2 2
brenthutch

Pfizer’s COVID pill

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Slim King said:

Wendy .. Answer this question.  If the Emergency act ended today, would it still be legal to inject people with these experimental chemicals? 

Yes.  The Pfizer COVID vaccine has been fully approved, and is now in the same category as (say) a flu vaccine.

You honestly didn't know that?  Perhaps try education first, unhinged rant second.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, SkyDekker said:

Yes, daily. Though admittedly a RAT and not a PCR.

My brother's wife tested positive.  Over a series of days, she sometimes tested positive, mostly negative, on RAT, while always testing positive on PCR (until she was over it).   He never tested positive, but I don't know whether he went for a PCR test.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

I’m literate; no need to read things to me. And I accept that some things are not without risk. Have you read all the warnings for the medication you take for diabetes (you mentioned being a diabetic)? They can kill you  

Wendy P. 

I am sure he has no problem following mainstream medical advice for diabetes and isn't relying on zinc to fix that for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Slim King said:

Prove it..... Prove that the chemicals you let them inject you with will be FDA approved once the Emergency Authorization is removed.

The emergency authorization has been removed for the Pfizer vaccine.  So it is in fact FDA approved, even if it is not approved in your imagination.

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Slim King said:

The FISH is on the line!!!!! Now you've bitten and it's time to reel you in ... Are you claiming that you were injected with Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine...??????? (Emergency Use)

I have a feeling I'll be disappointed with this "gotcha"...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Slim King said:

L@@K up what the inventor of the PCR test (Kary Mullis) had to say about it being used to diagnose disease. He said that it never should be used to diagnose disease. Eventually the CDC had to agree....document.cfm?id=364945

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2022/01/14/fact-check-kary-mullis-quote-pcr-tests-outdated-lacks-context/9198197002/

 

Bullshit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, wmw999 said:

I’m literate; no need to read things to me. And I accept that some things are not without risk. Have you read all the warnings for the medication you take for diabetes (you mentioned being a diabetic)? They can kill you  

Wendy P. 

For sure! Hypoglycemia is a real risk if you inject insulin! And as for the insulin its self, you don't know what's in it! Better to take vitamin supplements.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Slim King said:

"No vaccine was tested to prevent "transmission." The goal was to prevent symptomatic disease in vaccine recipients."

 This is presenting facts not in evidence. That's what is called "Begging the Question"

Wow. You are really out in left field. I didn't assume the conclusion; I provided it. You have been provided facts and your response is Twitter and YouTube opinions from those that align with your position.

They are wrong. You are wrong. Try reading the depth of research rather than regurgitating the gospel of others who are wrong. 

It's like JohnRich and 100th Monkey had an illegitimate son.  

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found this on Facebook, so it seems Slim is just parroting something he's seen in the conspiracy theory circles:

1906727202_Screenshot2022-10-13at23_51_38.thumb.png.a32f365c9ded32f436266ba2f5d4d9b7.png

They're just really grasping for straws, the RCT protocol and the 3 stages of clinical trials are pretty well defined, but they go crazy about an undefined test for "transmission" that would probably be very difficult to do ethically. (like challenge trials, which used to be done for really old vaccines, are considered quite unethical now)

Plus a complete lack of understanding of the basics of probability...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, GeorgiaDon said:

Is she in the hospital?  Is she dead?  If not the vaccine is working as it was designed.

Oh hush.

Don't you know if the vax doesn't completely stop ALL cases, then it's utterly useless?

Completely pointless?

A total con by "Big Pharma" to make money and get us to 'comply'?

We really need a 'sarcasm' font. ;P

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Slim King said:

I'll pray for your continued good health!!!!! I remember the first time I saw Walensky on TV .. She was crying. They had her looking like a little crying girl instead of what she really was. Why do you think she lied to everyone?

Did you bother to look up her complete quote, before it was modified to make it look like she was lying? Are you aware that you’re spreading lies from far right fringe sites and just don’t care, or are you being duped by their bs?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, lippy said:

Did you bother to look up her complete quote, before it was modified to make it look like she was lying? Are you aware that you’re spreading lies from far right fringe sites and just don’t care, or are you being duped by their bs?

Can we add to the high crimes of trolling and ad hominem attacks simply not being up to the minimum speed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Slim King said:

Yeah Slim, we get it.  She's got COVID.  Her being up to date on vaccines likely made for a less severe case than it otherwise could have been.  

In March of 2021 she said that the data suggests that vaccines prevent infection and spread.  

Are you unable to understand how that's different from the shocking, lying proclamation!!! that only a few websites are talking about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Slim King said:

Yes ...Fact number one .. She has Covid .... She said the experimental injection would prevent that .. Se lied.

I know you've got the brain power to understand the point that you're willfully ignoring here.  I'm just wondering if you're doing this because YOU need to believe it so badly that you ignore reality, or is it just trolling for the sake of trolling?  Not that I'm expecting an honest answer from you, just the thoughts that pass through my head when I'm L@@King out the window on a Sunday afternoon.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, lippy said:

Yeah Slim, we get it.  She's got COVID.  Her being up to date on vaccines likely made for a less severe case than it otherwise could have been.  

In March of 2021 she said that the data suggests that vaccines prevent infection and spread.  

Are you unable to understand how that's different from the shocking, lying proclamation!!! that only a few websites are talking about?

Hi lippy,

Somehow, I bet you know the answer to that question.

Jerry Baumchen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Slim King said:

Yes ...Fact number one .. She has Covid .... She said the experimental injection would prevent that .. Se lied.

I wear seat belts and don't think they guarantee that I'll survive a collision. I have a reserve parachute and don't think it will guarantee that I'll survive my skydive. It's part of risk management.

Again, what she says is on her, not on the vaccine. According to the numbers, it leads to better results than a lack of vaccine. Just as cars kill some people, but we haven't gotten rid of them. Just as some people get electrocuted, but we still use electricity. I'll bet you use cars, and I'll bet you use electricity. I'll bet that you use natural gas sometimes, even though people can die from that, too.

Saying that something has to be perfect to be an improvement over the status quo (especially if you're the one defining "perfect," with changing parameters) is anti-progress, and intellectually dishonest.

Wendy P.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

2 2