Oops. Their Covid narrative got peer reviewed in The Lancet (now officially printed on toilet paper to save time). "Why is this SO important? The 1905 SCOTUS case Jacobson v Mass. held that mandates can only be considered to “prevent the spread of contagious disease.” And now, OOPS, they DON'T
(media.greatawakening.win)
⚠️ Vax-tarded ☠️
Lancet study proves the shot does not prevent transmission.
“fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated”
“fully vaccinated people who got COVID infected others in their household at the same rate (about 25%) as unvaccinated people did (23%).
The vaccinated had just as much viral load in their upper respiratory tract, making them just as contagious.”
Why is this SO important?
The 1905 SCOTUS case Jacobson v Massachusetts held that mandates can only be considered to “prevent the spread of contagious disease.”
As all studies show the shots don’t stop transmission, Covid mandates are obviously illegal.
That's fantastic work!
The other reason that they are illegal is because there are non-experimental effective treatments available ie. ivermectin and HCQ. It's why these treatments have been suppressed so hard.
How do we hold them to account?
What about the FDA approved Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine is not even being available in this country. There is a legal difference in the two Pfizer shots.
What the hell is “Comirnaty” supposed to mean? Is it a comm?
Do you have a link to the full study?
https://www.thelancet.com/lancet/article/s1473309921006484
Thanks
👆I knew one of our heroes would be able to add it. Thanks patriot 👆
Bookmark thanks
yes please
https://www.thelancet.com/lancet/article/s1473309921006484
This.
Yep. And this has been known since day one as Pfizer said it never prevented infection or transmission, so 💯 illegal to mandate.
Also, Jacobson v Massachusetts only referred to mandates at a state level. It makes no mention of federal mandates.
Declared conflicts of interest include funding from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Hence this conclusion:
How can they seriously write that. Complete non sequitur.
Keeps the grants coming, though.
The vaccines don't work at all, which is why they are going to get Emergency Use Authorization for MerkoMectin and PfizerMectin and those are going to be for fully vaccinated people only, I'm guessing. That will be an attempt to bring the numbers back into line.
I’ll just eat my horse paste.
apple flavor just in time for fall. i bet it pairs well with some cider and ginger snaps.
If only it came in pumpkin spice, ha ha.
Jacobson v Massachusetts (1905) is often cited as proof that the state can mandate a vaccine. There are a couple of differences between now and then: Jacobson was over a $5 fine, not the loss of one's livelihood; the smallpox vaccine was over 100 years old at that point; the smallpox vaccine is just that, a vaccine.
The case led directly to the pro-eugenics decision in Buck v. Bell (1927), after which a young Carrie Buck was forcibly sterilized.
It's also has been implicitly overturned many times, perhaps most famously (or infamously) by Woe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), which were all about bodily autonomy and privacy. So where are all the pro-choice advocates when it comes to forced injections? Calling them pro-death makes their stance more clear, I think.
Woe v Wade? Typo or is this an "I see what you did here"?
No typo. The essence of Woe v. Wade is "My body; my choice," which directly contradicts the ruling of Jacobson v Massachusetts, and has been the by-words of the left for 50 years, but not any longer for some reason.
Whatever our feelings on Woe, it does overturn Jacobson. Not for the right reasons, since there is another body involved, but it does say that one's body is theirs alone.
idk dude ive seen enough to where i know i don't have to look at an infograph to know that the vaccine is some bs this is just redundant to some of us at this point
It’s helpful to wake up others though! Every little bit helps 🙂
ya thats true!
Peer reviewed!? I'll wait until it's Twitter fact checked, tyvm.
As a moderator u/catsfive should attach the link to the study. We should not have re-research information that is put up. Maddening. And poor posting. Not poor information but piss poor link/source.
Group effort. I'm in a bus with spotty internet, mate. As a patriot (have you seen your post score?) you should post the link and move the post past the finish line.
Name checks out
Again how can there be a variant if SARS-COV-2 has never been purified/isolated?
The "virus" literally dont exist.
Well until you can explain away the loss of smell and taste novelty of the SARS-COV-2 virus, then no normie is going to listen to you when you say the virus hasn't been isolated (even though you're right it has not)
And you can properly find a million different reasons for that, that is alot more plausible then a new "virus"
There is only two truths. SARS-COV-2 exist or SARS-COV-2 dont exist.
How do we find out which statement is true? We need evidence? Do we got any empiric evidence that SARS-COV-2 exist?
No because its never been purified/isolated.
Ergo SARS-COV-2 dont exist. Its really simple actually,
But that's the problem. Normies and libtards don't think too deeply so they won't heed to that type of logic based thinking.
I don't have any explanation for the loss of smell and taste element myself. Although I've heard some fringe stuff about 5g
🤣🤣🤣
That being said, they had printed a study by Dr. Pin Van Lommel on Near Death Experiences that was pretty cool. I read Van Lommels book as a teen when I was looking for proof of God as an angst teenager and that study and book gave me hope.
The universal elements of near death experiences are the same across civiliations around the world throughout different periods of time.
The tunnel, light beings, out of body experiences, motion without the sensation of moving, etc. I believe there were 12 in total.
Just something that came to mind.
Yes!
I believe it's here
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673601071008/fulltext
One of the findings is that people who had NDE and survived had shorter life spans but were comfortable with death.
That makes sense as I believe our mind and body hangs on for dear life because of fear of death. Once you're at peace, there is no reason to struggle to squeeze more out of staying alive.
That's so cool! Sounds like she's great to be around! I hope your husband takes after her and you two share a full long life :D ❤
Anyone know which lawyers to contact to sue city health directors and things like that?
I've been calling lawyers in Los Angeles all week and most won't even consider taking on much simper cases such as getting fired for vacc status.
Any help would be greatly appreciated as I am actively trying to sue our way out of this.
No idea what that means.
However, the interpretation is interesting and supports the use of the injections. Not sure if the study showed this or whether it’s just an opinion without support from the study.
Vaccination reduces the risk of delta variant infection and accelerates viral clearance. Nonetheless, fully vaccinated individuals with breakthrough infections have peak viral load similar to unvaccinated cases and can efficiently transmit infection in household settings, including to fully vaccinated contacts. Host–virus interactions early in infection may shape the entire viral trajectory.>
They add it to every study- otherwise it would not be published.
https://www.thelancet.com/lancet/article/s1473309921006484