Coronavirus - Doomsday

[TimHauck 1,799]

2 hours ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

did you get your booster yet science denier?

 

I am following the science.  You aren’t 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,569]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

I am following the science.  You aren’t 

you dont have 4 boosters, you deny science

[TimHauck 1,799]

2 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

you dont have 4 boosters, you deny science

Boosters for people under ~50 aren’t supported by science

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,569]

15 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

Boosters for people under ~50 aren’t supported by science

science denier

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/stay-up-to-date.html?s_cid=11737:covid vaccine booster recommendations:sem.ga:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY22

 

[TimHauck 1,799]

1 hour ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

science denier

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/stay-up-to-date.html?s_cid=11737:covid vaccine booster recommendations:sem.ga:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY22

 

CDC is not following the science in this case

[jerryskids 5,188]

41 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

science denier

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/stay-up-to-date.html?s_cid=11737:covid vaccine booster recommendations:sem.ga:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY22

 

Jeebus, every time I see a recommendation to vax a 6 month old kid, I want to punch a baby seal.   

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,569]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

CDC is not following the science in this case

So your take is the cdc is a science denier 

[TimHauck 1,799]

1 minute ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

So your take is the cdc is a science denier 

Yes

[TimHauck 1,799]

I’ve seen a few takes and critiques on this study.  I think this right here is the biggest takeaway, and is counter to one of the critiques that “Covid myocarditis is usually found in old people that are already sick and may not have actually been caused by the virus.”

 

 

[Strike 3,956]

43 minutes ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

So your take is the cdc is a science denier 

If you can't trust the CDC, who can you trust? 

[RaiderHaters Revenge 3,569]

30 minutes ago, Strike said:

If you can't trust the CDC, who can you trust? 

when we don't trust the CDC we are conspiracy theorists

when Tim doesn't trust them its science

 

[RLLD 3,455]

https://www.outkick.com/new-study-confirms-that-masks-likely-dont-work-to-stop-covid/
 

ruh roh. They are starting to tell the truth….

[Strike 3,956]

Just now, RLLD said:

https://www.outkick.com/new-study-confirms-that-masks-likely-dont-work-to-stop-covid/
 

ruh roh. They are starting to tell the truth….

Yeah but TRIPLE masks do!!!!

[TimHauck 1,799]

1 hour ago, RaiderHaters Revenge said:

when we don't trust the CDC we are conspiracy theorists

when Tim doesn't trust them its science

 

Well yeah, whether or not one is a conspiracy theorist should depend on what the information is that you don't trust, not simply the source it's coming from.

Their raw data for example, is trustable.

But I have criticized them for things in the past too.  Such as when they released a mask "study" based on phone surveys.   I did see the study you posted @RLLD, but I'm a little skeptical since most of the studies were from pre-covid.   I like Vinay Prasad for example, but he's always been against masks and has rightfully criticized the CDC for never doing a real study on them.   But he has jumped all over this study as "proof" they don't work, when it's really just looking at the studies that have already been done and he himself has said there haven't hardly been any large studies done (except for the Bangladesh one which did find some benefit).  But I really dislike talking about masks as I think it detracts from real conversations on things like vaccines.

[RLLD 3,455]

8 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Well yeah, whether or not one is a conspiracy theorist should depend on what the information is that you don't trust, not simply the source it's coming from.

Their raw data for example, is trustable.

But I have criticized them for things in the past too.  Such as when they released a mask "study" based on phone surveys.   I did see the study you posted @RLLD, but I'm a little skeptical since most of the studies were from pre-covid.   I like Vinay Prasad for example, but he's always been against masks and has rightfully criticized the CDC for never doing a real study on them.   But he has jumped all over this study as "proof" they don't work, when it's really just looking at the studies that have already been done and he himself has said there haven't hardly been any large studies done (except for the Bangladesh one which did find some benefit).  But I really dislike talking about masks as I think it detracts from real conversations on things like vaccines.

I think skepticism is entirely warranted. This is one study, and we likely need more of these.

just because a doctor, or a reputable organization, makes some assertion does not mean we automatically accept it.

What we should not do also is to vilify those who question the study as being a conspiracy nut and vilify them….

Questioning science is how science is done 

[TimHauck 1,799]

2 hours ago, RLLD said:

I think skepticism is entirely warranted. This is one study, and we likely need more of these.

just because a doctor, or a reputable organization, makes some assertion does not mean we automatically accept it.

What we should not do also is to vilify those who question the study as being a conspiracy nut and vilify them….

Questioning science is how science is done 

I actually don’t think this study is too far off.  I’ve always said I think masks might make like a ~10% difference, which I think was within the margin of error for the study.  One thing that some people pointed out was this only looked at “community” masking, so it’s still not really proven one way or the other if someone who wears an N95 religiously for example might actually have a lower chance of catching it.

Interestingly the study apparently found that handwashing had a significant impact, which is surprising considering the recent data suggested it was primarily spread through aerosols.

[TimHauck 1,799]

I can’t believe people actually believe this sh1t (let alone doctors).  Well, reading a lot of posts here I guess I can:

 

 

[Thornton Melon 542]

3 hours ago, TimHauck said:

I can’t believe people actually believe this sh1t (let alone doctors).  Well, reading a lot of posts here I guess I can:

 

 

I wouldn't mind spreading my mRNA all over Dr. Bowden's face 

[TimHauck 1,799]

$1250 for an "adverse reaction recovery package" from Peter McCullough, LOL.

https://www.twc.health/pages/adverse-reaction-recovery-package

[KSB2424 3,082]

On 2/7/2023 at 7:37 AM, TimHauck said:

I can’t believe people actually believe this sh1t (let alone doctors).  Well, reading a lot of posts here I guess I can:

 

 

Yeah that’s ridiculous. There is so much BS out there, all over the place. Both “sides”.

[lod001 1,237]

Fauci's net worth since the virus/jabs - His net worth exploded during the Covid hysteria era, reporting over $12.6 million on December 31, 2021.

https://openthebooks.substack.com/p/breaking-faucis-net-worth-soared

There's the real criminal.

Now as far as the garbage jab juice:

“We also need to fix the three problems of vaccines. The current vaccines are not infection-blocking. They’re not broad, so when new variants come up you lose protection, and they have very short duration.” ~ Bill Gates

The long winded version of saying 'This garbage is not a vaccine and never worked'.

Remember when they pimped that it was 100% effective? I do.

[lod001 1,237]

 That goblin used to say "it's highly effective". What a complete piece of dogshit that midget is.

 

 

[lod001 1,237]

 Can't figure out why. 

 

[TimHauck 1,799]

19 minutes ago, lod001 said:

 Can't figure out why. 

 

So we should prosecute Trump then?

[Reality 2,710]

1 hour ago, lod001 said:

 Can't figure out why. 

 

[Strike 3,956]

On 2/5/2023 at 5:57 PM, Strike said:

If you can't trust the CDC, who can you trust? 

Bump for @TimHauck

[TimHauck 1,799]

7 minutes ago, Strike said:

Bump for @TimHauck

I already addressed this

[lickin_starfish 1,479]

https://media.greatawakening.win/post/4nKPhCtHbwUE.png

[TimHauck 1,799]

8 hours ago, lickin_starfish said:

https://media.greatawakening.win/post/4nKPhCtHbwUE.png

Deaths in younger people were up due to Delta.

 

My guess is his “stillbirths” comment (if not made up) was comparing to 2020, when many people weren’t having funerals, probably even moreso with stillbirths.

The no 15-year old heart attack victims for 78 years to one a week definitely sounds made up.

Steve Kirsch, lol

 

 

 

[TimHauck 1,799]

On 2/10/2023 at 6:17 PM, Strike said:

Bump for @TimHauck

But if you want a literal answer to your rhetorical question, I’d say your doctor.  And the overwhelming majority of doctors know that the vaccines were successful.  And many of them were not pushing it for kids

[Casual Observer 597]

On 2/5/2023 at 7:41 PM, TimHauck said:

I’ve seen a few takes and critiques on this study.  I think this right here is the biggest takeaway, and is counter to one of the critiques that “Covid myocarditis is usually found in old people that are already sick and may not have actually been caused by the virus.”

 

 

Interesting study.  Collecting myocarditis data beginning on January 1, 2018 through 2022 (Why?  To broaden overall myocarditis numbers?).  Results:  7,292 diagnosed with myocarditis.  530 categorized as having myocarditis from the vaccine.  109 diagnosed as developing myocarditis from having Covid-19.  So the vaxx is 5 times more likely to cause one to develop myocarditis than simply having Covid-19.  Two things:  the first is an acknowledgment that the vaccines are causing myocarditis and the second is that the vaccines are causing myocarditis at a rate exceeding the virus it was intended to combat.  Then, without explanation, this study states that younger people were at a higher risk of developing heart failure due to myocarditis solely from Covid-19 than from the vaxx.  Curious that.

At least we have confirmation that the vaxx is causing myocarditis.  The remainder of the study summary explains that those diagnosed with vaxx myocarditis didn't die within 90 days of diagnosis.  That's very comforting.  It's like telling someone that they will be maimed, but that they won't die from the maiming.  Good study, Tim.

 

[TimHauck 1,799]

7 minutes ago, Casual Observer said:

Interesting study.  Collecting myocarditis data beginning on January 1, 2018 through 2022 (Why?  To broaden overall myocarditis numbers?).  Results:  7,292 diagnosed with myocarditis.  530 categorized as having myocarditis from the vaccine.  109 diagnosed as developing myocarditis from having Covid-19.  So the vaxx is 5 times more likely to cause one to develop myocarditis than simply having Covid-19.  Two things:  the first is an acknowledgment that the vaccines are causing myocarditis and the second is that the vaccines are causing myocarditis at a rate exceeding the virus it was intended to combat.  Then, without explanation, this study states that younger people were at a higher risk of developing heart failure due to myocarditis solely from Covid-19 than from the vaxx.  Curious that.

At least we have confirmation that the vaxx is causing myocarditis.  The remainder of the study summary explains that those diagnosed with vaxx myocarditis didn't die within 90 days of diagnosis.  That's very comforting.  It's like telling someone that they will be maimed, but that they won't die from the maiming.  Good study, Tim.

 

We knew the vax could cause myocarditis long before this study…

But here’s an explainer of why you can’t look at the absolute numbers (this is not the same Morris I usually quote):

 

 

 

 

 

[TimHauck 1,799]

@Casual Observer I thought of you recently because I saw a bunch of people were rightfully dunking on Eric Topol for touting this study:

 

(I’m not convinced Paxlovid has been all that effective)

[Casual Observer 597]

24 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

We knew the vax could cause myocarditis long before this study…

But here’s an explainer of why you can’t look at the absolute numbers (this is not the same Morris I usually quote):

 

 

 

 

 

Tim,

What is Morris trying to accomplish here?  Is he talking about myocarditis rates for vaxxed and covid-only folks?  I can't tell from looking at what you've posted.  If so, then it shows observed higher than expected, but higher for vaxxed.  He does repeat the less-severe-for-vaxxed theme, but that's not really compelling.  Number one, out of 109 covid-19 only myocarditis cases, that's a small number of severe.  Second, there does not seem to be follow-up after 90 days for vaxxed myocarditis.  Thus, at least ostensibly, you have more people harmed for a longer duration through the vaxx.  And it appears that the vaxx is dangerous in plain terms and probably more dangerous than the virus it seeks to blunt.

[Casual Observer 597]

30 minutes ago, TimHauck said:

@Casual Observer I thought of you recently because I saw a bunch of people were rightfully dunking on Eric Topol for touting this study:

 

(I’m not convinced Paxlovid has been all that effective)

I'm sure you know that I like Topol from Fiddler on the Roof better than Eric Topol.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,618]

Trump has to listen to the experts! 
Trump listens to the experts. 
It’s Trumps fault! 

[TimHauck 1,799]

1 hour ago, Casual Observer said:

Tim,

What is Morris trying to accomplish here?  Is he talking about myocarditis rates for vaxxed and covid-only folks?  I can't tell from looking at what you've posted.  If so, then it shows observed higher than expected, but higher for vaxxed.  He does repeat the less-severe-for-vaxxed theme, but that's not really compelling.  Number one, out of 109 covid-19 only myocarditis cases, that's a small number of severe.  Second, there does not seem to be follow-up after 90 days for vaxxed myocarditis.  Thus, at least ostensibly, you have more people harmed for a longer duration through the vaxx.  And it appears that the vaxx is dangerous in plain terms and probably more dangerous than the virus it seeks to blunt.

It shows observed higher than expected for vaxx’ed, but also higher than expected for Covid, and at a higher rate for Covid. 

So, based on Morris’s numbers, we should expect 8x as many myocarditis cases to have been vaxx’ed within the prior 4 weeks as those that had Covid within the prior 4 weeks.

So if you compare that to Hoeg’s numbers, overall myocarditis would be occurring less as a result of the vax than Covid, but when broken down to 12-24, it occurs more often as a result of the vax.

What data are you basing the claim of “more people harmed for a longer duration through the vaxx” on?

[Casual Observer 597]

1 hour ago, TimHauck said:

It shows observed higher than expected for vaxx’ed, but also higher than expected for Covid, and at a higher rate for Covid. 

So, based on Morris’s numbers, we should expect 8x as many myocarditis cases to have been vaxx’ed within the prior 4 weeks as those that had Covid within the prior 4 weeks.

So if you compare that to Hoeg’s numbers, overall myocarditis would be occurring less as a result of the vax than Covid, but when broken down to 12-24, it occurs more often as a result of the vax.

What data are you basing the claim of “more people harmed for a longer duration through the vaxx” on?

Higher raw number of vaxx myocarditis sufferers and lack of data past 90 days (at least as has been presented here).  I doubt that myocarditis magically disappeared at 90 days for vaxxed pts.

[Strike 3,956]

4 hours ago, TimHauck said:

But if you want a literal answer to your rhetorical question, I’d say your doctor.  And the overwhelming majority of doctors know that the vaccines were successful.  And many of them were not pushing it for kids

Cool.   My doctor thinks the vaccine is sh*t.  And in his practice they never required their employees to get it.  And they have not had one employee get Covid.  He does what you always say but don't practice - he follows the science and reads a lot of studies/papers on this stuff.  He doesn't just follow Twitter like you.

[TimHauck 1,799]

12 minutes ago, Strike said:

Cool.   My doctor thinks the vaccine is sh*t.  And in his practice they never required their employees to get it.  And they have not had one employee get Covid.  He does what you always say but don't practice - he follows the science and reads a lot of studies/papers on this stuff.  He doesn't just follow Twitter like you.

I never said it should be required.

There are plenty of doctors that didn’t recommend it for people under about 40 or so.

There are few that have said it was “sh1t” overall.  The studies/papers are clear that it has prevented deaths particularly for people over 50.   And I know you’re over 50 from when you commented about how you couldn’t read small text. 

Of course not all doctors do truly “follow the science.”  Seems like yours is one of those that doesn’t.