I presume the "booster" is only for those who received the original injections?
Given what we now know of the potential harm of these injections, anyone playing any part in injecting enfants - who have no say in the matter - can only be an idiot, a criminal or both. Sorry, but those are the only options I can see.
I still don't understand any rationale for immunocompromised people of any age to get these shots. The argument is that with reduced immune function then one is less easily able to fight an infection. Yet given that the supposed appropriate response to the injection relies on a functioning immune system it is set to fail. Yet that is the justification for administering it, with the added impetus of giving more shots to those people because they don't mount a good response?? It's totally backwards. Added in the acknowledged factor of the injection suspending the immune system, even if temprarily as claimed, makes it a triple whammy for those poeple. I mean, seriously?
And I just read Bernard Massie's response which put is to much more succinctly than my verbosity. Quite!
I'd be very interested to hear any opinions on the term 'vaccine effectiveness'. How exactly is this measured? Is this an ELISA assay for antibodies? If so, what antibodies? What data shows correlation to antibody level and clinical presentation? Antibodies have always been surrogate measurements. Is there clinical effectiveness such as infection? Viral load? Clinical progression? Where is it if so? Also, is there any data anywhere showing actual infectivity vs viral particle and viral load throughout clinical progression? Or, is only PCR data available which is also a surrogate? If only PCR, exactly which proves are used and why and how is this quantitative? qPCR? ddPCR? Does anyone truly know long term (>6mo bio distribution?). Seems like all the basic elements are still missing.... embarrassing.
Thanks for this article and the one before about the true IFR. I think the overall data was that it was .14% fatality rate on average from the Ioannadis study which is what I had been quoting. Before that even the CDC conceded it was only .3%, but the breakdown by demographic works better.
We can see the irrationality of these decisions because we, for whatever reason, have lost confidence in the institutions around us a long time ago. And there is no rational recourse. They will doggedly dig their heels in and drive this sunk cost logical fallacy train into the ravine. But we need to keep speaking out, and people will open their eyes and observe.
The sad thing is, I don't think there are many malevolent people at the top that know it's all theater, smoke and mirrors. A lot of these officials feed on the self perpetuating fear machine of the media, educational system, Hollywood etc. to reinforce and support their narrative. We have to be that playing card in the spokes of that wheel that makes noise, and the noise gets louder the faster they try to pedal.
That's my .02 cents of thought on this Thursday morning.
I don't know what to think of parents who would even think to vaccinate their children for a disease with a .0003% fatality rate. I should start up a narrative that I have an over-the-counter cooties cure. They could send away for it in the mail, and I'll send them a "Cooties Catcher."
The only people I know who got their 2 sons in Kindergarten and 2nd grade are wealthy, white Democrats (they had a Biden Harris motorcycle rally in the summer of 2020 which is how I know) who happen to live next door to me even though they know I almost died from mine they got those poor boys boosters 2/3 weeks ago. Breaks my heart.
Has ANY reporter (or anyone else) bothered to ask people at the FDA about when they plan to release their data on the Covid vaccines? The data that they said ‘wasn’t ready for prime time’?
Last year, I did a blog post on my Wordpress blog asking what was the rush to vaccinate children. Young children should not have been vaccinated. There was absolutely no benefit to them at all. The flu and RSV are more dangerous viruses to young children. The flu is a more dangerous virus to the average person than the coronavirus is. Here's the link to the blog:
I presume the "booster" is only for those who received the original injections?
Given what we now know of the potential harm of these injections, anyone playing any part in injecting enfants - who have no say in the matter - can only be an idiot, a criminal or both. Sorry, but those are the only options I can see.
If someone is severely immunocompromised, how can the "vaccination" be effective id the immune system is not working properly?
I still don't understand any rationale for immunocompromised people of any age to get these shots. The argument is that with reduced immune function then one is less easily able to fight an infection. Yet given that the supposed appropriate response to the injection relies on a functioning immune system it is set to fail. Yet that is the justification for administering it, with the added impetus of giving more shots to those people because they don't mount a good response?? It's totally backwards. Added in the acknowledged factor of the injection suspending the immune system, even if temprarily as claimed, makes it a triple whammy for those poeple. I mean, seriously?
And I just read Bernard Massie's response which put is to much more succinctly than my verbosity. Quite!
I'd be very interested to hear any opinions on the term 'vaccine effectiveness'. How exactly is this measured? Is this an ELISA assay for antibodies? If so, what antibodies? What data shows correlation to antibody level and clinical presentation? Antibodies have always been surrogate measurements. Is there clinical effectiveness such as infection? Viral load? Clinical progression? Where is it if so? Also, is there any data anywhere showing actual infectivity vs viral particle and viral load throughout clinical progression? Or, is only PCR data available which is also a surrogate? If only PCR, exactly which proves are used and why and how is this quantitative? qPCR? ddPCR? Does anyone truly know long term (>6mo bio distribution?). Seems like all the basic elements are still missing.... embarrassing.
Thanks for this article and the one before about the true IFR. I think the overall data was that it was .14% fatality rate on average from the Ioannadis study which is what I had been quoting. Before that even the CDC conceded it was only .3%, but the breakdown by demographic works better.
We can see the irrationality of these decisions because we, for whatever reason, have lost confidence in the institutions around us a long time ago. And there is no rational recourse. They will doggedly dig their heels in and drive this sunk cost logical fallacy train into the ravine. But we need to keep speaking out, and people will open their eyes and observe.
The sad thing is, I don't think there are many malevolent people at the top that know it's all theater, smoke and mirrors. A lot of these officials feed on the self perpetuating fear machine of the media, educational system, Hollywood etc. to reinforce and support their narrative. We have to be that playing card in the spokes of that wheel that makes noise, and the noise gets louder the faster they try to pedal.
That's my .02 cents of thought on this Thursday morning.
I don't know what to think of parents who would even think to vaccinate their children for a disease with a .0003% fatality rate. I should start up a narrative that I have an over-the-counter cooties cure. They could send away for it in the mail, and I'll send them a "Cooties Catcher."
The only people I know who got their 2 sons in Kindergarten and 2nd grade are wealthy, white Democrats (they had a Biden Harris motorcycle rally in the summer of 2020 which is how I know) who happen to live next door to me even though they know I almost died from mine they got those poor boys boosters 2/3 weeks ago. Breaks my heart.
Has ANY reporter (or anyone else) bothered to ask people at the FDA about when they plan to release their data on the Covid vaccines? The data that they said ‘wasn’t ready for prime time’?
Has ANYONE ever mentioned the subject again?
I questioned similar here:
https://leemuller.substack.com/p/is-it-time-for-the-fda-or-cdc-to
And came to these conclusions:
https://leemuller.substack.com/p/if-i-were-a-research-scientist-without
https://leemuller.substack.com/p/a-culmination-of-observations-and
Last year, I did a blog post on my Wordpress blog asking what was the rush to vaccinate children. Young children should not have been vaccinated. There was absolutely no benefit to them at all. The flu and RSV are more dangerous viruses to young children. The flu is a more dangerous virus to the average person than the coronavirus is. Here's the link to the blog:
https://angelinacountybearkat.wordpress.com/2022/02/07/the-rush-to-vaccinate-children/