Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Vikings Bring In Dr Michael Osterholm
#51
Quote: @"BarrNone55" said:
@SFVikeFan said:
@purplefaithful said:
Sure, bringing in some outspoken infectious disease specialist will do jack...
I think we can all agree, those who are anti-vax are basing their decisions NOT on science .... so the expert scientists might as well be talking to a wall.

Stupid still reigns Supreme 

The good news is my horse de-wormer stock is soaring.
That's actually not a terrible idea. Reminds me of that story a few months ago about the guy making profits on PredictIt by betting against theories espoused by Breitbart and QAnon. It really shouldn't be that easy. 
Reply

#52
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@SFVikeFan said:
@JimmyinSD said:
@Waterboy said:
Here we go again with all of the board experts. lol  Somehow I'd love to see our experts blow this guy right of the water with their vast knowledge of all things virus.  The ones that like to call everybody else stupid, and claim to have "science" on their side.  You choose to believe a narrative spoon fed to you by the media, and by the government.   That's it.  Quit claiming science, because there is no science available at this point proving the long-term safety of these vaccines.  In fact, the opposite has been true.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/single-most-qu...00060.html
https://www.bitchute.com/video/cIgEyCrxKYgd/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/AyvqtHSZTENs/
https://rumble.com/vkopys-a-pathologist-...mref=i2svv&mrefc=2
https://www.bitchute.com/video/nVTAoF8oCsD7/
not sure where I fall,  but i do have a question,  the vaccine has been out less than 16 months,  how could anybody from either side make any claims to its long term safety, both pro or con, with any credibility?  any  claims either way have to be based on speculation, educated guesses, or simply pulling shit out of their ass... wouldnt they?
The fact you, and many others, think the vaccine is newly developed is kind of disturbing.  It's not.  Coronavirus vaccines have been in development for over 15 years.  That's why we could attack this quickly.


Funny - FDA approved Pfizer vaccines today. 


48 hours earlier FDA put a warning:

"You are not a horse.  You are not a cow" in response to the overdoses of Ivermectin


So anti-vax ding dongs take note:  quit touting experimental drugs and get the FDA approved one.  Excuses are over.
it is newly developed,  thats why it took over a year and millions dying around the globe to get it out to the public.  they have been working on MRNA technology for a long time,  and they have been working on vaccines for similar viruses,  but if this wasnt a new drug to fight a new virus then the fact that it took about 16 months to get it out there from when the virus was first reported would be a bigger red flag to those hesitant to get it since they would be the people that withheld it while millions died.
Tell me you you don't understand anything about vaccines and their development, without telling me you don't know anything about vaccines and their development. 

One post and 20 minutes ago you were concerned it wasn't enough time, it was rushed.  16 months to FDA approval and now one post later the concern is what took so long???

Reply

#53
Quote: @MaroonBells said:
@"BarrNone55" said:
@SFVikeFan said:
@purplefaithful said:
Sure, bringing in some outspoken infectious disease specialist will do jack...
I think we can all agree, those who are anti-vax are basing their decisions NOT on science .... so the expert scientists might as well be talking to a wall.

Stupid still reigns Supreme 

The good news is my horse de-wormer stock is soaring.
That's actually not a terrible idea. Reminds me of that story a few months ago about the guy making profits on PredictIt by betting against theories espoused by Breitbart and QAnon. It really shouldn't be that easy. 
might have missed the boat on that one,  MERCK is already trading at or near historic highs.
Reply

#54
Quote: @SFVikeFan said:
@JimmyinSD said:
@SFVikeFan said:
@JimmyinSD said:
@Waterboy said:
Here we go again with all of the board experts. lol  Somehow I'd love to see our experts blow this guy right of the water with their vast knowledge of all things virus.  The ones that like to call everybody else stupid, and claim to have "science" on their side.  You choose to believe a narrative spoon fed to you by the media, and by the government.   That's it.  Quit claiming science, because there is no science available at this point proving the long-term safety of these vaccines.  In fact, the opposite has been true.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/single-most-qu...00060.html
https://www.bitchute.com/video/cIgEyCrxKYgd/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/AyvqtHSZTENs/
https://rumble.com/vkopys-a-pathologist-...mref=i2svv&mrefc=2
https://www.bitchute.com/video/nVTAoF8oCsD7/
not sure where I fall,  but i do have a question,  the vaccine has been out less than 16 months,  how could anybody from either side make any claims to its long term safety, both pro or con, with any credibility?  any  claims either way have to be based on speculation, educated guesses, or simply pulling shit out of their ass... wouldnt they?
The fact you, and many others, think the vaccine is newly developed is kind of disturbing.  It's not.  Coronavirus vaccines have been in development for over 15 years.  That's why we could attack this quickly.


Funny - FDA approved Pfizer vaccines today. 


48 hours earlier FDA put a warning:

"You are not a horse.  You are not a cow" in response to the overdoses of Ivermectin


So anti-vax ding dongs take note:  quit touting experimental drugs and get the FDA approved one.  Excuses are over.
it is newly developed,  thats why it took over a year and millions dying around the globe to get it out to the public.  they have been working on MRNA technology for a long time,  and they have been working on vaccines for similar viruses,  but if this wasnt a new drug to fight a new virus then the fact that it took about 16 months to get it out there from when the virus was first reported would be a bigger red flag to those hesitant to get it since they would be the people that withheld it while millions died.
Tell me you you don't understand anything about vaccines and their development, without telling me you don't know anything about vaccines and their development. 

One post and 20 minutes ago you were concerned it wasn't enough time, it was rushed.  16 months to FDA approval and now one post later the concern is what took so long???

tell me you have reading comprehension problems without telling me you have reading comprehension problems.

I said that neither side can make solid claims as to long term side affects.  The second was in response to your claim that its been around for quite a while when i noted that IF that were true and it took them so long to get it out,  then that would be another reason to question the source of the drug.... which it isnt because you were wrong in saying that it has been around a long time... it wasnt.
Reply

#55
Quote: @"BarrNone55" said:
@SFVikeFan said:
@purplefaithful said:
Sure, bringing in some outspoken infectious disease specialist will do jack...
I think we can all agree, those who are anti-vax are basing their decisions NOT on science .... so the expert scientists might as well be talking to a wall.

Stupid still reigns Supreme 

The good news is my horse de-wormer stock is soaring.
Good, might come in handy for yah.  You know, when you are the south end of a horse going north.  Wink
Reply

#56
Ok, for the horse folk on the board: just how big are the worms inside horses anyway? That has to gross as f^&%. 
Reply

#57
Quote: @StickyBun said:
Ok, for the horse folk on the board: just how big are the worms inside horses anyway? That has to gross as f^&%. 
Don't know as we don't have horses.  Growing up, we never used any, perhaps cuz our horses were way out in the country and not in wormy places.   We used some non-ivermectin dewormer on the goats.  Never saw the worms, but that was the diagnosis and it worked.
Reply

#58
Quote: @JimmyinSD said:
@PurplePastor said:
@JimmyinSD said:
ABBOTT AND COSTELLO’S ‘WHO’S BEEN VACCINATED?’ 
Bud: ‘You can’t come in here!’
Lou: ‘Why not?’
Bud: ‘Well because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But I’m not sick.’
Bud: ‘It doesn’t matter.’
Lou: ‘Well, why does that guy get to go in?’
Bud: ‘Because he’s vaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But he’s sick!’
Bud: ‘It’s alright. Everyone in here is vaccinated.’
Lou: ‘Wait a minute. Are you saying everyone in there is vaccinated?’
Bud: ‘Yes.’
Lou: ‘So then why can’t I go in there if everyone is vaccinated?’
Bud: ‘Because you’ll make them sick.’
Lou: ‘How will I make them sick if I’m NOT sick and they’re vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But they’re vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘But they can still get sick.’
Lou: ‘So what the heck does the vaccine do?’
Bud: ‘It vaccinates.’
Lou: ‘So vaccinated people can’t spread covid?’
Bud: ‘Oh no. They can spread covid just as easily as an unvaccinated person.’
Lou: ‘I don’t even know what I’m saying anymore. Look. I’m not sick.
Bud: ‘Ok.’
Lou: ‘And the guy you let in IS sick.’
Bud: ‘That’s right.’
Lou: ‘And everybody in there can still get sick even though they’re vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘Certainly.’
Lou: ‘So why can’t I go in again?’
Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘I’m not asking who’s vaccinated or not!’
Bud: ‘I’m just telling you how it is.’
Lou: ‘Nevermind. I’ll just put on my mask.’
Bud: ‘That’s fine.’
Lou: ‘Now I can go in?’
Bud: ‘Absolutely not?’
Lou: ‘But I have a mask!’
Bud: ‘Doesn’t matter.’
Lou: ‘I was able to come in here yesterday with a mask.’
Bud: ‘I know.’
Lou: So why can’t I come in here today with a mask? ….If you say ‘because I’m unvaccinated’ again, I’ll break your arm.’
Bud: ‘Take it easy buddy.’
Lou: ‘So the mask is no good anymore.’
Bud: ‘No, it’s still good.’
Lou: ‘But I can’t come in?’
Bud: ‘Correct.’
Lou: ‘Why not?’
Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But the mask prevents the germs from getting out.’
Bud: ‘Yes, but people can still catch your germs.’
Lou: ‘But they’re all vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘Yes, but they can still get sick.’
Lou: ‘But I’m not sick!!’
Bud: ‘You can still get them sick.’
Lou: ‘So then masks don’t work!’
Bud: ‘Masks work quite well.’
Lou: ‘So how in the heck can I get vaccinated people sick if I’m not sick and masks work?’
Bud: ‘Third base.’
I know this is meant to be funny, and I think it is. I also know that the vaccs/unvaccs topic instantly causes people to quit listening to each other and have a reasonable discussion. Also, I'm vaccinated. BUT there are some major questions presented in this rendition that the vacs crew refuses to reasonably answer.
thats why i posted it,  one side cant see the lunacy of their claims,  and only points out the lunacy of the claims of the other side... you decide which side I am referring to.  ( you will be correct either way.)
I get that there are fringes on both pro vax and con vax, but can you really find evidence of lunacy on the pro vax side?   I really dont see the equivalency here. 
Reply

#59
Quote: @Bullazin said:
@JimmyinSD said:
@PurplePastor said:
@JimmyinSD said:
ABBOTT AND COSTELLO’S ‘WHO’S BEEN VACCINATED?’ 
Bud: ‘You can’t come in here!’
Lou: ‘Why not?’
Bud: ‘Well because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But I’m not sick.’
Bud: ‘It doesn’t matter.’
Lou: ‘Well, why does that guy get to go in?’
Bud: ‘Because he’s vaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But he’s sick!’
Bud: ‘It’s alright. Everyone in here is vaccinated.’
Lou: ‘Wait a minute. Are you saying everyone in there is vaccinated?’
Bud: ‘Yes.’
Lou: ‘So then why can’t I go in there if everyone is vaccinated?’
Bud: ‘Because you’ll make them sick.’
Lou: ‘How will I make them sick if I’m NOT sick and they’re vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But they’re vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘But they can still get sick.’
Lou: ‘So what the heck does the vaccine do?’
Bud: ‘It vaccinates.’
Lou: ‘So vaccinated people can’t spread covid?’
Bud: ‘Oh no. They can spread covid just as easily as an unvaccinated person.’
Lou: ‘I don’t even know what I’m saying anymore. Look. I’m not sick.
Bud: ‘Ok.’
Lou: ‘And the guy you let in IS sick.’
Bud: ‘That’s right.’
Lou: ‘And everybody in there can still get sick even though they’re vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘Certainly.’
Lou: ‘So why can’t I go in again?’
Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘I’m not asking who’s vaccinated or not!’
Bud: ‘I’m just telling you how it is.’
Lou: ‘Nevermind. I’ll just put on my mask.’
Bud: ‘That’s fine.’
Lou: ‘Now I can go in?’
Bud: ‘Absolutely not?’
Lou: ‘But I have a mask!’
Bud: ‘Doesn’t matter.’
Lou: ‘I was able to come in here yesterday with a mask.’
Bud: ‘I know.’
Lou: So why can’t I come in here today with a mask? ….If you say ‘because I’m unvaccinated’ again, I’ll break your arm.’
Bud: ‘Take it easy buddy.’
Lou: ‘So the mask is no good anymore.’
Bud: ‘No, it’s still good.’
Lou: ‘But I can’t come in?’
Bud: ‘Correct.’
Lou: ‘Why not?’
Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’
Lou: ‘But the mask prevents the germs from getting out.’
Bud: ‘Yes, but people can still catch your germs.’
Lou: ‘But they’re all vaccinated.’
Bud: ‘Yes, but they can still get sick.’
Lou: ‘But I’m not sick!!’
Bud: ‘You can still get them sick.’
Lou: ‘So then masks don’t work!’
Bud: ‘Masks work quite well.’
Lou: ‘So how in the heck can I get vaccinated people sick if I’m not sick and masks work?’
Bud: ‘Third base.’
I know this is meant to be funny, and I think it is. I also know that the vaccs/unvaccs topic instantly causes people to quit listening to each other and have a reasonable discussion. Also, I'm vaccinated. BUT there are some major questions presented in this rendition that the vacs crew refuses to reasonably answer.
thats why i posted it,  one side cant see the lunacy of their claims,  and only points out the lunacy of the claims of the other side... you decide which side I am referring to.  ( you will be correct either way.)
I get that there are fringes on both pro vax and con vax, but can you really find evidence of lunacy on the pro vax side?   I really dont see the equivalency here. 
i have talked to plenty on both sides of this issue,  trust me,  there are those that are failing to exhibit common sense when it comes to both sides of this issue.   
Reply

#60
Quote: @SFVikeFan said:
@purplefaithful said:
Sure, bringing in some outspoken infectious disease specialist will do jack...
I think we can all agree, those who are anti-vax are basing their decisions NOT on science .... so the expert scientists might as well be talking to a wall.

Stupid still reigns Supreme 

No we cannot all agree on science leading these decisions.  Go to the CDC website and see their supposedly "scientific" research on masks.  There will be only one problem, they have no conclusive studies saying they help.  The one that comes the closest concludes they do not do any good, so the CDC has tried to discredit it.  Those of you think that the coronavirus vaccines are meeting the thresholds that other vaccines have met are fooling themselves.  The long-term side effects simply cannot be known at this time, no matter what anybody out there tells you.  It's a simple fact based on how quickly they've been developed.
Reply



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 Melroy van den Berg.