by Quelle
2
Bidensbrain2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

This is what doesn't make sense to me, if they replaced him, why not have him "get better".

2
Bidensbrain2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

So that's why it's called parental controls!

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, I'm looking into getting that test done too, as a positive result would make my family feel better about by, um, non-conforming views on covid treatment (whinny).

The paper I referenced is this one

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x.pdf

I don't know whether the T-detect test works the same way, they bill it as being a test of having had covid but I think people can have t-cell recognition without ever having been exposed.

The 80% result is backed up observationally by the "Diamond Princess" which had an infection rate of 19%, and 20% is also more or less the estimated household transmission rate. (For household transmission, it's an average - many households will have 100% transmission - but the average would be reflective of the population overall)

2
Bidensbrain2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

There is a paper from 2020 that showed that about 80% of people have t cell recognition which stops the virus in the mucosal system. This results in little to no symptoms if an infection develops at all. So it is contagious, but probably you are just not susceptible.

8
Bidensbrain2020 8 points ago +8 / -0

I massively reduced alcohol consumption, lost weight, stopped wasting time on Netflix. These changes are largely because I want to see things clearly and stop being escapist. Weight loss is probably due to cooking at home and not drinking beer. Try to get more outdoor time and more time with the kids, doing less work. I will say I spend a lot more of my time researching things :)

2
Bidensbrain2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

I got two different brands at Tractor Supply, "Horse Health" and "Durvet". The ones I found were clearly labeled "Ivermectin 1.87%", and do not contain any other active ingredients. The inactive ingredients are mostly corn oil. This is a standard form of the product, and it is what you want. Dosage is exactly as labeled on the product, just use your weight to dispense the correct amount.

Some products from the same brands are different active ingredients, or a mixture of ivermectin and other things. You don't want those.

Remember, we are not trying to deworm ourselves (which can probably be accomplished with various drugs), we are trying to use ivermectin specifically, and this just happens to be a way to acquire it.

Note that I picked mine up in store a couple months ago, I have no idea if they still have stock... :(.

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

I agree. I realize the meme is funny, but just to be clear:

Horse paste that has ivermectin as the only active ingredient is safe to use. Measure the dosage by weight, the dose regimen is the same for horses and humans.

DO NOT DRINK SHEEP DRENCH. IT IS FOR EXTERNAL USE ONLY. EVEN USING IT EXTERNALLY IT CANNOT BE DOSED ACCURATELY.

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

Lots of drug stores won't fill it and then you have to pay out the ass to an online pharmacy.

4
Bidensbrain2020 4 points ago +4 / -0

It doesn't taste quite as good as real apples though. I'm going to have to say they didn't focus group it too hard.

20
Bidensbrain2020 20 points ago +20 / -0

Neigh, the main thing is avoid the pastes with multiple active ingredients.. ivermectin only.

3
Bidensbrain2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't think there is a helpful way to respond. He pulled the trigger and he may end up paying the price this winter. Once the virus fully escapes the vaccine -- probably weeks to months away at this point as antibody levels wane globally -- those antibodies can only do him harm.

I'm sure you have already made the point that this shot is brand-new, lightly tested technology and only lasts 4-6 months. (I'm assuming they knew it only lasted 6 months and just didn't mention it - or else they had no idea how it worked).

I think some of your response is not technically correct though.

It's not really DNA altering. Reverse transcription is possible and has been observed to happen rarely but it's not known to be a big problem, and this can happen anyway with the RNA virus itself. The base mechanism does not modify DNA.

I'm not sure about the animal studies thing. I believe the 100% animal death was from vaccine research on SARS-1, using more traditional strategies. I've heard they skipped animal trials but I don't know for sure. Actually, the good news on these jabs is that the antibodies go away rapidly (which is one reason you need boosters). This suggests that long term B cell memory is not achieved, so if you just wait 6-8 months you should be in a lot less danger of ADE, OAS, or other problems.

He's right that we don't really know what's in most things we ingest, but we do know something about the outcomes, and VAERS data suggests there are problems. VAERS data for all those other vaccines... not so much. Claiming equivalency there is loopy.

IMO there are 2 major risks.

One is the problems caused by the spike proteins - clotting, strokes, heart attacks, brain fog, etc. This may be a short term risk, and that's what's causing all the VAERS reports. There may also be long term risks with microclotting and with the LNP (lipid nano particles) which maybe cause cancer or other problems.

The other is the danger to the immune system caused by the antibodies created. This probably goes away (since the antibodies seem to), but here the risk is of a mutation that induces ADE from vaccine antibodies. If that were to happen it would impact those most recently vaccinated or boosted, and could be devastating.

This article seems to suggest that this isn't that far from happening. It is an in-vitro study measuring antibody reactions to a delta virus with 4 added mutations, all of which are observed separately in the wild. They demonstrate total escape and enhancement from "Delta4+"

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.22.457114v1.full.pdf

Maybe this doesn't happen in real life, but I would not bet my life on it.

Anyway, sorry your friend is a fool but not sure what can be done.

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

90 days to produce a new version + another 90 days to rollout, in a race against a variant that picks up an ADE capability against the previous version of the jabs and spreads virally... would be a shit show of epic proportions.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.22.457114v1.full.pdf

And who's to say a certain country that did not allow any mRNA jabs might not help that evolutionary process along?

3
Bidensbrain2020 3 points ago +5 / -2

Technically the booster is needed because antibody levels drop by 60% per month. But not long from now there will be a variant that completely escapes the vaccine immunity, and then this meme will be accurate.

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

95 days plus rollout is not going to be fast enough to stop an escape mutant. One of these mutants will learn to leverage binding antibodies and then lots of people will die

3
Bidensbrain2020 3 points ago +3 / -0

This is absurd, the shots as currently defined are going to be useless in a month or two once we have full blown escape variants spreading in the wild.

Well, useless for immunity to covid but still ok as a 2 part bioweapon

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

Just noticed this wasn't posted at quodverum... Has that place now totally collapsed?

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe this is only true for what data is collected by the CDC on breakthrough cases. When I have had to get tested they never ask whether I am vaccinated, how would they know to change the threshold?

Still bullshit but a slightly different form....

1
Bidensbrain2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

The other problems with the analysis are that the vax apparently reduces symptoms thus contributing to undercounting cases, and it doesn't take into account the relative sizes of vaxed and unvaxed population in the UK.

When I did a similar analysis a few months ago I normalized the ratio of death counts by the ratio of population size for the two populations and found that for delta variant, vaccination produced about a 40% reduction in deaths. Which is something, but really is not that impressive given all the other risks of the shots.

These numbers look roughly similar to me.

5
Bidensbrain2020 5 points ago +5 / -0

I am looking forward to paying cash for decentralized doctoring. No more HMO pharma collusion bullshit

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›