Covid Hysteria 2023 / 2024

[GURPS]

Thanks, but No Thanks—New Poll Shows Americans Not Interested in New COVID Vaccines​

Less than a quarter of those surveyed have "subject myself to another jab" on their calendars:

Among U.S. adults, 52% say they will "probably" or "definitely" not get the new COVID-19 vaccine, according to the latest KFF (Kaiser Family Foundation) COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor poll.
Conversely, 23% of adults "definitely" plan to get the vaccine — while another 23% will "probably" get it.

The country has become so polarized under President Joe Biden that even medicine has been politicized, with Democrats continuing to show much more faith in the mRNA technology than do Republicans:

Among the people who said they "definitely" or "probably" will get the new shot, most are Democrats and/or at least 65 years old, the poll found.

Seventy percent of Democrats plan to get the new vaccine.
That's compared to just 24% of Republicans.

From the official White House transcript of a town hall in July 2021 (bolding mine):

...unvaccinated people — the vi- — the various shots that people are getting now cover that. They’re — you’re okay. You’re not going to — you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations.

Of course, that statement turned out to be spectacularly inaccurate.

The survey was conducted between Sept. 6 and Sept. 13 and polled 1,296 U.S. adults by internet and telephone. The San Francisco-based KFF, which describes itself as an "independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism," concluded that many with conservative leanings simply don't trust the political and medical establishment anymore after the debacle that was the nation's COVID response:

"The poll shows that most of the nation still trusts the CDC and the FDA on vaccines — but there is a partisan gap, and most Republicans don’t trust the nation’s regulatory and scientific agencies responsible for vaccine approval and guidance," KFF's president and CEO, Drew Altman, said in a press release.

 

[GURPS]

COVID Vaccine Mandates Begin in Red State​

The implementation of vaccine mandates at one of the largest institutions in the red state of Texas has raised concerns over the diminishing state of health freedom while a law that would provide Texans with vaccine choice remains stalled by lawmakers.

The Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), a medical school and research center in Houston, Texas, announced last week that it will mandate the latest COVID booster shot for its students, faculty, and employees.

“An updated Covid vaccine has been approved by the FDA and is now available," the Sept. 28 statement from the school reads. "A single dose is recommended for individuals 6 months and older. Because protection from prior vaccination fades over time and this updated vaccine better matches the currently circulating strains the updated dose is recommended. Baylor faculty, staff, and students must get the COVID vaccine, or request a medical, religious, or personal exemption by Nov. 30.”

“Because of the concern in case numbers, some entities have reinstated mask mandates. BCM does not have a mask mandate, but if you are at high risk you may consider making a personal choice to wear a mask in enclosed indoor areas,” the statement adds.

 

[GURPS]

CDC is no longer distributing Covid-19 vaccination cards, once a staple of the pandemic​

• The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is no longer issuing white vaccination cards, and recommends that individuals contact their state health department's immunization information system (IIS) to obtain a copy of their full vaccination record.
• CVS and Walgreens pharmacies will complete vaccination cards if patients bring them in, but the cards are not required for vaccination. Walmart will also add vaccine doses to existing cards upon request.
• The federal government no longer requires vaccine cards for travelers entering the US, but it is still important to check destination country requirements before traveling.

 

[GURPS]

But Politico’s bad news, delivered using as somber and ominous of a tone as that silly rag can muster, is our good news. What Politico sees as ‘horrifying’ trends, we count as accomplishments. In Politico’s words (lightly edited for clarity):

The paranoid hypochondriacs, I mean public health experts, are pulling what’s left of their hair out. First covid, now this. Politico quoted lockdown-worshipping maskaholic Dr. Lawrence Gostin, a Georgetown University public health professor who advises the White House, who tearfully but angrily warned, “Diseases that we once thought had ended will roar back and kids will get sick and die from 100 percent preventable conditions.”

You’ll be sorry if you don’t listen to us.


Permanently-disheveled bowtie advocate and pharma shill “doctor” Peter Hotez, somehow still employed as a virologist at Baylor’s College of Medicine, took a short break from counting his covid money and sighed that questioning vaccines has “now become a politically motivated movement.” In his multiple books about the so-called anti-vaccine movement, Hotez argued that vaccine skepticism has become part of conservatives’ political worldview. But for some reason, despite that Hotez says he’s tried to cure conservatives of their delusions, nobody will listen to him: “I can’t get any engagement out of anybody.”

Not satisfied with his disgraceful role in the global mRNA criminal conspiracy, bowtied wonder and disheveled whitecoat pretender Peter Hotez is now fully aboard the globalist train. Scientific American ran a revolting story yesterday, somehow keeping a straight face, headlined, “Vaccine Scientist Warns Antiscience Conspiracies Have Become a Deadly, Organized Movement.”




Peter Hotez is a well-heeled grant grabber, having made millions from doing positive pharma studies over the years, especially in the tropical-disease vaccine space. During the pandemic, probably because he looks like an “absent minded professor” straight out of Central Casting, and because his is completely amoral, he was recruited into the legions of official government-aligned liars. Despite thousands of on-air hours, he never quite got his celebrity bona fides over the hump.

Now Peter wants to avoid being held accountable for his part by locking us all up.

And, if Hotez’s theories hold water, we deserve to be locked up. According to scruffy Peter, we are all anti-semites (“There’s a history to that too— people called what Einstein and Freud did 'Jewish science’”), authoritarians (“this is coming out of the authoritarian playbook, with devastating consequences”), and globalists (“we’re seeing more of the globalization of what’s happening in the U.S.”). Not only that, but we’re well organized: “you already have two prominent antivaccine activists running for president—Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Ron DeSantis… these are state-sanctioned attacks on science and scientists.”

The horror.

The article was ostensibly about Hotez’s boring new book, The Deadly Rise of Anti-Science, and was styled as a Q&A interview. Somehow — without laughing — the article unironically described Hotez as “a target of antiscience attacks” and asked him — Hotez! — what should be done about all the antisemitic, authoritarian, globalist, anti-vaccine people who disagree with Hotez, Scientific American, and Pfizer?

Thanks to intelligence-agency managed media like Scientific American, Hotez has finally achieved a pudgy sort of transcendent apotheosis: he is now more than just a vaccine scientist. Much more. He has broken out of a kind of chrysalis, emerging as a universal expert: a sociologist, a public health expert, a detective, a psychologist, a criminal justice expert, and an international politician, all in one, a sort of expert’s super-expert. Of course Peter knows what to do.

The good doctor’s predictable prescription was more government. A lot more:

SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN: What can be done to combat antiscience attitudes and support science and scientists?

HOTEZ: “I don’t think the community of scientists by itself can solve this. We’re going to need help, both from the White House and the United Nations because this is now a politically motivated assault. So we need the White House, for instance, to treat this like any politically motivated attack on the country, whether it’s a cyberattack or global terrorism or nuclear proliferation.

The first step is bringing in people from the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Commerce, the Department of Justice and the Department of State because of the role of Russia in amplifying the discord. I think we need an interagency task force (in the U.S.) and the same at the U.N. I don’t think the World Health Organization can solve this problem. I think this needs to go to the attention of the U.N. General Assembly and maybe the Security Council and NATO, perhaps, because it is a security threat, and it undermines democracies and the security of countries.”

It’s Russiagate all over again. Using his finely-honed, 007-style international sleuthing skills, Peter has detected a sulphuric whiff of: Vladimir Putin! It’s Putin! Putin hates science.

Obviously, the solution is to send more money to Ukraine. Duh. It was also no coincidence that, like Macbeth’s chanting witches, Hotez ritualistically invoked the names of every single agency currently being investigated by the House Weaponization of the Federal Government Committee plus the United Nations and NATO. To his partial credit, Peter was being honest when he admitted science has become political. More accurately, science has been politically weaponized by whomever is pulling Peter’s strings.

Scientific American disabled the comments, or you’d better believe I would have left a spicy one.

☕️ COMMON SENSE ☙ Friday, October 6, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Neo-globalist Hotez comes for us all; Biden restarts Border Wall; FBI chases Trump supporters; reporter says Biden's brain is mush; sepsis epidemic; Trump for Jordan; Trump cases update; and more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[GURPS]

Pfizer Used Separate Manufacturing Processes for COVID Shots Used in Clinical Trials, Public Distribution​

In recently resurfaced news that should surprise no one but should shock the conscience and, in my view, result in criminal prosecutions, it has come to light that Pfizer used a separate manufacturing process for its fraudulent COVID-19 trials (the ones it used to get its emergency use authorization pushed through) as the one it ultimately used to manufacture the shots at scale for public use.

(I use the modifier “fraudulent” in front of “COVID-19 trials” with confidence because I have previously documented elsewhere other forms of fraud that Pfizer employed in its clinical trials, which should nullify the legal immunity it obtained for itself from damages.)

Via British Medical Journal (emphasis added):

Recent calls for more transparency in COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials is particularly relevant for data on the manufacturing process, which is an integral part of the regulatory approval process to ensure consistent safety and efficacy outcomes.

An October 2020 amendment to the protocol of the pivotal Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 (Comirnaty) clinical trial (C4591001) indicates that nearly all vaccine doses used in the trial came from ‘clinical batches’ manufactured using what is referred to as ‘Process 1’. However, in order to upscale production for large-scale distribution of ‘emergency supply’ after authorization, a new method was developed, ‘Process 2’. The differences include changes to the DNA template used to transcribe the RNA and the purification phase, as well as the manufacturing process of the lipid nanoparticles. Notably, ‘Process 2’ batches were shown to have substantially lower mRNA integrity.

The protocol amendment states that “each lot of ‘Process 2’-manufactured BNT162b2 would be administered to approximately 250 participants 16 to 55 years of age” with comparative immunogenicity and safety analyses conducted with 250 randomly selected ‘Process 1’ batch recipients. To the best of our knowledge, there is no publicly available report on this comparison of ‘Process 1’ versus ‘Process 2’ doses.

Two documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request[6] describe the vaccine batches and lots supplied to each of the trial sites through November 19, 2020[7] and March 17, 2021,[8] respectively. According to these documents, doses from ‘Process 2’ batch EE8493Z are listed at four trial sites prior to November 19, and four other sites are listed with ‘Process 2’ batch EJ0553Z in the updated document. Both batches were also part of the emergency supply for public distribution. The CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, known to be underreported. lists 658 reports (169 serious, 2 deaths) for lot EE8493[10] and 491 reports (138 serious, 21 deaths) for lot EJ0553.

Josh Guetzkow, Ph.D. explains the basic distinction between Processes 1 and 2: in the former, PCR cycling was used to replace the mRNA used in the shots while in the latter, the mRNA is replicated in plasmids, parts of bacteria. The apparent benefit of the latter method is that it is cheaper and easier to scale. The potential downside (for the recipients, not for Pfizer, which enjoys legal immunity from damage caused by its products and therefore considers injuries as externalities) is that the adverse effect rate will vary depending on the manufacturing process.

These findings dovetail with two other unexplained anomalies in the shots’ formulations by batch and to which segments of the population they were given:

• Danish researchers identified significant variations in the rates of adverse effects from the shots by batch.
• Pfizer gave its Australian employees shots from a separate batch from the ones distributed to the public.

 

[GURPS]

Better Late Then Never: There's Been Another Tacit Admission That COVID Mandates Were A Disastrous Mistake​

Recently a new government report from the United Kingdom was released to little fanfare, which not-so-surprisingly mirrors the fanfare resulting from the release of new data from the CDC itself, showing how vaccine efficacy has fallen to zero.

But despite the lack of attention it’s received within the mainstream media outlets, there are a number of extremely important conclusions which have been based on data and an impartial collection evidence that once again confirm that panic, fear and cowardice led to destructive, pointless COVID policies.

What The Evidence Says About NPI’s
​

The UK’s Health Security Agency (HSA) recently posted a lengthy examination on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions at preventing or slowing the spread of COVID-19 in the country.

And at the risk of revealing a spoiler alert, it’s not good news for the COVID extremists determined to bring mask mandates back.

The goal of the examination was laid out succinctly; the UK's HSA intended to use primary studies on NPI’s within the community to see how successful or unsuccessful they were at reducing COVID infections.

The purpose of this rapid mapping review was to identify and categorise primary studies that reported on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented in community settings to reduce the transmission of coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK.
Streamlined systematic methods were used, including literature searches (using sources such as Medline, Embase and medRxiv) and use of systematic reviews as sources to identify relevant primary studies.

Unsurprisingly, they found that the evidence base on COVID interventions was exceptionally weak.

In fact, roughly 67% of the identified evidence was essentially useless.. In fact 2/3 of the evidence identified was modeling.

Two-thirds of the evidence identified was based on modeling studies (100 out of 151 studies).
There was a lack of experimental studies (2 out of 151 studies) and individual-level observational studies (22 out of 151 studies). Apart from test and release strategies for which 2 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified, the body of evidence available on effectiveness of NPIs in the UK provides weak evidence in terms of study design, as it is mainly based on modelling studies, ecological studies, mixed-methods studies and qualitative studies.
This is a key learning point for future pandemic preparedness: there is a need to strengthen evaluation of interventions and build this into the design and implementation of public health interventions and government policies from the start of any future pandemic or other public health emergency.

Modeling, as we know, is functionally useless, given that it’s hopelessly prone to bias, incorrect assumptions and the ideological needs of its creators.

The two paragraphs which followed are equally as important.

Low quality evidence is not something that should be relied upon for decision making purposes, yet that’s exactly what the UK, US and many other countries did. Fauci, the CDC, and others embraced modeling as fact at the beginning of the pandemic. They then repeatedly referenced shoddy, poor quality work because it confirmed their biases throughout its duration, with unsurprising results.
https://ianmsc.substack.com/p/vaccine-efficacy-has-reached-zero

 

[GURPS]

Yesterday NBC ran what has to be the most ironic headline in medical reporting history. Here it is, in all its glory:



Now remember, it’s only been three years. And it’s not just the amount of time. It has been three years of being super careful: locking down, masking up, distancing, maniacal handwashing, and of course, jabbing. But despite all those precautions and experimental medications, some people — we’ll get to who in a moment — some people have still gotten covid at least five times.

At least.

Just imagine what you’d say about my immune system if I told you I’d had the flu at least five times over the last three years. And don’t even get me started about how “getting covid over and over takes a mental toll.” Chickens and eggs! Which came first, the covid or the mental problems?

So, exactly who is getting covid so frequently? Carefully observe the following paragraph from NBC’s article and see if you can spot any common denominators. Take your time:

“I’ve seen a few patients with five infections,” said Dr. Grace McComsey, vice dean for clinical and translational research at Case Western University. “Sadly, they were immunized and they still got Covid five times.”​

Sadly! So, did you find it? What do all these repeat covid customers have in common? Hmmm? What baffling, mysterious agent could be at work in all these cases?

The tragicomedy continued as the article began to describe individual cases, packed with nuggets of amusement. One was Brenda Keele, 38, who in addition to covid infections is also having some other health problems:

Keele has chronic heart failure and adrenal insufficiency, so she takes medications that compromise her immune system. Her heart condition has declined over the last year and a half, she said, but doctors aren’t sure if Covid is responsible.​

Keele was vaccinated but did not get booster shots.​

Declined! Mysteriously! I know what you’re thinking, and I am thinking the exact same thing.

Repeat infectee Makenzie Boyle, 28, is also having more health problems than just her recurring covid infections, they are now “manifold”:

Makenzie Boyle, a 28-year-old human resources administrator in San Francisco, went to the emergency room when she was infected with Covid for the first time in December 2020 and was diagnosed with pneumonia. A year later, Boyle was diagnosed with diabetes, which her doctor said was an effect of Covid. After her fifth infection in June, she developed chronic kidney disease and chest pain that hasn’t gone away, she said.​

Boyle’s manifold symptoms have led her to continue masking in crowded places and ask family members to take Covid tests before they see her. ​

Her boyfriend is moving out of their shared home because he doesn’t want to risk exposing her to another infection.​

Diabetes, you say? Weird, I remember reading something about that… oh yeah!



Or, how about her new chronic kidney disease? (Note: nephropathy is kidney disease.)



Oh well. I tried. I’ve been doing this for two years now and the jabbers never read my stuff anyways. Good luck, covid magnets. We are praying for you and watching to see how your grand experiment turns out.

☕️ SPONSORS ☙ Monday, October 9, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Israel war news roundup; the US's border problem; militias needed; voters side with Gaetz; Mass. exploding with sponsored illegals; NBC's most-ironic headline; Times's most-hilarious headline; more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[stgislander]

Damn... now Covid causes diabetes.

 

[GURPS]

The tragi-comedy among the healthcare harlots continued unfolding this week. It’s hard to know whether to laugh or cry. (But I laughed.) Here’s how it started: Canadian anthropologist, family physician, Ottawa school board trustee, and woke feminist Dr. Nili Kaplan-Myrth, MD, PhD, is not feeling well. Here she is, pictured in the Ottawa Citizen this year:



I want to, but I won’t say anything about her appearance, since that seems to trigger some people but — mask alert! And, the telltale eyes. Okay, I’m stopping.

On Friday, Dr. Nili tweeted her extreme vexation about getting covid again — the second time this month!





It was non-maskers’ fault. Dr. Nili was promptly and mercilessly mocked by shameless social media trolls since she is a delusional maskaholic — and still got covid twice in one month. So woke Australian doctor Claire Taylor, MBChB, BSc, a former neuroscientist who now runs a long covid clinic, sprang to Dr. Nili’s defense, and tweeted this in support:





So first, we learned that Dr. Claire, her son, and her doctor friends are all getting covid about every five weeks. If that weren’t bad enough, Dr. Claire — using Science! — has concluded it is now possible to be infected, not just frequently, but even by more than one covid variant at a time. Double covid. Triple covid. Quadruple covid. There’s really no upper limit. Covid doesn’t even wait for the last infection to end anymore.

Because there’s nothing else like covid out there. It’s unique. Apparently the human immune system is completely useless against it.

After starting that thought, Dr. Claire then wrote a 25-post thread about it, adding seven more postscripts. Last word freak.

Anyway, if you’re wondering whether the highly-credentialed ladies have considered jabbing as a possibility, the answer is both yes and no. Both doctors engaged in hand-to-hand social media combat with rude people suggesting their immune systems were destroyed by the jabs. Both doctors completely rejected the notion, because “safe and effective.” Dr. Claire claimed that unjabbed people are also getting covid all the time — but they just aren’t testing themselves like the morally praiseworthy jabbed people are.

Trust me when I tell you there is a lot of material in Dr. Claire’s 32-post thread and in the 486 responses. Since I’m short on time, go ahead and browse it for yourself if you like. It’s gold.

☕️ DARWIN AWARDS ☙ Sunday, October 15, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Bonus edition: Middle East War Briefing; jabby docs get multi-covid; counter-revolution in Louisiana; Afghan earthquake epidemic; boosters fall on their faces; hilarious public health awards; more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[GURPS]

In possibly the best — and most under-appreciated — news this week, only 2% of Americans have taken the new-and-improved covid booster shots. Weird. Pfizer’s stock tanked on the news, briefly dropping below pre-pandemic prices.



It couldn’t have happened to a nicer criminal organization, either.

People are rightfully enjoying the schadenfreude over all those wasted tax dollars and jab vials that will soon be incinerated, but I think there’s much more to the story than that.

Lat year, 18% of eligible Americans took the boosters (for some reason). This year, the public health agencies all ran the same positive propaganda, with the CDC’s Glorious Leader Mandy whatshername bravely going on TV and getting the latest, greatest booster shot* (* or a realistic-looking facsimile thereof).



I am not making this up: according to reports, Mandy tested positive for covid one month after getting her booster. And after her Paxlovid. So.
Two percent is nothing. It’s probably down to just the public health crowd and medical fetishists now.

I have two observations. Despite constant pro-jab propaganda, Americans finally seem to be wising up to the abject failure of mRNA technology. That in turn suggests that anti-jab messaging from independent sources like C&C is getting through the public-health noise. It also suggests that a lot of people probably have personal experience with bad jab outcomes now.

Did you notice that even medical-fetishizing healthcare professionals like Dr. Nili and Dr. Claire are pushing masks — not boosters?

Second, and more significantly, the wall-to-wall public health booster propaganda failed. Some believe this demonstrates the total collapse of “trust” in public health, and that may well be true. But note the difference this year: they aren’t using — because they can’t use — fear and censorship this time.

But at this point, the only tools public health has left that work are fear and censorship. And it’s not even close those would work at this point. Great job, public health experts.

☕️ DARWIN AWARDS ☙ Sunday, October 15, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Bonus edition: Middle East War Briefing; jabby docs get multi-covid; counter-revolution in Louisiana; Afghan earthquake epidemic; boosters fall on their faces; hilarious public health awards; more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[GURPS]

The Hill ran an unintentionally hilarious bit of backfiring pharma propaganda yesterday while desperately trying to short up Pfizer’s stock, capped with a blithely ironic and self-parodying headline, “Why do I feel sick after getting the flu shot, COVID booster?”



The answer to the headline’s rhetorical question suggests itself. Because it MAKES you sick, that’s why. But that article was even funnier than that and ultimately could even have been a stealth anti-jab piece. Sadly for the Hill, to maintain credibility it was forced to use all kinds of weasel language, and admit some uncomfortable facts, since everyone now knows the shots are perfectly awful, and their ever-waning efficacy can only be detected using the Hubble Telescope on a good day.

The article starts by answering its headlined question — by posing another question, presumably something that dark government propagandists surfaced in some CIA focus group. The Hill thinks some folks might be wondering why they get sick after the shots, but not their friends, who brag on social media they didn’t even need a band-aid or have a sore arm.

This will shock you. But the simple answer to the puzzle of why the shots make some people sick but not others is: they have no idea. The establishment scientists, once so confident about everything covid and 100% sure about the safety and efficacy of the jabs, now find themselves suddenly and regretfully helpless as vaccine-injured babies.

It’s an enigmatic mystery, a riddle deeper than the Sphinx:

Unfortunately, there is no scientific explanation as to why some people experience side effects and others don’t, explained Dr. Rachel Scheraga, a pulmonary and critical care specialist at Cleveland Clinic.​

It’s unfortunate!

As if we all haven’t heard it a hundred times now, their ridiculous lie is that the shots are working when they give you symptoms of the disease — but the benefit is it’s not the actual disease. It’s kind of like taking the polio shot and becoming paralyzed. The good thing is you weren’t really paralyzed by polio, not per se. Your frigid, motionless body proves the polio shot is working.

Of course, here in the real world, on Planet Earth, we perceive that the symptoms are just what we are trying to avoid. The pro-pharma scientists’ finer distinctions about degrees of severity are quite lost on most of us, which may be part of the reason uptake is only 2%.

Or, it could be all the side effects they are willing or required to admit at this point. I collected all the following side-effect sentences from the single article. Compare what the short article admits about the downsides versus what it claims about the upsides. Here’s the downside:

Feeling a bit under the weather after getting the flu vaccine or COVID booster is OK.​

The CDC notes that you may experience soreness, redness, or swelling where you got either shot for a few days. You could have some flu-like symptoms afterward. That includes a headache, a fever, nausea, muscle aches, fatigue, and potentially fainting. ​

Those who receive their newest COVID booster shots may experience a number of symptoms, including tiredness, headache, muscle and joint pains, chills, fever, nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, dizziness, irritability, swollen lymph nodes, and generally feeling unwell.​

Your symptoms from either vaccine should last hours to days, according to Dr. Scheraga. If you have a fever, headache, or respiratory symptoms for longer than a day or so, she recommends seeking medical attention.​

Another serious but rare side effect to be aware of is Guillian-Barré Syndrome. Seen in the face and sometimes other parts of the body, Dr. Althoff says GBS can occasionally cause temporary paralysis.​

You can get the flu vaccine and COVID booster at the same time, but you may want to do it when you know you’ll have some free time, in case you do experience side effects.​

Boy, that sounds great! I can’t wait to encounter all those risks. But let’s look at the glass half-full. Here are all the weakly-worded sentences about the benefits of the shots:

It doesn’t mean you can’t get sick… But, those who receive the vaccine are less likely to become seriously ill or die from an infection than those who are not vaccinated.​

“It’s about making sure that you’re not becoming so seriously ill that you’re hospitalized. That is our first and foremost priority, that we can avoid severe illness,” she says, adding that the COVID vaccines and boosters have also been found to reduce a person’s risk of being hospitalized or becoming seriously ill. ​

Haha, that’s it, that’s the whole thing. And even though the so-called doctor claimed the shots “make sure” you don’t get seriously ill, the Hill immediately followed that quote clarifying the shots only “reduce a person’s risk” of getting seriously ill. You might have to look at it twice to notice what they did there, but a reader’s subconscious easily notes the discrepancy.

They wrote a whole pro-jab article and those few sentences were all they could stitch together to try to sell us on the damned things. They can’t say it will keep you from catching covid or the flu. They can’t say it will help create herd immunity. They can’t even say it will stop you from getting very sick or dying. The best they got is it will “reduce your risk” of getting sick or dying. They can’t even say by how much. It will reduce your risk by a mysterious, unknown and unknowable amount.

I think this might be why booster uptake is only 2%.

☕️ ADVENTURES ☙ Monday, October 16, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

DeSantis airlines delivers un-stranded Americans; another weird Bills injury; SADS turbo cancer; Middle East war briefing; US political briefing; accidentally hilarious booster article; more CDC lies.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[spr1975wshs]

It’s kind of like taking the polio shot and becoming paralyzed.

I had a mild case of polio as an infant, from the vaccine.
There were about 1/4 million such cases in the late 50's.

 

[Tech]

I had a mild case of polio as an infant, from the vaccine.
There were about 1/4 million such cases in the late 50's.

Read a couple years ago a story about an outbreak of polio in Afghanistan caused by the vaccine. They used a live virus vaccine (sugar cube) like we received back then as opposed to the dead virus given today by needle.

 

[herb749]

The Hill ran an unintentionally hilarious bit of backfiring pharma propaganda yesterday while desperately trying to short up Pfizer’s stock, capped with a blithely ironic and self-parodying headline, “Why do I feel sick after getting the flu shot, COVID booster?”


The answer to the headline’s rhetorical question suggests itself. Because it MAKES you sick, that’s why. But that article was even funnier than that and ultimately could even have been a stealth anti-jab piece. Sadly for the Hill, to maintain credibility it was forced to use all kinds of weasel language, and admit some uncomfortable facts, since everyone now knows the shots are perfectly awful, and their ever-waning efficacy can only be detected using the Hubble Telescope on a good day.

The article starts by answering its headlined question — by posing another question, presumably something that dark government propagandists surfaced in some CIA focus group. The Hill thinks some folks might be wondering why they get sick after the shots, but not their friends, who brag on social media they didn’t even need a band-aid or have a sore arm.

This will shock you. But the simple answer to the puzzle of why the shots make some people sick but not others is: they have no idea. The establishment scientists, once so confident about everything covid and 100% sure about the safety and efficacy of the jabs, now find themselves suddenly and regretfully helpless as vaccine-injured babies.

It’s an enigmatic mystery, a riddle deeper than the Sphinx:



It’s unfortunate!

As if we all haven’t heard it a hundred times now, their ridiculous lie is that the shots are working when they give you symptoms of the disease — but the benefit is it’s not the actual disease. It’s kind of like taking the polio shot and becoming paralyzed. The good thing is you weren’t really paralyzed by polio, not per se. Your frigid, motionless body proves the polio shot is working.

Of course, here in the real world, on Planet Earth, we perceive that the symptoms are just what we are trying to avoid. The pro-pharma scientists’ finer distinctions about degrees of severity are quite lost on most of us, which may be part of the reason uptake is only 2%.

Or, it could be all the side effects they are willing or required to admit at this point. I collected all the following side-effect sentences from the single article. Compare what the short article admits about the downsides versus what it claims about the upsides. Here’s the downside:



Boy, that sounds great! I can’t wait to encounter all those risks. But let’s look at the glass half-full. Here are all the weakly-worded sentences about the benefits of the shots:



Haha, that’s it, that’s the whole thing. And even though the so-called doctor claimed the shots “make sure” you don’t get seriously ill, the Hill immediately followed that quote clarifying the shots only “reduce a person’s risk” of getting seriously ill. You might have to look at it twice to notice what they did there, but a reader’s subconscious easily notes the discrepancy.

They wrote a whole pro-jab article and those few sentences were all they could stitch together to try to sell us on the damned things. They can’t say it will keep you from catching covid or the flu. They can’t say it will help create herd immunity. They can’t even say it will stop you from getting very sick or dying. The best they got is it will “reduce your risk” of getting sick or dying. They can’t even say by how much. It will reduce your risk by a mysterious, unknown and unknowable amount.

I think this might be why booster uptake is only 2%.

☕️ ADVENTURES ☙ Monday, October 16, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

DeSantis airlines delivers un-stranded Americans; another weird Bills injury; SADS turbo cancer; Middle East war briefing; US political briefing; accidentally hilarious booster article; more CDC lies.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

People don't want to be attacked for saying no. They say yes and don't get one.

 

[GURPS]

The Epoch Times ran a story last week headlined, “COVID-19 Vaccines 'May Trigger' Rheumatic Inflammatory Diseases: Study.”



The story reported on a new meta-review study published in the journal Vaccines titled, New-Onset Rheumatic Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases Following SARS-CoV-2 Vaccinations until May 2023: A Systematic Review.

The study tried to downplay the significance of meta-review of 190 published case studies including 271 patients, mostly by invoking the large number of total shots given and noting that a lot of vaccine injured people responded to treatment. But Epoch searched VAERS and found that RIMID (Rheumatic Immune-Mediated Inflammatory Diseases) cases were second only to myocarditis in the volume of reports.

RIMID happens when joints, tendons, muscles, and bones are inflamed due to an unknown cause. Common types include arthritis, lupus, and vasculitis. Vasculitis was the most common post-jab type in the study, and presented in all kinds of ways. For instance, one patient developed inflamed arteries in his head and went blind in his left eye from restricted blood flow to his optical nerve.

The evil genius of the shots is the vast array of ways it injures people, which allows it to hide like a family of deadly vaccine lions creeping around in a sea of data grass. No one type of injury amounts to a clear proportion of recipients, allowing medial liars to claim injuries are rare. The awful significance of the aggregate risk only becomes obvious once you start adding the different categories together.

That’s about when the white-coated pretenders suddenly start pretending they can’t do basic addition.

Anyway, the most significant finding in the RIMID meta-study was the authors conviction that the new auto-immune injuries were probably caused by the shots. "The short time span between COVID-19 vaccine administration and the onset of R-IMIDs suggests the potential possibility of a cause-and-effect relationship," the authors carefully concluded.

The researchers were left baffled at what the mechanism of injury from the safe and effective shots might be. They were baffled, even though everyone knows the mRNA transfects billions or trillions of previously healthy cells causing the body to start nuking itself from orbit. The horrible lottery jab takers play seems to be related to where the mRNA mostly winds up, and how much they still needed those transfected cells.

☕️ RESCINDED ☙ Wednesday, October 18, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Pro tips for medical investors; study shows more type of jab injuries; Speaker drama; health minister whines about online criticism; hospital bombing wrecks narratives; cancel culture backfires; more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com

 

[GURPS]

Who Says There’s No Good News? Stats On The Latest COVID Booster Show Declining Trust In CDC, Public Health​

As if we needed more proof that COVID destroyed the public health profession, the public response to this year’s booster doses is as good as you’re going to get.

Last year, the CDC, FDA, Dr. Fauci and other health “experts” spent months excoriating the public to get an updated, bivalent booster. They were adamant that those boosters, despite little testing and overhyped results, were necessary to prevent a significant winter surge and increased transmission. Talk about an illusion of control.

I’m happy to report almost no one listened.

Despite immediately authorizing the boosters for virtually all ages, and with little justification, a mere 17% of the population received their latest COVID shot. Whether through skepticism of the “experts,” immunity from prior infection, or the realization that the vaccines are ineffective at preventing infection, the public overwhelmingly ignored the advice coming from public health experts.

Unsurprisingly, that relentless commitment to ignoring the actual data has continued even today.

No, There Is No Evidence That Lower Vaccination Rates Due To Political Leanings Were Responsible For COVID Deaths​

It’s late 2023, and there are still millions of people who refuse to admit they were wrong about COVID. And they’re denying that reality in increasingly desperate ways. We’ve seen this before, yet it's currently being repeated via an expert-supported attempt to blame COVID deaths on lower vaccination rates on the right. There's just one problem. It's not true.


In response to newer variants that once again made the bivalent booster functionally useless, yet again, there’s a new, variant-targeted COVID vaccine this year. And in classic public health fashion, it was designed to stop a variant that’s already virtually disappeared.

Now, more than a month after they were authorized based on the testing on eight mice, we have an update on what percentage have gotten the new doses. After yet more excoriating from the CDC, public health “experts,” politicians and the media.

And it’s low. Really low.

 

[Kyle]

No, There Is No Evidence That Lower Vaccination Rates Due To Political Leanings Were Responsible For COVID Deaths​

Even more interesting would be did lower vaccination rates due to political leanings lead to fewer heart attacks, thrombotic thrombocytopenia and myocarditis complications in that group?

 

[Sneakers]

Even more interesting would be did lower vaccination rates due to political leanings lead to fewer heart attacks, thrombotic thrombocytopenia and myocarditis complications in that group?

Now that fewer and fewer and getting the shot, are the cases of thrombocytopenia and myocarditis dropping to pre-covid statistics?

 

[TPD]

I had to laugh at this article today:

CVS to pull certain cold medicines containing decongestant phenylephrine from store shelves

CVS is voluntarily removing certain cough and cold medicines that contain phenylephrine as the only active ingredient from stores.

www.cnbc.com

• The company’s decision comes a month after a panel of advisors to the FDA unanimously determined that the main ingredient used in many popular over-the-counter cold and allergy medications doesn’t actually work to clear up congested noses when taken orally.

So CVS is pulling products containing phenylephrine because it is not effective. When will they stop administering the 'rona shot, because you know, it's INEFFECTIVE!!

 

[GURPS]

Speaking of the Washington Post, the paper also ran an unintentionally hilarious pandemic performance review yesterday, or maybe it’s a limited hangout, or a partial sideways apology, or something, headlined “How We Got Covid’s Risk Right But the Response Wrong.”

See? They were right, even though they were wrong. More Orwellian double-think! It’s all so very, very nuanced.

The article was labeled an “analysis,” and authored by Bloomberg business commentator and former Harvard Business Review director Justin Fox, who apparently drew the short straw for having to frame the paper’s abject covid failures and hysterical fear-mongering as “successes” — successes, that is, if you squint really hard and look at it in just the right light. And also backwards through a telescope.

Justin got off to a terrific start by immediately explaining he was qualified to cover covid since 2020 even though he has “no background in epidemiology or even health journalism,” since “I can multiply, divide and make charts.”

My son Luke, who just turned thirteen, can also multiply, divide, and he makes great charts. I guess we’re all experts now!

Obviously feeling very generous, Justin credited himself for his 2020 estimate of a 1% covid fatality rate, since he didn’t fall for the obviously-wrong CDC and W.H.O. and their much higher 2-3% estimates. Of course, one percent is a chucklesome exaggeration all by itself, but the rest of the article swelled with even more belly laughs, like Justin’s claim that the CDC’s covid death estimates were “almost certainly undercounts, because in the early days the lack of testing meant many Covid-caused deaths were attributed to other maladies.”

Hahaha! I’ve personally reviewed hundreds of covid death certificates and coroner reports. My favorites are the covid gunshot wounds, covid tumbles off of roofs, and covid motorcycle accidents, but the great variety of covid nursing home trip-and-falls comes in at a close second.

Justin also quoted Bill Gates, even though he’s not a medical professional or a scientist. At least he tried to credit whatever dumb thing Bill was saying. Justin labeled the software billionaire a “well-informed amateur epidemiologist.” Hahaha! You really can’t make this stuff up.

Justin even claimed lockdowns “seem to have saved lives when implemented early enough.” We just need to do them earlier. If only we could implement lockdowns before pandemics start. I wonder whether Justin thought of that idea.

But anyway, after all that, Justin got down to brass tacks, the hideous point of the awful apology tour. After congratulating himself so many ways, and whole expressing great magnanimity and praiseworthy open-mindedness, Justin ultimately allowed that “the US did an awful job of balancing Covid’s risks with the costs of fighting the disease,” and even conceded that Sweden “ended up with one of the most successful and sustainable Covid management efforts among Western countries.”

How about that? Sadly, Sweden need not apply to the Washington Post to get its reputation back. This brief, footnoted admission is probably as much credit as Sweden will ever get, even though it deserves to be included in the title of every textbook about pandemic management from here on out. Still, the Nordic country is enjoying the best revenge, the quiet victory of being right.

☕️ BELLE’S BOOGALOO ☙ Tuesday, October 24, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

Superfog suddenly strikes; solid new Trump motion to dismiss; WaPo's sorry excuse for an apology over its covid coverage; more bad news for jabs; SADS stuff; the unhappiest place on earth; and more.

www.coffeeandcovid.com