More Project Veritas

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Right! Treatment protocols are so successful that 2,000 people are dying every day and tens of thousands are testing positive. They are so successful that states are initiating cries of care plans, which means people are being turned away.

By the way, Ivermectin and Hysrochloroquine are not effective treatment protocols. Monoclonal antibody infusion is, but it’s expensive. It takes a long time. Vaccination is free. It takes minutes. You can get it almost anywhere.

Maybe 2000 people a day wouldn't be dying if our Government would have listened to Dr. Kory or Dr. Mccullough, something like 10 months ago. How many of those hundreds of thousands of people that have died this year would still be alive? But no, they couldn't/can't do that. They chose to go all in with Vaccines. If another half a million or a million or 10 million people die in the meantime, who cares. Anybody mentions Hydroxychloroquine or Ivermectin on social media, we label them as providing misinformation and censor their ass. MSM, call Ivermectin horse dewormer. Despite everything that Jeff P and PA have shown you, you still keep repeat the MSM lies that Ivermectin is dangerous and doesn't work.

You also still haven't explained to me your obsession with vaccinating everyone. I know politicians are corrupt. I know Pharma wants to own the world. WTF is your motive. Can't you relax in knowing that 97% or 95%(according to your credible sources) of those who die are unvaccinated. Wear a mask. Don't your credible sources say masks save lives. So you can wear a mask, chances are very good you wont get it. If you do get it your chances of even getting hospitalized are pretty tiny. So what exactly are you so ****ing scared of. If you want I can provide you a covid prevention list, but it comes from a conservative doctor, so you may not be interested.

My next question is wtf makes you the authority on whether these vaccines are safe. Because you read the Washington Post? Nobody has any idea what the long term side effects are. Government is going out of their way to suppress any information about anyone who dies suspiciously after they are vaccinated. Companies are going out of their way to brainwash employees that Vaccines are safe, and we are all in this together bs and now are starting to fire folks who aren't getting vaccinated.....Idiot left wing governors are making it illegal for normal law abiding citizens who choose not to get vaccinated (maybe they have medical conditions that concern their doctor, maybe they have had covid and are safer with natural immunity and don't want to take on any extra risk, maybe it is against their religion or convictions, or maybe they just don't trust are lying government...) to even go into a store or Restaurant or gym or just about anything else. Also wouldn't be shocked if they start vaccinating real young kids soon. Nothing shocks me anymore. Meanwhile Mostpost is hollering from the top of the roof "Get your vaccines, they are safe and will end the pandemic and if you don't get it you are being selfish". You are completely lost. You are neck and neck with our President (which I am sure you take as the ultimate compliment).

[Poindexter]

Originally Posted by Redboard

This study showed that unvaccinated people who already had COVID-19 are more than two times as likely than fully vaccinated people to get COVID-19 again.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/...DC_921-DM63289

Just another bit of info in order to make an informed decision.

Doesn't make a lot of sense from a logic perspective given what else we know.

If you want to believe it is true, I suggest reading this paragraph from it:


The findings in this report are subject to at least five limitations. First, reinfection was not confirmed through whole genome sequencing, which would be necessary to definitively prove that the reinfection was caused from a distinct virus relative to the first infection. Although in some cases the repeat positive test could be indicative of prolonged viral shedding or failure to clear the initial viral infection (9), given the time between initial and subsequent positive molecular tests among participants in this study, reinfection is the most likely explanation. Second, persons who have been vaccinated are possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated. Third, vaccine doses administered at federal or out-of-state sites are not typically entered in KYIR, so vaccination data are possibly missing for some persons in these analyses. In addition, inconsistencies in name and date of birth between KYIR and NEDSS might limit ability to match the two databases. Because case investigations include questions regarding vaccination, and KYIR might be updated during the case investigation process, vaccination data might be more likely to be missing for controls. Thus, the OR might be even more favorable for vaccination. Fourth, although case-patients and controls were matched based on age, sex, and date of initial infection, other unknown confounders might be present. Finally, this is a retrospective study design using data from a single state during a 2-month period; therefore, these findings cannot be used to infer causation. Additional prospective studies with larger populations are warranted to support these findings.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by Redboard

This study showed that unvaccinated people who already had COVID-19 are more than two times as likely than fully vaccinated people to get COVID-19 again.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/...DC_921-DM63289

Just another bit of info in order to make an informed decision.

Redboard,

Thanks for posting a link to that study. (I hadn't seen it before.)

I just finished reading it (thoroughly) and decided to write the author with some questions about the structure of the dataset used for the study.

Imo, this matters for reasons pointed out by classhandicapper in post #30.

This is a partial cut and paste from my email:

Recent data from Israel suggests immunity from vaccination decays over time. A half life for time decay of immunity from vaccination can be estimated from the data.

1. Did you look at or consider ELAPSED TIME since vaccination of the subjects in your study?

2. Same question - but for the unvaccinated subjects in your study: Did you look at or consider ELAPSED TIME since recovery from infection?

If she decides to respond I'll come back to this thread and post an update.


-jp

.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by mostpost

I ask plenty of questions. Every time one of you posts something from one of your cockamamie sites, I question your sanity.

We question yours a lot more often.

[classhandicapper]

If she decides to respond I'll come back to this thread and post an update.

Thanks Jeff.

[Redboard]

Originally Posted by Poindexter

Doesn't make a lot of sense from a logic perspective given what else we know.

If you want to believe it is true, I suggest reading this paragraph from it:


The findings in this report are subject to at least five limitations. First, reinfection was not confirmed through whole genome sequencing, which would be necessary to definitively prove that the reinfection was caused from a distinct virus relative to the first infection. Although in some cases the repeat positive test could be indicative of prolonged viral shedding or failure to clear the initial viral infection (9), given the time between initial and subsequent positive molecular tests among participants in this study, reinfection is the most likely explanation. Second, persons who have been vaccinated are possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated. Third, vaccine doses administered at federal or out-of-state sites are not typically entered in KYIR, so vaccination data are possibly missing for some persons in these analyses. In addition, inconsistencies in name and date of birth between KYIR and NEDSS might limit ability to match the two databases. Because case investigations include questions regarding vaccination, and KYIR might be updated during the case investigation process, vaccination data might be more likely to be missing for controls. Thus, the OR might be even more favorable for vaccination. Fourth, although case-patients and controls were matched based on age, sex, and date of initial infection, other unknown confounders might be present. Finally, this is a retrospective study design using data from a single state during a 2-month period; therefore, these findings cannot be used to infer causation. Additional prospective studies with larger populations are warranted to support these findings.

The study is a confusing, for one it doesn’t say who paid for it. if it were a retrospective study, it's probably worthless. But here’s what I’m gleaming:

1- A case-patient was infected twice. Once in 2020 and also in May-June 2021. There were 246 of these.

2- a control-patient is one who was infected only once, in 2020. There were 492 of these in the study, but why only 492?. They had a lot of candidates, I would think, (Kentucky had about 250k people infected in 2020) but decided to use only twice the number of case-patients, so, they came up with these 492 by taking each case-patient, and matched them with two control-patients based on sex, age , and date of initial positive test(They didn’t take into account underlying conditions, as you mentioned).

My question is, why only two?

Say I’m a male case-patient, age 40-49, and was infected in the third week of October 2020. Now if there are 250k in your database, I’m sure there were more than two who were male, 40-49 infected during that week. Why not take this demographic and compare it to the entire demographic?

My point is, in hindsight, it's easy to do a study and come up with any conclusion you want (depending on who is paying for it). But was it in hindsight? Or was the "match" done at the time of the initial infections?

Maybe i'm missing the boat here.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by mostpost

You get more irrational with each passing day. There is an incredible amount of anger in your post. One word to a line. All caps. Vulgarities. All signs of unrestrained anger. Devoid of logic.

Maybe you should have me rounded up and put into a camp so I can be programmed to think as you do.

You're the one who is angry...angry at those who have already contracted COVID and refuse to get the vaccine.

This angers you greatly. Because you are a cuck.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by mostpost

You get more irrational with each passing day. There is an incredible amount of anger in your post. One word to a line. All caps. Vulgarities. All signs of unrestrained anger. Devoid of logic.

Oh, and when you post lies about me...you bet I'm gonna get angry.

I've had it with folks like you and their constant bullshit.

[Jeff P]

Twitter

-jp

.

__________________
Team JCapper: 2011 PAIHL Regular Season ROI Leader after 15 weeks
www.JCapper.com

[JustRalph]

Originally Posted by Elkchester Road

I predicted a while back ivermectin will be everywhere in a year.

I pick up my prescription on Friday.

3 month pre-emptive strike

Latest studies say that it cuts chances of getting regular Covid over 90% and Delta by 84%

The new data on steroid inhalers is very promising also.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

https://twitter.com/EricSpracklen/st...01692143390720



-jp

.

Don't worry...mostpost will be along in about 2 seconds to tell you how everything in the video is fake.

And that he's always been a HUGE champion of BIG PHARMA and BIG EVERYTHING, actually...he loves BIG CORPORATIONS because they are all so highly ethical and do the right thing by everybody, especially their lower level employees. They never put the bottom line profit ahead of doing the right thing.

He's a shill for corporate America...basically...

[Elkchester Road]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

I predicted a while back ivermectin will be everywhere in a year.

I pick up my prescription on Friday.

3 month pre-emptive strike

Latest studies say that it cuts chances of getting regular Covid over 90% and Delta by 84%

The new data on steroid inhalers is very promising also.

Absolutely, Ralph. Great to hear.