocratic systems that are masquerading as democracies the first part is changed to: "you fool public into thinking they gave you power, and your position is legitimate". P.S. It seems that might be politicians aren't capable of shaking off that modus operandi, and that this can be exploited somehow as a weakness? See he doesn't even care if he makes fool of himself in the eyes of people who care about science and who can look the facts up. If this trait persists even when it is a disadvantage, there may be hope in ridding Earth of politicians one day. Just gotta find how to make them all weave a rope around their necks. P.P.S. "autocratic systems that are masquerading as democracies" -> this is called anocracy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anocracy . Have recently talked to a person who has described Russian regime as "personalized anocracy" and gave the definition.
|
|
Lobo
Doomer
Posts: 556
|
Post by Lobo on Aug 2, 2021 15:12:20 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2021 11:45:48 GMT -5
Newest post on Ehden's telegram channel featured a link and verbatim text of its contents: senseofawareness.com/2021/08/07/pfizerleak-what-if-the-pfizer-contracts-were-declared-illegal/I hadn't yet checked whether the contract contains clauses as stated, so this is a repost of trending shit, not endorsement. I attach no seal of approval or quality measurement on this one. Also there is daily posts to this channel, I can't keep track of all that, the walls of text are huge. He uploaded more documents (he also set up separate channel for documents), I will need to back them up with a PC version of telegram, I guess, cause the phone doesn't have enough place to download all that individually. In case anyone uses Telegram (I have to, and I don't otherwise recommend it), these are: t.me/eh_den -> main channel for new posts, comments are ENABLED and flourishing, list of subscribers grows daily t.me/eh_den_files - "repository of contracts and other files related to the #PhizerLeak". Comments disabled
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 7, 2021 12:07:27 GMT -5
Ah, and also delicious link from discussion: thenewabnormal513330780.wordpress.com/2021/02/01/ten-reasons-why-sars-cov-2-is-an-imaginary-and-theoretical-virus-they-never-isolated-the-virus/I must admit, I had reservations in 2020 that there was some doggy shit going on with virus seemingly invisible in some people but nonetheless there. Especially the draconian tests you need to have performed on you to assure you had/hadn't one with it showed through the nose almost to your brain, despite the proverbial ease of spread. However, I subsequentially began to assume the medical community was in hurry to combat or report new research on virus, and that a lot of reports were premature, driven by the need to report it before others do, to be invalidated by the next day with the new findings. But stop. China might have reported wrong data, but the governments could perhaps order to isolate the virus from the patients in the country they ran? Definitely needs to be fact-checked, this "pure digital, provided by China" sounds like a scam to me. The very first patient admitted could provide the necessary material, no need to trust anyone, and with the hit being global enough things could be cross-verified.
|
|
BIG DICK NIGGA
this post is a lie about my bodily proportions
Major Arlene obsessed, 100% verified freakazoid. AKA bzzrak
Posts: 2,296
|
Post by BIG DICK NIGGA on Aug 7, 2021 12:13:28 GMT -5
Why would you trust anything posted to a telegram channel that doesn't belong to a major media source. With regards to corona, only the utterly deranged 5G reptile bill gates microchip QAnon schizos (read: people who don't have the loosest grip on reality) post there.
|
|