Viruses / Vaccines 2

Poncier · June 2023

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

mrussel1 · June 2023

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

That's about right. This CDC report shows that in real world trials (nursing homes), it was 75% effective against transmission. Some places showed as high as 95%. Once the Delta mutation took over, that went down to the 50's, but it was still highly effective against hospitalization and death. Which to me, seems worthwhile considering how rare and insignificant the side effects were.

In fairness, this information was from so called "scientists" and not my favorite You Tubers or goat girl on Twitter. They are normally my 'go to' source.

Punchline:

Both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna mRNA vaccines were highly effective in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection in nursing home residents early after vaccine introduction. However, the effectiveness among this population in recent months has been significantly lower. To prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in nursing homes, these findings highlight the critical importance of COVID-19 vaccination of staff members, residents, and visitors and adherence to rigorous COVID-19 prevention strategies. An additional dose of COVID-19 vaccine might be considered for nursing home and long-term care facility residents to optimize a protective immune response

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7034e3.htm

mace1229 · June 2023

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

23scidoo · June 2023

Lol and lol!!

23scidoo · June 2023

You rewriting history here..

Zod · June 2023

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant. It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

mrussel1 · June 2023

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Merkin Baller · June 2023

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

nicknyr15 · June 2023

Merkin Baller said:

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

PLANDEMIC!!!!!!

mrussel1 · June 2023

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

PLANDEMIC!!!!!!

YES! It's obvious that Bill Gates and global elites unleashed a deadly virus, killing millions and it was nothing worse than a cold. Thank God Donald Trump instituted Operation Warp Speed to create an awesome vaccine that I won't take.

Merkin Baller · June 2023

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

PLANDEMIC!!!!!!

FANDEMIC

nicknyr15 · June 2023

Merkin Baller said:

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

PLANDEMIC!!!!!!

FANDEMIC

Amazing. You win.

nicknyr15 · June 2023

mrussel1 said:

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

PLANDEMIC!!!!!!

YES! It's obvious that Bill Gates and global elites unleashed a deadly virus, killing millions and it was nothing worse than a cold. Thank God Donald Trump instituted Operation Warp Speed to create an awesome vaccine that I won't take.

It only took 114 pages and 3.5 years for you to finally get it.

mrussel1 · June 2023

nicknyr15 said:

mrussel1 said:

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

PLANDEMIC!!!!!!

YES! It's obvious that Bill Gates and global elites unleashed a deadly virus, killing millions and it was nothing worse than a cold. Thank God Donald Trump instituted Operation Warp Speed to create an awesome vaccine that I won't take.

It only took 114 pages and 3.5 years for you to finally get it.

I did my own research

nicknyr15 · June 2023

mrussel1 said:

nicknyr15 said:

mrussel1 said:

nicknyr15 said:

Merkin Baller said:

mrussel1 said:

Zod said:

mace1229 said:

Poncier said:

mickeyrat said:

AW124797 said:

mrussel1 said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

AW124797 said:

benjs said:

23scidoo said:

mrussel1 said:

23scidoo said:

Nothing new here..
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/inside-wuhan-lab-covid-pandemic-china-america-qhjwwwvm0

here we go..
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-biontech-covid-vaccine-to-face-damages-trial/a-65886978

also nothing new here..
https://nypost.com/2023/03/13/tens-of-millions-of-dollars-in-us-grants-went-to-wuhan-labs/

64 million does in Germany and this woman sues because the vaccine caused her to suffer upper-body pain, swollen extremities, fatigue and sleeping disorder.

Sure, millions of deaths or this woman's "upper body pain". This is a tough call.

Trial my friend..ah, and you forget to mention she is a doctor, a scientist as you like to call..lol..
Any comments for your government money went to China's labs??.. Did Fauci knew that??..

You're completely missing the point. I don't care if she's Madonna or the Pope or a scientist - the fact remains, she's convinced that the vaccine did this to her, and she has no evidence to make that claim with. If she had evidence, she would take the next steps towards accountability - aka a lawsuit.

The fact remains? What are you talking about? BioNTech is facing hundreds of lawsuits in Germany and she is the first one. Completely missing the point is right.

I apologize - I made a snarky remark, and didn't realize that she had started a lawsuit. To that, I say great! Let's get a legal answer to whether this is their fault or not.

I'm sure you guys will completely acknowledge and accept the outcome of these suits which ever direction they rule.

You made a snarky remark without reading the article. It's completely fair if our acknowledgment and acceptance is on par with your bias and ignorance.

so you'll only accept the results if they come out in your favour. right on brand.

No. I just spun it around to highlight the hypocrisy. It's amusing and sad.

it's not hypocrisy. he admitted he missed a detail that was posted. that is not the same as saying what you said about acknowledgement and acceptance.

Please. It's not "a detail." It's the main theme of that article. All you need to do is check the title. Evidently, he didn't bother.

1. The original poster has not earned any scrutinizing of his content - as he doesn't scrutinize it before posting anyways.
2. I already said I didn't read it in enough detail - ready to move on?
3. My bias is towards theories with evidence (i.e. facts), and while I try to remain ignorant of conspiracies, places like this make that difficult.
4. I ate my crow with respect to my pathetic reading and comprehension capacity, so now you've "won", so can we move on to my other question? If these lawsuits prove fault on behalf of BioNTech, etc., I'd eat more crow. If they don't, will you accept those results or just continue down the slippery eel path of a typical conspiracy theorist - heightening the acceptable burden of proof as it reaches your prior set of standards?

I'll move on after I add that I'm still certain you didn't read that article initially. You just checked few comments here and already presumed the lawsuit lady was full of shit. Also, please elaborate on theories with facts. How is POTENTIAL hospitalizations fantasy argument more factual than claiming something is ineffective after being infected 3 times with Covid despite 2 doses of covid vaccine and 3 boosters? And how is that a conspiracy if someone thinks the vaccine is futile after having Covid 3 times?

Let's use our brains a little, even giving your statements initial credibility:

1. The original vaccine was designed for the original strain, so like a flu vaccine, after mutation it is less effective.
2. Virus vaccines are not for the rest of your life. It doesn't matter how many times you get one, the effectiveness wanes over time. Getting 3 boosters over three years has nothing to do with the virus you did or did not get in year four (or even three).

How is #1 helping you here? If you use your brain, would you take an outdated shot on four/five occasions for a strain that was long gone before its vaccine was rolled out?

2. Again, let's use our brains here a little. For mickeyrat it lasted 3 months. It's a bit short, isn't it?

to repeat, it was never supposed to prevent. politicians told you that. did the manufacturers?

The manufacturers most definitely told us the vaccines were around 95% effective at preventing transmission of Covid-19 in the early days of vaccine rollout. That was the story line at the time until evidence and mutations showed that it wasn't the case.

I remember them saying 97%. It was definitely sold by both politicians and the manufactures as preventing transmission for several months.

Now my memory is getting hazy. Was this not the case with the original strain and first mutation of Covid. My memory thinks it was the 2nd big strain of Covid that drastically reduce the efficacy of vaccines.

Problem being, the virus mutates so fast, that by the time you've developed and gotten one of the vaccines approved, it's probably mutated on to the next variant.    It did feel like when Vaccines first came out there was a chance at herd immunity, but then it mutated.. and that was that.

That's right. But it was still highly effective at reducing symptoms, hospitalization and death, even against the mutation. It's just that transmission efficacy was reduced.

Yup, and people hang their hat on that reduced transmission efficacy while ignoring all the other crucial net gains from the vaccine so they can cry about how they were lied to therefore "scamdemic!!!" as if millions of people didn't die and healthcare systems around the globe weren't overwhelmed and crippled by this virus at its peaks.

It's fucking exhausting.

PLANDEMIC!!!!!!

YES! It's obvious that Bill Gates and global elites unleashed a deadly virus, killing millions and it was nothing worse than a cold. Thank God Donald Trump instituted Operation Warp Speed to create an awesome vaccine that I won't take.

It only took 114 pages and 3.5 years for you to finally get it.

I did my own research

Me too