2nd vaccination ..

[rockriver]

a close associate is ex military and still in good shape... got the virus... symptoms like a bad case of the flu.. stayed home. says he's 95% back to normal now.

but hearing of this occurring pushed us over the hill to get the vaccine. this week we get our 2nd shot.
long delays in our area. able to get our first shot in another county, and that's where we will go back in order to get 2nd.

[wwdnet]

Plenty of vaccines available in our county, but we've decided to forego getting vaccinated. Being retired, our public exposure is minimal and my health is excellent. My PCP made no recommendation, so I'll stick with my annual flu shot.

[Benn Gleck]

You know I was talking with the better half about whether or not to take the jab and was almost ready to capitulate when they offer it to my age group, but then I read the article below and decided to take my chances.

https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=241577

After reading that article by Karl Denninger I remembered reading another article early on in the plandemic about a speech made by a chinese general years ago where he was saying how the chinese rightfully should have America because it was their birthright being the master race and all.

He was envious of how much space we had and all of our natural resources even down to our forests because they have fouled their own country so badly.

He went on to say that they didn't want to nuke us because then they couldn't just colonize America. He talked about how they were pursuing research like the Israelis were in biologic weapons that would target specific races of people so that they could use it on us, wipe us out and move into our country.

I have decided I will not take the vaccine. Now I'm not criticizing anyone who chooses to take it, we all have free will and I'm not trying to change anyone's mind, I'm just stating my reason.

[rockriver]

a risk .. either way..
wife only had a sore shoulder on 1st shot..
on 2nd, she was a little puny for 2-3 days...

in the last week, we have heard of several folks that had little or no reaction to the first shot, but
had to go bed or couch for 2-4 days following 2nd shot...

long term consequences? still to be seen.

[prc-104]

It's only the long term unknown problems of taking a thing that's not a vaccine but a genetic DNA modifier that doesn't make one immune to the virus but is touted as "reducing the symptom's" of the virus.

It's effects are NOT reversible. Once your DNA is modified, it stays that way forever.

Also, Fauci and company received payment for Modirna and nada's development of a "vaccine" for this virus in January, 2019. Simply must wonder about that.

[wwdnet]

It's only the long term unknown problems of taking a thing that's not a vaccine but a genetic DNA modifier that doesn't make one immune to the virus but is touted as "reducing the symptom's" of the virus.

It's effects are NOT reversible. Once your DNA is modified, it stays that way forever.

Also, Fauci and company received payment for Modirna and nada's development of a "vaccine" for this virus in January, 2019. Simply must wonder about that.

No vaccination for me, except for my annual flu shot. I like my DNA the way it is!

[Patriotic Sheepdog]

https://www.ivmmeta.com

100% of the 49 studies to date report positive effects (24 statistically significant in isolation). Random effects meta-analysis for early treatment and pooled effects shows an 81% reduction, RR 0.19 [0.09-0.38], and prophylactic use shows 88% improvement, RR 0.12 [0.07-0.22]. Mortality results show 76% lower mortality, RR 0.24 [0.14-0.42] for all treatment delays, and 84% lower, RR 0.16 [0.04-0.63] for early treatment.

•100% of the 25 Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) report positive effects, with an estimated 69% improvement, RR 0.31 [0.20-0.48].

•The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 49 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 563 trillion (p = 0.0000000000000018).

https://hcqmeta.com/

HCQ is effective for COVID-19. The probability that an ineffective treatment generated results as positive as the 232 studies to date is estimated to be 1 in 5 quadrillion (p = 0.0000000000000002).

•Early treatment is most successful, with 100% of 29 studies reporting a positive effect (13 statistically significant in isolation) and an estimated reduction of 65% in the effect measured (death, hospitalization, etc.) using a random effects meta-analysis, RR 0.35 [0.25-0.50].

•92% of Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) for early, PrEP, or PEP treatment report positive effects, the probability of this happening for an ineffective treatment is 0.0032.

•There is evidence of bias towards publishing negative results. 88% of prospective studies report positive effects, and only 73% of retrospective studies do.

•Studies from North America are 3.9 times more likely to report negative results than studies from the rest of the world combined, p = 0.0000000011. (hmmmmm, wonder why this is?)

[Patriotic Sheepdog]

and this is the remdesivir results. And, if you remember, Fraudchi was touting this as the best we have....got to get them on this drug...

https://c19rmd.com/

[Bill Foster]

While looking at info on ivermectin, I found a book by doctors about home based treatment of COVID.

https://faculty.utrgv.edu/eleftherios.gkioulekas/zelenko/aaps-Guide-to-Home-Based-Covid-Treatment.pdf

[Patriotic Sheepdog]

Bill, that is a good resource. If anyone had not seen the interview of Dr. McCollough by Tucker Carlson, you should watch it.

https://www.brighteon.com/cd71bc85-9f09-4969-b26d-2221d96bf029

The guide Bill posted above is based off this Doctors work (even references him in the guide)

I am not sure when this was posted, but the part at the end about vaccines is spot on. Remember, an E.U.A. does not mean it has been fully vetted and has not been approved by the FDA.

"Several vaccine models are being investigated for SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) including DNA and RNA
vaccines. These vaccines take genetic information from other sources that is introduced into the cells. This
information includes instructions to produce a SARS2-like viral antigen itself, and the immune system then
reacts to it to develop immunity to the virus.

The most important consideration before approving a vaccine for human use is to make sure that the
vaccine is safe and effective. Developing safe and controlled infection models for humans normally takes many
years of phased testing in the lab and then in humans. Many physicians and scientists have been concerned
that vaccine manufacturers, with government support, are speeding up this process in ways that are not
allowing adequate time for the usual phased testing leading up to human clinical trials. Two vaccine
manufacturers already have voluntarily paused their clinical trials in people due to serious adverse events.
Currently, there are no RNA-based vaccines approved for human use so it would seem prudent to take
the time needed to ensure safety. Vaccines for RNA viruses are notoriously challenging and difficult to
develop. We still, after all these years since AIDS emerged in the 1980s, do not have a vaccine for the AIDS
virus, or the SARS-1 coronavirus that emerged in 2002-2003, and both are RNA viruses.

Several attempts have been made to create vaccines for coronavirus and other respiratory viruses but
none of the vaccines have survived the testing phases. The vaccine trials for SARS-1 from 2003, for example,
was shut down because it produced autoimmune hypersensitivity reactions when exposed to the natural virus
after immunization in animal studies.

Another problem is that the SARS-2 virus has already shown many mutations. Viruses adapt to the
environment to survive. Like the flu virus, it is difficult to predict what mutations will occur and circulate
around the world each season. A new vaccine must be reformulated to adjust to the changing genetic makeup
of the SARS-2 virus.

Even the best vaccines for flu are only about 30-60% effective. Compare that with an effectiveness for
improvement ranging from 64% to more than 90% in more than 100 new studies showing early, outpatient
treatment with our existing medications described in chapters.

As research on the vaccine continues, safety and effectiveness are of primary concern. The good news
is there are very safe and effective early treatments already available as we described in Chapter 3. Clearly,
early, home-based treatment has now been so successful and offers so much hope, there is less urgency to
have a vaccine."

[Benn Gleck]

Sheepdog, I have found a doctor near me that will give Ivermectin prophylactically. What are your thoughts on this as a preventative?

[Patriotic Sheepdog]

Not knowing your health status all I can tell you is I have been taking it since October....

[Benn Gleck]

Thank you.

[rockriver]

vaccinated and still get sick.

we have had 3 associates recently get the covid following being vaccinated...

case 1... got sick... bad flu type symptoms ... recovering.

case 2... wife's ex co worker mid 60's farm wife... healthy... went to hospital died thursday.

case 3... husband of case 2... mid 60's farmer healthy.... went to hospital died monday...

we had stopped wearing masks... now, wearing masks again when in public. but not restricting activiities.
going camping with some folks soon.. haven't decided yet what precautions we will take...

[wwdnet]

Be careful out there. I am back to masking due to the climbing numbers.