The variant should provoke symptoms faster than the Delta-4, and respiratory stress happen fast at the onset.
No word on how the models were designed. No word on how they know there will even be a "deadly" variant, and how it will even act if it doesn't even exist right now.
I'm flabbergasted.
The only silver-lining I can see from this prediction, is that if it's deadlier and faster to show symptoms, then it will be easier to contain and accelerate the end of the scamdemic, as the big problem of the 'rona is the relative silence allowing "asymptomatic spread".
"Wow, Doc, so you're telling me there's going to be a new strain of flu this winter? Why don't you tell me what else is new?"
I wonder how much that fuckass paid for that worthless degree.
We've known this doc for decades. He's also an EMT and a ME. He doesn't lack practice and he's getting old. He is known throughout all the medical establishments on the island of Corsica (an island of 330k people).
He's the only one who looked far into my mother's fibromyalgia, at a time when it was a "trashbin disease" that's been used as a diagnosis for a bunch of other diseases, decredibilizing it entirely when it comes to officially recognizing the disease as a handicap for the purpose of government programs related to housekeeping help. He doesn't take free time, his only preoccupation is the well-being of his patients. I've seen it. He fought with her as she was slowly crumbling from the constant muscle pain.
He also told us he's pro-vaccination but that forced vaccination is against his ethics. I've asked him, knowing I'm in my 30s and kinda overweight, if it's a good idea for me to take it, he could only tell me he's pro-vaccination again, not that it was a good or a bad idea. I left from there without a clear answer.
I've looked into both sides of the argument on the jab. I'm not clear on the testing (one side says they've been through the standard safety tests and the current trials are normal, the other says it's still experimental, the only clear indication on any clinical trial estimated time of completion is from Pfizer's website, and in 2023), I'm not clear on the side-effects and the death rates, I'm not clear if those numbers are even accurate, I'm not clear on alternative treatments, I'm in a goddamn fog. I hate this.
As I mentioned in a thread I started.
What you have to ask yourself.
Are you prepared to taking the vaccine in a REPEATED fashion?? To stay "Up-To-Date" on the latest anti-virus solutions?
This is where this is going.
So you have to ask yourself. Are you injecting something that you will HAVE to have other treatments going forward.
That's my reason for not taking it so far.
I am not anti-vaccine at all. I am for surely for vaccine CHOICE!
But..
If they make it a repeated thing for life. That's kind of like Mark of the Beast for me.
95% of age 70+ recover. 99.5% of 50+ recover. 99.95% of youth recover. It is treatable with HCQ and Ivermectin to damn near 100% and America's Frontline Doctors will telemed a prescription if needed.
If you're unsure, you can always change your mind later if you deem the info credible enough to justify the jab. But you can never change your mind after you take it. That's my rationale. I want it to play out in others for many years to see the long term effects before I put something in my body that is statistically unnecessary, medically treatable and completely experimental.
Everything we are hearing is changing day to day. Facts are nearly impossible to find. You can't undo this decision.
That's the other thing, I've looked into HCQ. Raoult seemed on the right track, considering he's looked into the drug after the first epidemy of SARS/MERS, of which some studies pointed at CQ as a potential drug against them. I remember finding this study too.
The only double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial with a large patient pool (the gold standard of clinical trials) of HCQ I found showed no real difference between that and the placebo for patients treated with early COVID19. Granted, there's no AZ or Zinc. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-4207
Ivermectin, I found the site ivmmeta.com which lists no less than 60 studies, a lot of which are gold-standard as mentioned above, but that may play on my confirmation bias of "anything but those rushed so-called vaccine". How many such gold-standard studies are there still out there showing no real effect? I don't know. I'm not a doctor, and even now my faith in doctors has severely decreased.
I remember the Mediator scandal, a drug that was prescribed for type-2 diabetes which had actually no real effect. Officially, 500 people died from it, other counts are into the 1500 to 2000, and that led to its removal after showing its complete lack of effect and even its toxicity. Was it tested and approved by the authorities? Yes. And that scares the hell out of me.
Discrediting*** Also, don't take the experimental injection please.