Arielle Popstar

Significant difference in hits between the Safe Search settings. On Strict mode there were few PoC whereas on Off there was a greater percentage of PoC.

Sorry, I was meaning that the politics of the State, infects Science in the same way it infected the Church historically. When the State uses the tool of science to push its agenda, the opposing political party is then needing to counter or agree with whatever is considered the mainstream science to gain any headway with the populace to regain power. That is why in response to your statement: I pointed out that in my opinion the fear mongering with misinformation it is to be expected from the opposing party. Not that the other side would consider it to be that.

Not really bizarre. Just as the Church and State wasn't a good marriage, Science and the State isn't either. Both become infected with politics.

And the problem with you is that you like to view all businesses as being on the same level where in reality many small businesses barely survive and most actually will go out of business within 5 years and less if you had your way. Government favours the big businesses whereas the small ones get shafted throwing small entrepreneurs to the dogs where they are in a worse position then those poor you claim to be standing up for. The pandemic lockdowns really bore that out.

And of course technically you are correct that the vaccine does not contain the virus, however it does have the code to make the host replicate the spike protein, which has its own pathogens aside from the virus itself. I do remember linking you to that study proving that.

Mm maybe. I remember you mentioning you didn't go to hospital when you did get it. I am going to assume you continued to smoke when you did which might have something to do with why you are still here to talk about it now rather than suffering the worsening effects at being a sudden ex-smoker had you been in the hospital.

Eh? I was meaning political correctness in mentioning that tobacco may have a beneficial effect. That would be like therapeutic and I have been roundly lambasted for months when I had the audacity to bring up Vitamin D, Ivermectin or that one Trump promoted as it has obviously been politically incorrect to bring up anything that may take away from vaccines being the only alternative to preventing Covid.

I'd like to agree with you and on most of what you have mentioned I do but in the case of the ingredients I think it is becoming increasingly important if not critical to know what ingredients are in a product.

That is a pretty old article. It just isn't politically correct to mention smoking may have a benefit but certainly it should be pointed out that ex smokers and non smokers are at a higher risk. "A so-called “living review” of the evidence, originally published as a pre-print this March but subsequently updated, similarly found that “Compared with never smokers, current smokers appear to be at reduced risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection while former smokers appear to be at increased risk of hospitalization, greater disease severity and mortality from COVID-19.” https://www.acsh.org/news/2021/06/08/does-smoking-prevent-covid-19-we-dont-know-some-journalists-dont-want-find-out-15588 And from a study done by the Mayo clinic: "Patients who used only e-cigarettes were no more likely to have a COVID-19 diagnosis than those who don't smoke or vape. Those who smoked only cigarettes, on the other hand, were 57 percent less likely to be diagnosed with COVID-19. The results may come as a surprise to many as it was widely thought at the beginning of the pandemic that both smoking and vaping would cause more COVID-19 infections with worse symptoms." https://reason.com/2021/06/11/study-finds-vapers-not-more-likely-to-get-covid-19/

Would the vaccines have a bearing on which strains become dominant?

First off, my summation was based off of the figures from the exact same site that you yourself list as authoritative, as it was the one Dr. John Campbell used in his Youtube analysis. Looking at that graph from page he lists as his reference, one can see the unvaccinated cases leveling off and starting to drop while the vaccinated cases are doing a fairly steep rise. Your rebuttal is rebutting something I did not address in the first place. Please look at the craftiness in your own backyard before looking for it in others. Yes, God will judge me, so you don't have to In the meantime perhaps you could look at where your "facts" differ from the Dr. Campbells Youtube to see if there is anything you may need to adjust on your own understanding. Wonder if the studies authors would be surprised at how quickly the Covid virus is mutating. "Thus, we contend that vaccine resistance is less of a concern than drug resistance because it is less likely to evolve and when it does, it is less harmful to human and animal health and well-being." Think that statement has been proved wrong considering the speed of the delta variant and the significant reduction in efficacy in both antibody treatments and vaccines. Nothing on that page addresses my original point. Btw, should I be calling you Dr Innula considering that you make yourself out to be more of an authority on interpretation of the data than the Youtube Doctor I linked? He is most definitely not an anti vaxxer and since this pandemic has started has consistently preached the importance of getting vaccinated. He is also straightforward with his analysis of the data and a good deal more honest than a many of the ones I see elsewhere including here. He is thorough and exact on his analysis which makes his videos a bit tedious at times but that is all good when one wants exact information, right? Interesting point though on the page you did link: The risk of identifying a new infection following vaccination was highest during the first 21 days after the first vaccination That verifies what many have said about getting Covid after being vaccinated.

Well they are the typical clickbait factchecking sort of articles you favour. I wonder if you even read them considering their rebuttals to some stated fact it is checking, agrees for the most part but takes issue with some small detail not germane to the initial fact. Taking the USA Today one they state: "The claim that the "death toll” of COVID-19 vaccines is more than 20 times higher than that of past vaccines is FALSE, based on our research. Deaths reported to VAERS for the COVID-19 vaccines do outnumber reports for past vaccines, but those reports have not been verified as being causally related." I didn't state it was 20 times higher as it is quite evident from the number it is only 11 times higher then all previous vaccine deaths prior to covid. Whether or not it is causal, it is still statistically significant in comparison. My question would be why you vaccine drug pushers are so adamant about trying to hide the negative effects of them. Shouldn't human guinnea pigs be informed of the potential side effects?

Oh that is interesting: "Daily active smokers are infrequent among outpatients or hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Several arguments suggest that nicotine is responsible for this protective effect via the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR)." https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04583410

Oh look, snowflakes are cheating and reading my posts! Get me back on your block list!

There are some good arguments out there for the idea that the new strains are as a direct result of the vaccines themselves. After all, there would be no need for the virus to mutate if there had been no vaccine and that is proven by the fact that the vaccines are not as effective on the delta strain. Same as antibiotic resistance.

Well then what is this all about with the Vaccine adverse events, especially considering that the voluntary reporting system only reflects 1 in a 100 actual events and for these vaccines is only the short term events nevermind what will be discovered long term as to the potential harms. You have no scientific studies to support your opinions on their safety. https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data

Maybe they could tax teleports and promote the idea that it is a privilege, not a right. More people would start to take public transportation like pods and see the countryside and maybe even meet some new people.

From what I have read, an MD still has the ability to override the FDA's recommendations and the NIH for example has no guidelines for or against Ivermectin's use. Enough studies out there showing some degree of efficacy fort the Covid treatments so it certainly would not have harmed in any case even if it was nothing more then a placebo effect. Her bedside manner in effect signed the patients death warrant by removing all hope. Thx for the correction.

It isn't anywhere near 9 times. Probably barely 50% vaccinated if you include the 12-18 age group.

Wonderful bedside manner she has. Too bad she didn't offer to treat the patient with Ivermectin or hydrocloronique as the the patient might well still be alive today. Instead she uses the death to promote her little agenda. Keep her well away from me.

Regardless it counters the argument that the unvaccinated are any more of a danger to others than the vaccinated. The vaccine becomes a personal decision that is relevant for oneself rather than the community as a whole. Some of the unvaccinated have to weigh the risk of getting an adverse effect from vaccines vs getting Covid itself.

It would appear that in the UK at least, the numbers of vaccinated contracting COVID is about to overtake the numbers of unvaccinated contracting it. Regardless of whether or not there is a difference in the severity of the symptoms, both still appear to be able to transmit the disease to others so to me it sounds like people should be careful of both the vaccinated and unvaccinated who might be displaying symptoms.

I do wonder how often those who so much complain about places like Amazon, Walmart etc also use them for much of their shopping needs. Myself I have never bought anything from Amazon mostly because I do try to buy Canadian whenever possible and not so much out of principle against either of those 2 employers. My brother does work for Amazon and to be honest, the rate of pay is pretty much equivalent for that type of work in the area. Bezos has made a lot of money regardless of how much he pays workers but there is plenty of other companies who pay similar and yet the owners of those companies are not flush with cash so I would say Jeff has maximized his profit in other ways.

Then again that is what you get with copyrights, trademarks etc. It was a system put in place to promote people putting the time and effort into developing things for the betterment of society as a whole. In any other context I am sure that most are all in support of those things that give those people a monopoly through copyrights.