I did, because you are blind.

I did. Asymptomatic people spread covid without knowing. If the vax is working partially then you have asymptomatic people spreading covid. The spike proteins from the vax become a mechanism to enable the virus to spread as it keeps the host mobile. Its also true that that the spike protein from the vax is part of the covid spike proteins. Why would anyone claim otherwise? That's the entire premise of the argument that partial immunity increases virus deadliness...and the entire premise of why the vaccine is effective!

The person doing the review can go on to work for the company they are reviewing and what is being reviewed can be funded by people profiting from a favorable review.

Strict regulation prevents this from being a problem. We actively support the exact opposite.

Baseless accusations and name calling aren't really factual.

Peer reviews refers to articles reviewed for publication in journals, not companies. They are blinded.

Wat?

You know what I meant, you split hairs to avoid actual debate. The drugs companies produce you blithering idiot.

You can take this a step further and talk about how viral evolution favors asymptomatic spread due to asymptomatic people having increased levels of social interaction.

Understanding this it is obvious that people that are vaccinated will spread the virus more due to the vaccine reducing the likelihood of a symptomatic infection.

This is compounded by the medical misinformation that vaccinated people cannot spread the virus resulting in vaccinated people increasing their social interaction under the delusion of immunity.


JLC understand all of this but wont admit to it unless his sources (that absolutely wont ever report such a thing) report such a thing.

The drugs aren't reviewed in articles. Articles report studies, those articles undergo peer-review before publication. The review process is blinded.

Gotta take enough Vitamin K2 with D3 to make sure the calcium from D3 is used in your bones and not deposited in your arteries.

https://www.nutritioninsight.com/new...s-of-both.html

I am talking about the system that ensure that the billionaires do not self regulate.

You know this, and you don't care that they do.

Ah, you're changing the topic. My bad. I wasn't looking for a pivot.

If I understand correctly I beleive this is the argument that providing partial immunity has an unintended negative consequence of creating more asymptomatic carriers as well as increasing the social mobility (reduced caution and social distancing) of those who have received it. This is likely true. But while interesting, and an important part of the equation, this fact alone is insufficient to drive any conclusions or decisions on how we should proceed. There are significant pros and cons to the vaccine and these should be weighed against each other instead of in isolation. It's disappointing that in the end all we get is 4 pages of autists trying to convince themselves they have made the superior decision and clearly smarter than anyone who provides conflicting information...

The vaccines provide marginal protection against COVID19, which is not a particularly deadly SARS virus. They also create health problems in a % of the population who takes them. We just don't know the % because we have no long term studies. I don't think anyone can argue these points. They are firmly established. They miss the REAL point however.

The real point is why Globohomo is so desperate to compel everyone to take these vaccines, even after 2 years where we've discovered therapeutics that work, and also that the death rate is nowhere close to the early on estimates. The answer is simple. These vaccines and even the monoclonal antibodies treatments are all tainted by abortion. Murdered babies were used to create these drugs. That's a mortal sin. If you take them willingly, you become complicit. If you dismiss this spiritual risk as irrelevant or imaginary, then Satan has your soul. That's what he wants, but you have to give it to him willingly (many already have by living a hedonistic lifestyle indulging in mortal sins). When the WHOLE world is compelled to take these vaccines, Satan will have won. Modern medicine is veering towards an almost exclusive use of "humanized mice" to develop new vaccines and therapeutics. We'll get to a point where it'll be impossible to treat your illness (whatever it may be) without taking one or more of these drugs. Now it makes sense to me what's really going on, why Globohomo and their governmental allies have focused EXCLUSIVELY on vaccination as a way to stop the so-called COVID19 pandemic, and what the actual endgame is for ruining anyone's life who resists. We are in the end times, boyos. It's clear. For those who can see it, there is no mistake about it. For those who can't or won't, they'll just dismiss what's going on as conspiracy or find some secular explanation.

If you want to understand more, here's some reading. If you're openly hostile to Christianity, you may gain little by reading these, unless you recognize the inherent evil in harvesting cells from a living baby as it's in the process of being aborted, to experiment upon for medical research.

Part I: The deadly new world of vaccines and monoclonal antibodies: Introduction to Humanized Mice
https://nonvenipacem.com/2022/02/07/...umanized-mice/

Part II: Mice from Hell 2.0, “Precision Mouse Models:” First came BLT mice… but why not use even more human organs? Next comes human lung transplantation, yielding BLT-L mice
https://nonvenipacem.com/2022/02/08/...ng-blt-l-mice/

Part III: Monoclonal antibodies derived from Humanized Mice are literally exploding in popularity and pervasiveness… every person on earth will eventually consume these materials (if we allow it)
https://nonvenipacem.com/2022/02/09/...f-we-allow-it/

Fact:

studies with partial immunity therapeutics (what the covid "vax" is) resulted in more deaths of the untreated than from control groups

That has been a key argument against mrna tech all along, period

JLC is clearly trying to sidestep the issue with pedantics but his flow chart is done so he's appealing to authority and claiming peer review is from god himself.

Without any therapeutics the virus will keep evolving into a weaker version as its survival favors host sustainability. That's not even fukking debatable at this point. That IS how omicron arose from unvaxed portions of the earth.

I was focusing on the claim that it's the vaccine-induced (mRNA-encoded) spike protein being breathed on people causing heart problems.

Link?Nope, I just clarified what the process involves.

Without any therapeutics the virus will keep evolving into a weaker version as its survival favors host sustainability. That's not even fukking debatable at this point. That IS how omicron arose from unvaxed portions of the earth.[/QUOTE]

of course you were focused on that because you'd rather dismiss the premise of the argument based off its proposed mechanism rather than the actual validity of the premise which is what matters in this case.

disingenuous af. And frankly it wouldn't surprise me if spike proteins were exhaled on their own.

Purebloods are free to shovel snow and make your beds

Let the jabbies sit in the corner scared to move while they wait for their pfizer heart attack pills

You're finding Jesus' face in a slice of toast OP

All you have to do is google 'causes heart attacks' and set the year range to pre covid, nothing new. 2017 articles:

https://www.webmd.com/pain-managemen...rt-attack-risk

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...t-attack-study

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...trokes-n705901

Go outside

It was the argument. It's not usually considered odd or disingenuous to address an argument directly.

When did you get your booster shot?

I love when people end a statement in "period". In the scientific world that's translated as "please accept everything I say as not only fact, but as the only facet of the issue to consider." It's a valid argument against partial immunizations, I am just stating that this needs to be weighed against the benefit instead of looked at in isolation. The mortality rates of vaccinated and unvaccinated show huge numbers of lives that were saved due to the vaccine and this is the counterweight that needs to be considered.

Let's at least apply equal expectation on both sides of the discussion. You can't argue against peer reviewed data yet leverage other studies that suit your argument as you did (without link or source) in the first part of your quote up above. Peer reviewed studies are the best that we have and yes, they are imperfect and open to challenge. Let's challenge them based on the merit of the study, though.Are you sure? If it's a partial immunity therapeutic that enables the virus to continue to spread why specifically state it arose from the unvaccinated population? You mean from the total population, right? And you can argue the vaccine is slowing this (though not without stating that the vaccine is effective in slowing the spread), but then you are still back to weighing the benefits of an accelerated drop in virility against the lives saved along the way.

I'm totally unvaxxed and in the UK too. But I'm not finding satanic symbols in the clouds either. Just say, 'I was wrong', and move on.

It absolutely is when you myopically pick a specific portion as the only representative mechanism in which the premise presents itself because you're a cherry picking whore.

I'm not wrong though

word salad LMAO

you keep redefining what peer review is just like the definition of vax

https://www.webmd.com/pain-managemen...rt-attack-risk

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...t-attack-study

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...trokes-n705901

Go outside

damn quoted sources from webmd, theguardian.com, and nbcnews!!!

Are you retarded? Literally just go on google and change the date to pre covid and you'll found thousands of articles saying this and that can cause heart attacks. You must be trolling srs