The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.
NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.
The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.
Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.
The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)
Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.
Considering sending spam? Read this first.
Before I begin for those who want to call health-care workers "heroes": Damn near every single "doctor" and hospital are included in the title of this article, and throughout I shall prove it.
Let's start with President Trump and his HHS jackass who put into place financial incentives for people to wind up in the hospital, particularly those over 65 who are on Medicare, with even more financial incentives if you were put on a ventilator.
USA Today, hardly a "right wing conspiracy rag", said this back in April of 2020:
We rate the claim that hospitals get paid more if patients are listed as COVID-19 and on ventilators as TRUE.
Hospitals and doctors do get paid more for Medicare patients diagnosed with COVID-19 or if it's considered presumed they have COVID-19 absent a laboratory-confirmed test, and three times more if the patients are placed on a ventilator to cover the cost of care and loss of business resulting from a shift in focus to treat COVID-19 cases.
May I remind you that on the data from Wuhan we knew that 90+% of the time being put on a ventilator was futile for Covid-19 patients, and again, we knew that in March.
Doubt me? Here's the study data which I reported out at the time -- March of 2020.
Why would you pay three times more if you did a thing that had a 90+% rate of killing someone unless you wanted them to die?
That which you pay more for you will get more of -- every time.
Now you can go ahead and claim that nobody "falsified" the data with regard to hospitals and death certificates, that is, claimed someone had Covid-19 and it killed them when they didn't.
That doesn't matter when you get down to brass tacks.
What does matter is that we knew how to stop people from being killed by Covid-19 all the way back to the summer months, conclusively so, in nearly every case. Yes, in some cases therapy and early intervention will fail (so do vaccines some of the time) but in most cases these therapies succeed.
When did we know that early intervention worked in old people particularly?
In April of 2020.
Did we make that something to be widely used immediately, back in April of 2020?
NO. In fact we did the opposite; the NIH specifically recommended against the use of Ivermectin.
If you don't go to the hospital then the hospital doesn't make their extra money, particularly if you're 65+ and on Medicare. If the hospital doesn't get you in there or you don't get sicker they don't get the even larger, three times larger, bonus from putting you on a machine that is extremely likely to kill you. Who is at the greatest risk from Covid-19? Those over 65 and thus on Medicare; statistically-speaking this is a disease that harms damn few younger individuals.
As the evidence piled up in the summer did we change the recommendations?
All the way to December we did not and indeed as of today the NIH position is "neutral"!
Again folks: These are real clinical physicians who are using this therapy in extremely high-risk patients with a 90-100% reduction in hospitalizations and deaths. Not once, not twice, repeatedly in every case. In addition there is not one failed clinical trial on record.
Why did we not strongly recommend and use Ivermectin despite the overwhelming evidence that it worked all the way back to April of 2020?
The $30,000 in extra payments to the hospital wasn't enough -- oh no, there were in fact tens of billions of dollars at stake, and your mother, grandfather or other family member had to be slaughtered in order to make sure that money flowed and kept flowing.
An Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is a mechanism to facilitate the availability and use of medical countermeasures, including vaccines, during public health emergencies, such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. Taking into consideration input from the FDA, manufacturers decide whether and when to submit an EUA request to FDA.
The EUAs for vaccines (and Remdesivir) were illegal if there was an adequate, approved and available alternative. HCQ, Ivermectin (and budesonide) are all available and approved drugs. This meant that in order to obtain EUAs for Remdesivir, monoclonal antibodies and the vaccines on an EUA basis it was necessary to deliberately deny that the use of these existing therapeutic agents were adequate even though the data was that their use prevented somewhere between 75 and 90% of all hospital admissions when used early and even when not used until hospital admission prevented the majority of intubations and deaths.
In other words the data is that they work as well as a vaccine.
If that is not "adequate" would you mind telling me what would be?
Our governments at the federal and state levels, all 50 states including those like Tennessee and Florida which have claimed to be "leaders" in Covid-19, deliberately sat back and let your loved ones be denied known safe and likely effective treatments for Covid-19 and the data says that as a direct result of that intentional refusal a whole lot of them are dead.
Most, but not all physicians and hospitals not only went along with this bull**** they explicitly supported it and the hospitals got to bill Medicare for every person over 65 at a greatly elevated rate by doing so.
This is why the vast majority of those who Covid-19 killed have died.
Our local hospital's record here is that nearly 65% of those admitted for Covid-19 left in a box.
Damn near all of those individuals should have survived but then the roughly $5 million our local hospital obtained in "extra and triple-extra payments", assuming most or all of the 163 dead were on Medicare, would not have been paid out to them.
There was no medical reason for any of the hysteria, closures, mandates or anything else -- including vaccines.
Why are you still quietly putting up with this bull****, including mask mandates, business and school closures and more?
Our government, physicians and hospitals knew how to keep Covid-19 from being a serious threat to your health in April of 2020 with cheap and widely-available drugs just as physicians use antibiotics for bacterial infections on a daily basis that would otherwise be deadly. Instead of using known safe and available existing drugs they intentionally let the virus kill nearly a half-million people along with the government destroying the education of our children and countless businesses and jobs for the explicit purpose of funneling billions of dollars to the medical and pharmaceutical industry, along with furthering the political aspirations of various actors all through the United States.
These were not deaths that occurred despite our "best efforts"; they were mass-homicide.
If you are willing to let your government slaughter your mother while believing their intentionally-false claim that wearing a diaper on your face "works" and as a result you sat back for the last year and watched 500,000 of your countrymen and women die rather than rising up and holding every one of those ghouls accountable for the unnecessary death they deliberately allowed for both political and financial profit then you are the monster.
In my nearly six decades of drawing breath on this rock I've never seen our government, until Covid-19 showed up, take actions that I believed were worthy of a no-bull**** uprising with essentially every government official at all levels being physically dragged out of office by their hair and tossed into the street with nothing more than their underwear remaining to their name. Never in my adult life would I have believed that our government, with its alleged "checks and balances", would deliberately kill half a million American citizens over 12 months time by allowing them to choke on their own spit through the intentional concealment and outright suppression of known safe medical therapies via threats, executive orders, outright lies and even license suspensions for the explicit purpose of enriching certain "chosen people and corporations" both politically and economically.
Over the last 12 months I've read well over a hundred scientific and medical research papers and myriad references which in my opinion document conclusively that this is in fact exactly what happened at a level of proof more than sufficient to sustain criminal convictions.
I've given this virus and our government's response to it at all levels more than one full year of my effort as an independent journalist.
That ends today, February 28th, 2021.
This is what I've referenced repeatedly over the years, and many times with regard to Covid and multiple claims, whether it be masks, the PCR testing, other alleged mitigations and similar.
Too many of its findings that fill the academic ether are the result of shoddy experiments or poor analysis. … A rule of thumb among biotechnology venture capitalists is that half of published research cannot be replicated. Even that may be optimistic. Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could reproduce just six of 53 “landmark” studies in cancer research. Earlier, a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67 similarly important papers. A leading computer scientist frets that three quarters of papers in his subfield are bunk. In 2000-10 roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later retracted because of mistakes or improprieties.
Think about the scope of this problem. It is by no means limited to the medical field; indeed environmental matters are some of the worst, especially in the so-called "global warming" field.
As just one example we all know the oceans are connected bodies of water. That is, unlike a lake which may be impounded and thus rise and fall with the amount of rain, water drawn for irrigation or used to produce electricity independent of another lake a few miles away the oceans all connect to each other and as anyone who has ever put water into two containers connected together knows it will flow through the connection until they are both at the same level.
Tidal forces and such are different in different places, but consistent in one location. Nonetheless you cannot dump a bunch of "extra" water into the Gulf of Mexico, for example, and have it remain there and not influence the level of water everywhere else in the oceans because all of them are connected.
So we were told back in the 1990s and early 2000 timeframe that over the next 100 years starting from 2000 the sea level would rise by more than five feet on a more-or-less linear basis. Ok., that's a testable claim. Fortunately (or not so much for the screamers) I built a dock shortly after I bought my home right at the start of that time frame in Florida. I know exactly where the cross-members on the pilings and their bolts, which obviously do not move, were at both high and low tide in both winter and summer. While sand comes and goes, particularly with storms, the water level is independent of that unless the dock becomes "stranded" (no water at all.) I also put a ladder on the dock that, when in the "down" position allowed you to climb out of the water, and in the "up" position was clear of the water by under a foot at high tide in the summer. Why so little? Because you want it to extend down far enough to get on it when it's down, of course but you do not want the lower end submerged when not in use or all manner of things (including oysters, which are very sharp and will slice through you like a razor blade when you break them with your foot!) will grow on the bottom rung.
Well, 20 years passed and...... the ladder still had the same clearance. The bolts were in the same place at high and low tides, winter and summer. If there was any change at all it was perhaps an inch -- small enough that I cannot reliably state that there was any impact whatsoever. Yet I was promised....... a foot of increase, which would submerge the bottom of that ladder in the "up" position.
It didn't happen.
Obviously those "models" were wrong. Where's the apology? More to the point since the thesis was blown why are we taking any sort of "mitigating" steps today when the claimed reason for it was wrong?
It's even worse in certain other areas. Cancer researchers have only been able to replicate ten percent of the studies. When you think about the implications there your hair ought to stand up. People with cancer and their doctors make decisions that, if wrong, wind up with the person being dead.
As the CEI points out there is inherent bias when people are paid to do something. The entire point of peer review and similar metrics is to try to remove that bias, which otherwise will wind up in the results. This is especially bad when we start talking about computer models .vs. empirical observations and data collection, as someone who started programming in machine code on various devices, including the PDP-8, PDP-10, a weird Burroughs bookkeeping machine and the Z-80 I think four decades of experience likely gives me a bit of credibility in this area. In short if you tell someone doing a computer model either by statement or implication by where the "study" comes from what you want and you're writing the check you are nearly certain to get it.
But all that means when you get that result is that the check cleared.
Think about the problems we have now with Covid-19. We knew in March that ventilators were useless; this disease was not ARDS, and 95% of the people ventilated at Wuhan died. Nobody in their right mind would promote and focus on a "therapy" that kills you 95% of the time.
But we did -- in fact Trump, Fauci, the CDC, Cuomo and others went so far as to use a wartime statute, the Defense Production Act, to produce many copies of a very expensive and clinically useless device. They did this despite knowing it was useless. I pointed this out in March.
We killed thousands this way.
But it didn't end there.
We have various entities claiming masks work including the CDC in a very-recent MMWR report. Their claim is pure propaganda; they deliberately selected the time frame coming into the late spring and summer, stopping in middle October, timing same for the institution of mandates right into the hottest and highest insolation months in the United States and even worse they omitted those jurisdictions from consideration that had no mandates. As such they intentionally included confounding factors (like how much Vitamin D people get from being outside) and control groups that would identify those confounding factors by showing the same general shape of the curve (places without mandates.) That would be bad enough but to omit the last few months as the confounding factors disappeared but the mandates did not when all those places with mandates took enormous spikes in infections, hospitalization and death is unconscionable and intentionally fraudulent considering the publication date of 2/5/2021.
There is also the intentional willful refusal to follow the data on various prophylaxis and treatment options, including Vitamin D, HCQ and Ivermectin while at the same time trumpeting Remdesivir which has a much worse efficacy and safety profile than any of the others. Of course Remdesivir is on patent and expensive where Vitamin D costs either nothing or pennies and the others are long off-patent and cost under $20. Note that the others have decades-long safety records and thus very well-understood contraindications and side effect profiles, where Remdesivir, being a new drug, does not -- but in the study used to get an EUA it demonstrated a roughly 30% risk of significant adverse event including both cardiac and liver damage.
Then there is the willful refusal to follow the data with regard to both aerosol and fecal transmission of Covid-19. We knew fecal spread was nearly certain in February and March of 2020 when there were multiple incidents in China and Hong Kong within apartment buildings with tenants who did not know each other and were separated by many floors and their apartments did not have "P" traps on the sinks. The only plausible mechanism of transmission was via fecal aerosols expelled out the sinks as the secondary cases were all on the same vertical drain stack. We even have multiple states and locales testing sewage to detect Covid-19 yet to this day the CDC maintains that the only means of transmission is via respiratory droplets. That's flat-out nuts yet to admit that fecal transmission or aerosols are in play mean that masks are worthless or even harmful since you are more-likely to touch your face with a mask on after coming into contact with contamination.
If "just make a claim promoted by someone who paid you" was just centered around Covid-19 it would be one thing but it's not, even within the medical field. Statins are another example; in persons who have not had a heart attack or occlusive stroke while they do lower blood cholesterol they don't change all-cause mortality. We've known this for over 10 years and it should be obvious that if reducing cholesterol does not in fact stop people from dying then cholesterol was not the reason they were dying in the first place. The same is true for people with stable angina and stents: The insertion of stents in such persons does not change all-cause mortality.
Another example: While high blood pressure is indeed associated with all manner of bad things up to so-called "Stage 1" high blood pressure while drugs do lower blood pressure the data is that they do not change all-cause mortality just like statins don't. In other words yes, your blood pressure goes down but dead is dead and the drugs do not stop you from being dead. At higher levels it's a different story as there we do see lower risks of death and serious morbidity yet we put people on drugs for decades that, by the data, does not make them less-likely to die or have serious disorder occur in their body but does make the drug manufacturers money.
The problem is that all drugs and procedures have risk. Stents kill right around 1% of the people who get them at the time of the procedure or shortly thereafter and nearly 10% are readmitted to the hospital due to serious complications within the next 30 days. Does that sound "safe" to you? Cardiologists and hospitals with cath labs who make millions of dollars placing them in people will tell you it is but on the data that risk is only reasonable if you are having a heart attack. Yes, in that instance where the risk of death if the procedure is not done is nearly 100% it is clear that a 1% risk of dying from the procedure is far better.
But if you're not having a heart attack taking a 1% risk of dying, and a 10% risk of being readmitted to the hospital within the next month due to complications, all of which you pay for never mind the procedure itself is crazy. You're far better off to stop eating carbohydrates and drop 50 lbs instead. That has no discernable risk and a whole host of benefits.
Statins cause significant muscle damage (myopathy) in many people and limit their exercise performance. In a small percentage of people this does not just limit exercise tolerance it kills directly via rhabdomyolysis, a syndrome in which muscle tissue is destroyed (your heart is a muscle, remember) and the byproducts of same do severe damage to both the liver and kidneys. Again, if you've had a heart attack already then perhaps this risk is worth it -- but for people who have not the computation is nowhere near as simple.
It would be nice to pin all of the Covid-19 insanity on some crazy outbreak of stupidity or even intentional action such as lacing the water with psychedelic drugs but the facts are that this sort of insanity has permeated all of what is called "science" for decades.
Again, as I've said before and will leave you with this is the the bottom line: If you cannot reliably repeat the results claimed and/or are not given sufficient information to be able to do so it is not science, it is a cult or worse, intentional fraud.
If we read or hear one more time that Woods, following at least his third rotten-driving escapade, is “lucky to be alive,” I’m going to retch. Woods’ good fortune instead again lies in the fact he hasn’t killed anyone, including himself.
Lucky? At least twice while driving after taking prescription drugs, he was lucky to have not committed vehicular homicide — in 2009 and 2017.
His 2009 physical hassle with his ex-wife after her discovery of his infidelity culminated with a car “accident” after he’d ingested the strong prescription sedative Ambien. Yet he escaped a DUI charge.
This time, despite official reports that he was speeding as he crossed the center median, leaving no skid marks to indicate that he applied his brakes, then rolled up an embankment, has already been determined “an accident,” the media again portrayed Woods an innocent victim of fate to which he claimed no memory.
The truth, thus far, is that he crashed his vehicle.
An accident is a result of unfortunate and unforeseen circumstances.
If you crash your vehicle the events appear at first blush to have occurred as a result of something you intentionally, or at least with reckless disregard, did.
The evidence certainly points to the latter at this point. That Tiger's vehicle crossed the median with no evidence of the brakes being applied, assuming the SUV in question is not determined to have a mechanical fault such that it had no brakes, likely fits into the latter category.
And, as the author notes, this isn't the first time.
But then again they protest a little bit too much, don't you think?
All those Covid-19 people in nursing homes didn't have an accident. They didn't pass away as a consequence of some random pathogen we had no idea was there and it was a truly unfortunate set of unforeseen cicumstances.
On the contrary in NY and a few other states we deliberately loaded infected people into the building, and in every state we deliberately refused to segregate employees from the population and a rapidly-circulating infection. At the same time douche-bags such as Governor Lee banned relatives from coming to visit even if they were to purchase their own PPE and take a test, or even if they had already had the virus, recovered and were medically cleared and thus, by any reasonable presumption, were safe as they could neither get or transmit the virus. To those who argue that "well they might get it twice" I will simply point out that every employee in the place put the residents at much higher risk and yet that was intentionally ignored.
A quarter or more of all the deaths from Covid-19 are directly chargeable there.
Most of the rest are chargeable to intentionally sending infected persons home to eat chicken soup without any treatment or interdiction of the disease whatsoever, even though we had entirely reasonable evidence (but not conclusive evidence) that a host of drugs might work including HCQ, Ivermectin and Budesonide. We knew very early on that the usual course of pathology, when death occurred, was due to clotting in the lungs and as a result that ventilators would not work (no blood flow means no gas exchange) yet we built more by the 10s of thousands which in fact we did not need at all as there were enough of them -- never mind they killed you nearly every time.
Oh by the way we've known how to deal with clotting disorders for the last several decades too. Yet even today people are not being appropriately tested and treated for this when they are admitted to the hospital by which point 90% or more of their O2 transport capacity has been impaired and they are literally on death's door.
I've written about all of this for the last year, literally, in dozens of articles.
Instead we were told to eat some more pain pills (ala Woods) in the form of wearing masks in which 40 years of hard science says does nothing to interdict transmission of airborne viruses and indeed doesn't even work for bacteria as source control in an operating room; bacteria are many times the size of a virus. The press has maintained all of this fiction; that the deaths were a "sorry circumstance and accident of nature" since inception even though in fact those who died almost all crashed due to gross negligence or worse.
Yeah, the Woods story and fawning by the media is bull****.
But so is the entire last year when it comes to Covid-19.
Remember what we were told: Vaccines were the way forward, back to normality.
That was a lie -- just the latest (and almost-certainly not the last) in a long string of lies.
Let me start by saying this: it is weird. I have about a month under my belt since the second vaccine and still experience a dizzying mix of guilt and delight. Note to fellow vaccinees about this topic: dealing with this juggling act interests absolutely no one who has not been vaccinated (but everyone who has).
Guilt and delight?
Delight at.... what, exactly?
I saw this the other evening at the pub -- some older folks who were in delight they were getting vaccinated. Sitting in a bar, where they've sat for months, drinking with friends which of course means within six feet of distance without a magic mask, since it's damn hard to quaff a beer with a diaper on one's face.
Death occurred in 301 of 2743 patients receiving remdesivir and in 303 of 2708 receiving its control (rate ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.11; P=0.50)
When I pointed this out I was told it definitely saved his life; damn science to Hell. You know, what we're supposed to believe in and follow?
You see the drug cost $3,000 and has an EUA therefore it has to be good and it definitely saved his life. The off-patent drugs that cost $10 definitely would not work as well or better -- never mind that even if neither budesonide or ivermectin worked (the science says they both do) they'd be as effective as Remdesivir but drain 1/100th as much money from your bank account.
Nope. The drug did make him $3,000 poorer and he lived anyway and that high price, of course, is what made it work. I hope he dodged the quite-material risk of cardiac damage that the earlier trials disclosed. If his friend has a heart attack two years from now odds are decent Remdesivir caused it.
One friend of mine, about my age but materially more-morbid than I am, has had the Coof, it didn't kill her and she's smart enough to recognize that there is no benefit to her from getting the shot. She has no intention of doing it. Indeed there might be harm (as with any medication) so since she's already had the disease it's bone-headed stupid to get inoculated. She gets it -- but that was one out of four.
One of the "shooters" was proudly showing off his "card" and strongly implying he'd demand everyone have them to go and do various things. I pointed out that the law says in the US at least vaccine passports are illegal as they violate BOTH HIPPA and the ADA. Can (and might) nations demand them for entry if you wish to travel internationally? Yes. That would be stupid, but they might and they can, as governments. Can a public school do it? Yes; and to do it they solicited and got a specific exemption in the law but they must protect that private health information. Can a private business do that? Nope, just as they cannot demand you prove you need that wheelchair if you roll up to their door in one. As a former CEO who had to pay a fair bit of attention to ADA and HIPPA requirements when it came to employees and customers lest I get sued I'm well-aware of where those lines are. If private firms start that crap they will get sued instantly and lose, taking it in both holes and be bankrupted by it because there are plenty of people who can't take a vaccine for various reasons yet you cannot force them to prove it and you also can't force someone to document their medical treatment and conditions without damn good cause (e.g. in furtherance of some sort of specific accommodation for a specific employee) and if you do obtain such information you must protect all personally identifiable information. Unauthorized disclosure, in the case of PII within HIPPA, can be not just a civil but a criminal offense.
You think not? Oh there are ambulance chasers all over the place who sue firms every day because the button on the wall to open the door (ADA required) is 3" too high or the wheelchair ramp is an inch and a half out of spec. That shakedown has been going on for decades and you can bet those folks are salivating at the potential to fry some big fish if anyone actually tries that crap in the US. I for one will be happy to be a named plaintiff and will enjoy screwing every single such firm I can and all of their owners straight up their ass with no lube.
Never mind the stupidity of the demand, as is displayed right here:
Take, as an example, the experience of getting onto an elevator. At the start of the pandemic, this seemed a high-risk, Apollo 11 sort of dangerous blast-off moment. Now, however, it has become a test of will. Can I remove my mask ... while still in the elevator? No one will see me! What would happen if I did? And what about touching the elevator button not with my elbow but with a bare fingertip?
Or what is the best plan for going to a grocery store? Extra masks? A scarf? Should I pay cash (requires receiving coins back) or credit card (Who knows where that machine has been?). Does my newly jazzed up immune system allow me to live a little? Do I dare eat a peach?
For me, the answer is clear. Not yet. The best advice, alas, is what the CDC is pushing: continue to hunker down and keep on doing what you're doing.
Wait a minute..... isn't the entire point of a vaccine to immunize you -- that is, protect you -- against a disease?
If you do not believe that's what you are getting in exchange for the risk of those jabs in the arm why did you do it?
Don't you take a measles vaccine to prevent you from getting the measles? Are you scared to go out in public after being vaccinated against the measles because some illegal invader might have the measles? No. Yet among all the illegals in our nation, most completely unvaccinated, that's actually rather likely and measles spreads a hell of a lot easier than does Covid-19!
So if you do believe you're getting immunity if you let them jab you with the Covid vaccine then why are you hesitant to remove your mask and stab the elevator button with your bare finger? Why are you still scared to go to the grocery store or eat a peach?
If you believe the vaccine is safe and effective, that is, it won't hurt you and will keep you from getting the virus or at minimum being significantly harmed by it then why do you care if anyone else has been vaccinated? You either believe it's effective or you don't. If you do then you're safe so why do you give a crap if I do not believe? After all it's my ass, not yours -- you're safe -- right? Isn't this like believing you are going to Heaven if you live a pious life? While you might preach to me in an attempt to convince me that Hell lies ahead if I do not change my ways in the end it's my soul on the line, right?
Not even the most-rabid preacher has the gall to stand up there on Sunday and tell you that your neighbor's sin damns you to Hell.
Again: If you're not convinced that the vaccine has rendered you safe then why did you take the jab in the first place?
Do you not recognize the giant con job you just bought into ladies and gentlemen?
I stopped rather quickly at the pub because with those three, at least, it was clear they were hell-bent to take a jab they did not believe in yet they were doing it anyway and trying to coerce other people to do so by threatening them. For what purpose? Clearly not prevention of disease because once you're immune who gives a wet crap if someone else gets the bug? If I'm wrong and die you get to laugh at my corpse.
If someone next to you isn't vaccinated that's on them -- and can't be you -- right?
Again, isn't that the entire premise of taking a vaccine in the first place?
How long before people figure this out? The so-called "experts" don't know because they didn't test it and thus they don't believe the jabs make you immune. So why are they trying to con you into getting them and then keeping on with the precautions?
I'll answer that for you: They sure as hell don't want you to broil their spouses, children, nieces and nephews -- and then them -- if you take their recommended jab and then get deathly ill from the Coof, and you might do exactly that if you were told to take the stab and it didn't work, especially if the data ultimately shows that no, you're not the 1 in 100; statistically speaking nobody was actually protected and certainly not at the percentages you were told and sold.
So exactly when did we change from proving something is safe and effective with regard to this or that to oh no, you must continue to take precautions, which is a very-clear and in fact definitive statement that the very people that are purveying and advocating these jabs don't believe they are effective or you would be told it's perfectly ok to remove the mask and hug your friends two weeks after the second dose yet somehow you continue to be conned into rolling up your sleeve!
Never mind that the data says the vaccines are not why the case counts, hospitalizations and deaths are collapsing; the curve of infection rolled over, even with all the new "scary" variants, before the first stab went into the first arm.
That which occurs before you do a thing cannot be caused by the thing you do.
Then look at the facts regarding treatments -- cheap, over-the-counter ones and when we knew about them. Or when we knew that anyone coming into a nursing home might infect the residents and kill them. We stopped you from comforting your family member but we did not stop the employees from killing everyone in the place! We knew how and in the first few months when tourism was basically zero it wouldn't have been very expensive to have the staff all live in one for a few months either as damn near every hotel was almost-completely empty.
But those so-called "experts" who now tell you to take a jab didn't do either or those things a year ago and your grandmother is dead as a result.
From my little informal survey it would appear that a very material percentage of the American population is either stupid or brainwashed, rolling up their arms for a jab that the experts state confers nothing in terms of benefit as you're still told to wear that damn mask and stay away from others even after you've received both doses. Worse, they're listening to the very same *******s who killed 400,000 - 450,000 Americans already.
You'd think that anyone told this would either (1) refuse the jab and tell those purveying them to go pound sand since the person giving it to you has told you it's worth nothing or (2) take the jab, remove the mask and BBQ the "officials" issuing such "recommendations" as obviously full of crap since they have now proved they have been issuing "rules" that have exactly nothing to do with health, whether personal or public, for the last year.