00:00
00:00
Newgrounds Background Image Theme

Our goal is for Newgrounds to be ad free for everyone! Become a Supporter today and help make this dream a reality!

Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine?

2,356 Views | 180 Replies
New Topic Respond to this Topic

At 12/15/20 03:04 PM, Yomuchan wrote: ... heh, now you're just mad that a link has been established proving a mere 'malarial drug' can have the capability to assist the body in combating viruses.

Please, in any reality I'd be happy if it worked. Instead here I am arguing about whether something's that not proven to work doesn't work or not.


If SARS was the same as SARS-2, please tell me why SARS was a brief epidemic and SARS-2 is a pandemic.

The viral infection, meaning SARS CoV-2
By the way, Influenza A =! SARS CoVX. You truly have no idea how these drugs work, do you.

You said that it 'helps the immune system'. Is it like how zinc 'helps the immune system', or is it specific to COVID-19? I certainly didn't get that second meaning.


And looking through earlier posts, you seem to be suggesting that it helps the immune system in general. AKA like zinc.


Were that the case, it would improve case outcomes even for influenza.


Except it didn't, and now you're backpedaling by saying that the two diseases aren't the same.


Why?


Is it an immunity booster, or an anti-SARS drug?

the WHO has lost all credibility after the flaw conga they went through earlier this year.

I don't know why you brought that part up...unless the raw data suddenly isn't the whole picture anymore. Gee, I wonder how that works.


I'll have to dig a little deeper into this later. Have a bonus article while you wait. Also, I misunderstood what you meant by the solitary trial at first. Sorry about that.

WHO got stuck between politics and more politics. No wonder that happened. Maybe if China hadn't declared Taiwan as part of their country, and maybe if the US had recognized Taiwan internationally, then this wouldn't have happened.


But if we're talking hypotheticals, if the US didn't get rid of their observers in China, then this whole pandemic wouldn't have been more than an epidemic.


Slint approves of me! | "This is Newgrounds.com, not Disney.com" - WadeFulp

"Sit look rub panda" - Alan Davies

BBS Signature

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-15 18:35:13


At 12/15/20 06:03 PM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/15/20 03:04 PM, Yomuchan wrote: ... heh, now you're just mad that a link has been established proving a mere 'malarial drug' can have the capability to assist the body in combating viruses.
Please, in any reality I'd be happy if it worked. Instead here I am arguing about whether something's that not proven to work doesn't work or not.


Well, enjoy your reality as it is dictated to you by corporate interests, then.


Please tell me why SARS was a brief epidemic and SARS-2 is a pandemic.


Have you considered the fact that it could be because back then, the majority of the US government and the WHO weren't chinese government assets kowtowing to the CCP's wishes and actually did their best to actually do something about the epidemic. Or maybe the treatment I linked to here worked. But your reality doesn't allow that, does it.


You said that it 'helps the immune system'. Is it like how zinc 'helps the immune system'? I certainly didn't get that meaning.


If you had no idea what micronutrients were, you should have said so in the first place. Educate yourself.


the WHO has lost all credibility after the flaw conga they went through earlier this year.
I don't know why you brought that part up...unless the raw data suddenly isn't the whole picture anymore. Gee, I wonder how that works.


There you go, making assumptions about data I have yet to fully read through. Don't do that - it makes you look desperate.


WHO got stuck between politics and more politics. No wonder that happened. Maybe if China hadn't declared Taiwan as part of their country, and maybe if the US had recognized Taiwan internationally, then this wouldn't have happened.


Well, we're in agreement there.


But if we're talking hypotheticals, if the US didn't get rid of their observers in China, then this whole pandemic wouldn't have been more than an epidemic.


Go on.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-15 18:53:19


At 12/15/20 06:35 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/15/20 06:03 PM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/15/20 03:04 PM, Yomuchan wrote: ... heh, now you're just mad that a link has been established proving a mere 'malarial drug' can have the capability to assist the body in combating viruses.
Please, in any reality I'd be happy if it worked. Instead here I am arguing about whether something's that not proven to work doesn't work or not.
Well, enjoy your reality as it is dictated to you by corporate interests, then.

Please tell me why SARS was a brief epidemic and SARS-2 is a pandemic.
Have you considered the fact that it could be because back then, the majority of the US government and the WHO weren't chinese government assets kowtowing to the CCP's wishes and actually did their best to actually do something about the epidemic.

For all the supposed kowtowing the WHO did, what else could they have done to address the pandemic when nobody cared?


Or maybe the treatment I linked to here worked. But your reality doesn't allow that, does it.

Can it with the snide remarks, nobody fucking used hydroxychloroquine for SARS and you know it.


If you had no idea what micronutrients were, you should have said so in the first place. Educate yourself.

I know zinc helps the immune system. Stop dodging the question.


Is hydroxychloroquine an immunity booster like zinc? Or is it specific to SARS?

the WHO has lost all credibility after the flaw conga they went through earlier this year.
There you go, making assumptions about data I have yet to fully read through. Don't do that - it makes you look desperate.

Says the guy who made assumptions about a scientific study...makes you look desperate and hypocritical.


But if we're talking hypotheticals, if the US didn't get rid of their observers in China, then this whole pandemic wouldn't have been more than an epidemic.
Go on.

The Predict program involved having observers from the US stationed in certain "hotspots" around the world, mainly China and parts of Africa where novel diseases could start.


It was canned late last year, and the rest is history.


Explains it far more comprehensively than I can.


Slint approves of me! | "This is Newgrounds.com, not Disney.com" - WadeFulp

"Sit look rub panda" - Alan Davies

BBS Signature

At 12/15/20 05:35 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/15/20 03:44 PM, EdyKel wrote: LOL. That would be pretty funny if you tried to explain that.
I don't need to. You just explained the joke.


At 12/15/20 03:44 PM, EdyKel wrote: People who promote conspiracies don't actually have evidence, they just use a lot of mental gymnastics to support what they want to believe in - often using a combination of logic fallacies, and a heavy reliance on inferences on odd bits of information without taking them into context, scale, or reliability.
Which is what you're doing at the moment, citing 'fact checkers' and ignoring the ever-piling up of evidence, but go on.


Throwing out a bunch of shit to see what sticks is not evidence, that's just desperation. Nor is using the very sources you are claiming are part of some conspiracy, that's just hypocrisy and undermines your own argument - comically.


At 12/15/20 03:44 PM, EdyKel wrote: Uh huh... sure, as a anti-malaria drug, not a covid cure, or anything to boost the immune system. Brazilian doctors are not happy about it. And before you go on about high drug doses: "but test tube studies suggest much higher levels may be needed for the drug to block viruses". It's funny, but for certain medications that are not designed for other things, you have to have a higher amount of it to make it effective for another thing, but at those higher levels it also become more dangerous for other conditions. Funny how real life works.
Which is why I said it's a supplement to help assist the body's natural immune system, and not a 'cure'.

"Part of Lacerda’s problem is that he appeared unaware that the dose was very high. In the preprint, the team justified the high dose in part by pointing to an expert consensus coming from Guangdong province in China that recommended using 500 mg of chloroquine phosphate twice daily."

"But the comparison was off. A dose of chloroquine base, the nomenclature used by Lacerda, is 67% more potent than an equal dose of cloroquine phosphate, which the Chinese authors used. Lacerda said the mistake came when writing the preprint, after the trial was completed. He says the team did a wide literature review before making its dose decision and that the Guangdong dose was just one factor in their choice."

Here's your problem. Read through it carefully.

Done? Good. Let's continue. Now then, this folds right back to what I said about safe, measured uses of the correct drug for the right situation, measured so that doesn't put strain on the body, administered on a doctor's recommendation. So did the Brazillian doctors use hydroxychloroquine-zinc or chloroquine phosphate? This article doesn't exactly make it clear. Overdose people with what could be the less-effective variant of the drug for political purposes, then get salty when the real world doesn't take it lying down. Funny how real life works, huh?

PS: It's pretty funny when your own links destroy your arguments. Keep at it.


Son, I also looked into that, and what you are pointing out is a Chines study that some Brazilian medical scientists are pointing to as an excuse (a lot of people died because of it) for why they got the dosage so wrong. A study that is being promoted by the Chines Government, who are also promoting the idea they have it under control with only 50,0000 deaths. A study that was written early on in the pandemic before they realized that most people were asymptomatic to it, and already had high immunity to it. That the study is more likely flawed, or part of a Chines propaganda. But, if you want to trust the Chines government, and the medical scientist who killed a lot of people with it out of political kowtowing.....


And here you are gloating over the comments by some Brazilian medical scientist in June of 2020 who was doing it for political kowtowing, who is giving an excuse about why he gave out high doses that did a lot of damage to people's health there by pointing to a Chines government study in march of 2020 on why he got it so wrong..... And it's been months since then, and you would think we would have heard about some measure of success if they got the dosage right there. Nope. But here is a recent study that should be a nail in the coffin for your claim, not that it will end your conspiracy since it's not what you want to believe.


At 12/15/20 07:41 PM, EdyKel wrote: And here you are gloating over the comments by some Brazilian medical scientist in June of 2020 who was doing itfor political reasons, who is giving an excuse about why he gave out high doses that did a lot of damage to people's health there by pointing to a Chines government study in march of 2020 on why he got it so wrong..... And it's been months since then, and you would think we would have heard about some measure of success if they got the dosage right there. Nope. But here is a recent study that should be a nail in the coffin for your claim, not that it will end your conspiracy since it's not what you want to believe.


But don't you understand!? China bad except when China good, and science good except when science bad!


In a twist of irony, the US president did not receive hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, when he contracted COVID-19 and was hospitalized at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center in early October

LOL the guy behind it didn't even take it. Let's see...tested positive early? Check! Minimal cardiac involvement? "Healthiest president", check! So did he take hydroxychloroquine, since it's supposedly so great for people in those groups?


Nope! Let's use experimental antibodies and remdesivir instead!


Slint approves of me! | "This is Newgrounds.com, not Disney.com" - WadeFulp

"Sit look rub panda" - Alan Davies

BBS Signature

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-15 20:19:46


No, I don't need to. I tested negative for COVID-19.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-15 21:18:57


At 12/15/20 08:19 PM, ngman7 wrote: No, I don't need to. I tested negative for COVID-19.


Cool, I was tested twice for COVID. First time was back in June (negative), and the second time was earlier this month (positive). So, you could still end up with COVID at some point, but taking this vaccine can help reduce the odds of that happening.


I used to be TNT

Latest song cover: Boulevard of Broken Dreams

Discord: Tyler From Texas #2030

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 01:05:38


At 12/15/20 08:19 PM, ngman7 wrote: No, I don't need to. I tested negative for COVID-19.


judging from this response, I'm not sure you know what the purpose of vaccinations are lol

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 02:06:55


To answer the question of the thread topic, I plan on taking the COVID Vaccine.


The way I see it is, is essentially that once the Vaccine rolls out to the general populace, it will at the very least be required to be taken if say, for instance, you're looking to get hired for a new job oooorrr if you're intending to continue your college education. Granted, I can't be absolutely certain that such a requirement will be necessary for either scenario, but that could be the case in order to minimize any further spreading of COVID.


Plus, I feel like it is more or less my own responsibility to ensure the potential safety of my fellow Americans; not to mention I tested negative for the virus and I'd like to keep myself from getting sick with the virus anyhow.


Can and will do stupid shit for style points.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 07:36:43


I'll happily take it, I've put worse things in my body by far. If you've ever taken a key bump from a stranger in a bar, then you shouldn't be worrying about a vaccine.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 09:50:52


At 12/15/20 07:41 PM, EdyKel wrote: Throwing out a bunch of shit to see what sticks

Does the existence of data that contradicts your opinion bother you that much?


Son, I also looked into that, and what you are pointing out is a Chines study that some Brazilian medical scientists are pointing to as an excuse (a lot of people died because of it) for why they got the dosage so wrong. A study that is being promoted by the Chines Government, who are also promoting the idea they have it under control with only 50,0000 deaths. A study that was written early on in the pandemic before they realized that most people were asymptomatic to it, and already had high immunity to it. That the study is more likely flawed, or part of a Chines propaganda. But, if you want to trust the Chines government, and the medical scientist who killed a lot of people with it out of political kowtowing.....

And here you are gloating over the comments by some Brazilian medical scientist in June of 2020 who was doing it for political kowtowing, who is giving an excuse about why he gave out high doses that did a lot of damage to people's health there by pointing to a Chines government study in march of 2020 on why he got it so wrong..... And it's been months since then, and you would think we would have heard about some measure of success if they got the dosage right there. Nope. But here is a recent study that should be a nail in the coffin for your claim, not that it will end your conspiracy since it's not what you want to believe.


Three mistakes on your end - one, I didn't gloat. That's what you're doing right now, talking like you know it all. Second, you assume I would just trust the CCP just because someone made a mistake - that's a slippery slope right there. Clearly, the problems in the Brazillian study were caused by overdosing on something which was completely different from hydroxychloroquine (their words, not mine), and which doesn't have (in the same article) substantial evidence to prove that an overdose is "needed". Three, you people will never be satisfied unless a study follows the Party Line. Why does something that aligns with your opinion considered an 'unshakeable truth' while a study that does not is considered 'fake'?


Double standards.


Moving on, so far - we've proven that


1) Your claim to hydroxychloroquine is 'an unproven, dangerous chemical used in aquarium cleaners' is a lie.

2) The claim that 2mg is a lethal dose has been proven wrong by your 'nail in the coffin'. (thanks!)

3) Hydroxychloroquine is not a 'miracle cure' - only a supplement that should not be overdosed whatsoever, and not used as a primary prophylactic (which the studies I've pointed out takes notes - yours doesn't. It would help if you read the whole thing, and not just the abstracts).

4) The WHO is compromised due to the CCP's influence.


PS: The Chinese government does not have it under control. Never had. You're a fool if you believe that.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 12:59:59


At 12/16/20 09:50 AM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/15/20 07:41 PM, EdyKel wrote: Throwing out a bunch of shit to see what sticks
Does the existence of data that contradicts your opinion bother you that much?


You haven't provided any serious amount that would, in a coherent manner, or even related to the subject at hand other than trying to tie it with inferences and slippery slopes.


I think I have done more with the data by showing your hypocrisy with examples of you backing a drug that is being politically promoted, forced onto a populace with medical scientists kowtowing to those political forces, while relying on what China tells them, while still not having any evidence that the drug has been widely used to fight coronavirus with positive results in countries using them other than questionable studies done early on in the pandemic. All the while you are constantly ignoring anything that greatly contradicts and dwarfs your own meager and questionable data . Critical thinking is not your strongest suite. You might want to put a dunce cap on and quietly sit in the corner at this point.


Son, I also looked into that, and what you are pointing out is a Chines study that some Brazilian medical scientists are pointing to as an excuse (a lot of people died because of it) for why they got the dosage so wrong. A study that is being promoted by the Chines Government, who are also promoting the idea they have it under control with only 50,0000 deaths. A study that was written early on in the pandemic before they realized that most people were asymptomatic to it, and already had high immunity to it. That the study is more likely flawed, or part of a Chines propaganda. But, if you want to trust the Chines government, and the medical scientist who killed a lot of people with it out of political kowtowing.....

And here you are gloating over the comments by some Brazilian medical scientist in June of 2020 who was doing it for political kowtowing, who is giving an excuse about why he gave out high doses that did a lot of damage to people's health there by pointing to a Chines government study in march of 2020 on why he got it so wrong..... And it's been months since then, and you would think we would have heard about some measure of success if they got the dosage right there. Nope. But here is a recent study that should be a nail in the coffin for your claim, not that it will end your conspiracy since it's not what you want to believe.
Three mistakes on your end - one, I didn't gloat. That's what you're doing right now, talking like you know it all. Second, you assume I would just trust the CCP just because someone made a mistake - that's a slippery slope right there. Clearly, the problems in the Brazillian study were caused by overdosing on something which was completely different from hydroxychloroquine (their words, not mine), and which doesn't have (in the same article) substantial evidence to prove that an overdose is "needed". Three, you people will never be satisfied unless a study follows the Party Line. Why does something that aligns with your opinion considered an 'unshakeable truth' while a study that does not is considered 'fake'?


If that is what you tell yourself. And you continue to make these slippery slopes by relying on things unrelated to to the current discussion to argue how things are now, while still not having concrete or relevant evidence to back it up with. And now you are jumping all over the place trying to savage the remanents of your crumbling argument.


Double standards.

Moving on, so far - we've proven that

1) Your claim to hydroxychloroquine is 'an unproven, dangerous chemical used in aquarium cleaners' is a lie.


You are relying on a Chines study, and one other, in the early months of the pandemic, with less known about Covid, while other later studies (and even wide use) continue to show that the higher the dosage the more dangerous it is, while lower dosages don't have the desired effect in boosting the immunity or even helping people get over Covid - the prime reason for it's use.


2) The claim that 2mg is a lethal dose has been proven wrong by your 'nail in the coffin'. (thanks!)


The nail in the coffin just shows it doesn't work over covid, period. At this point, you are moving the goal post over something I didn't say, to try and desperatly save face at this point as your points continue to fall around you.


3) Hydroxychloroquine is not a 'miracle cure' - only a supplement that should not be overdosed whatsoever, and not used as a primary prophylactic (which the studies I've pointed out takes notes - yours doesn't. It would help if you read the whole thing, and not just the abstracts).


A potentially dangerous one, with many deaths attributed to it, while not showing any real benefit over covid - even as a supplement - as you put it.


4) The WHO is compromised due to the CCP's influence.


So is the Chines study that touts the benefits Hydroxychloroquine.


PS: The Chinese government does not have it under control. Never had. You're a fool if you believe that.


Never said I trust them, just mocking you for your about face in trusting their study over Hydroxychloroquine while you rip the WHO for what you think is kowtowing to them.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 13:54:21


At 12/15/20 06:53 PM, Gimmick wrote: Can it with the snide remarks, nobody fucking used hydroxychloroquine for SARS and you know it.


I know zinc helps the immune system. Stop dodging the question.


Aw, boo hoo. Let me play you a song on the world's smallest violin.


But in all seriousness, can it with the snide remarks if you can't take the heat right back. And no, I don't know - this is indeed the first time I'm hearing about this. Keep your mouth clean.


Says the guy who made assumptions about a scientific study...makes you look desperate and hypocritical.


These assumptions are all in your head. Why? Because I haven't read through the entirety of the SOLIDARITY trial results yet. Still, I really do mistrust the WHO, as we have proven that it has become too subservient to the politics of the paper tiger. I would take what they say with a pinch of doubt.


The Predict program involved having observers from the US stationed in certain "hotspots" around the world, mainly China and parts of Africa where novel diseases could start.

It was canned late last year, and the rest is history.

Explains it far more comprehensively than I can.


That was quite a fascinating read, thank you.


"Scientists must explore the most advanced frontiers of research while citizens attend to the least glamorous tasks of personal hygiene. Physical supplies matter—test kits, protective gear—but so do intangibles, such as “flattening the curve” and public trust in official statements."


That would be rather difficult to score because some public officials in the US were still salty about the nothingburger Mueller report and were trying to make every step taken look 'inappropriate' and downplaying the danger of the pandemic. The travel bans were called 'an outrage!', attempts at initial safety precautions were mocked, and the list goes on.


It's only now that the pandemic has reached the US, that - instead of following common sense, the panic peddlers went into overdrive, blaming old man Trump for what they did. At the moment, I have a timeline that I have not managed to entirely verify just yet - and when I do, I'll post it right here.


I don't really know why the current US administration shut down the PREDICT initiative. Maybe Trump was rattled by this case?


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 14:01:26


At 12/10/20 10:08 AM, CitizenGoose wrote: Im referring to the Pfizer one, but you could decide to choose one from another company.

I personally would choose getting the coronavirus than this vaccine. Do you know how long they have to be testing this stuff to confirm it works right? And if it doesnt work right, the side effects are dangerous.

In latin america, one of these big companies(i think it was pfizer) was testing out a vaccine with volunteers. The volunteers would sign that they wouldnt have children for the following 2 years. That does not sound good.

And Covid is weird AF. It mutates a ton. If we dont have a vaccine for stuff that is less weird, that we understand better, and that has been under observation for way way longer... how can we be sure they got it under control?

Ive seen articles about old people taking them and everybody going like "yeah if they do it we can too!"... well, first, how do you know they took it, and second, they already lived their fricking life, young people are yet to have kids and develop.

So idk thats my argument.

Absolutely not. I am vaccine injured and if I have another I might die because idk the aluminum and mucury do something funny to me and don't even get me started on the GMOs. REMEMBER: YOU CAN SAY NO; YOUR BODY YOUR CHOICE!!


أوين

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 15:46:21


At 12/16/20 12:59 PM, EdyKel wrote: Never said I trust them, just mocking you for your about face in trusting their study over Hydroxychloroquine while you rip the WHO for what you think is kowtowing to them.


You really are clutching at straws right now, aren't you. Ignoring entire sections on safe use and just going for an unmarked claim that it needs higher dosages to work and taking that as an absolute truth while several other studies break that claim, then trying to conflate reasonable skepticism with 'BLINDLY TRUSTING CHINA'.


Mocking, huh. I expected better of you. Too bad that 'nail in the coffin' was a coilgun round that's cutting through your arguments instead.


It's an interesting study, to be sure. But did you take a close look at how it was done? If you only read the editorial and the headline, it might have slipped right by you.


So, just in case, I'll read it out to you; Adults hospitalized with respiratory symptoms from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were enrolled between April 2 and June 19, 2020. "This study, from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PETAL Clinical Trials Network, focused on hospitalized patients with moderate to severe disease.


See where the problem comes up?


It contradicts the standard usage of hydroxychloroquine-zinc as a supplement to help the body's immune system fight the infection in question early on.


I'll keep going in case you don't believe it.


With antiviral therapies, early treatment is important. The best known example of this is the over-the-counter drug Abreva. Cold sore sufferers are instructed to apply Abreva as soon as they sense a tingling, before a cold sore actually appears. A further reason for early treatment in COVID-19 is to win the race against the cytokine storm that emerges in response to the virus, when the immune system actually attacks the patient’s own cells. This is why proponents of hydroxychloroquine-zinc universally recommended its use early, before hospitalization, rather than late when the body's immune system is effectively overloaded.


See why hydroxychloroquine is ineffective in this study? Because the volunteers were all already hospitalized with an immune system that had been overrun by the viral infection to the point a few of the test participants actually needed to be put on ventilators.


By analogy, to study the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine by assessing patients treated so late would be like testing the effectiveness of parachutes by looking at cases where the parachutes had only been deployed after the volunteer had passed the safe threshold for landing. What you're essentially doing is taking such a study and saying "Parachutes aren't safe! This is a nail in the coffin for anyone who argues that airplanes should have parachutes!"


Now that's pathetic.


Now have some actual studies done with patients in the correct treatment window, where the supplements were administered in safe and measured doses while you sit there and consider the fraility of your so-called fact checkers who have been lying to you this whole time. Oh, and these studies disprove the claim that a 'higher dose' is needed.


I'm not moving any goalposts - you were the one who claimed it was a 'dangerous, unproven' drug. And I know exactly where you got that talking point from. Unfortunately, the claim that “We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19.” has been retracted, citing that the data used in the core study was unverifiable.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 16:02:34


At 12/16/20 03:46 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 12:59 PM, EdyKel wrote: Never said I trust them, just mocking you for your about face in trusting their study over Hydroxychloroquine while you rip the WHO for what you think is kowtowing to them.
You really are clutching at straws right now, aren't you. Ignoring entire sections on safe use and just going for an unmarked claim that it needs higher dosages to work and taking that as an absolute truth while several other studies break that claim, then trying to conflate reasonable skepticism with 'BLINDLY TRUSTING CHINA'.

Mocking, huh. I expected better of you. Too bad that 'nail in the coffin' was a coilgun round that's cutting through your arguments instead.

It's an interesting study, to be sure. But did you take a close look at how it was done? If you only read the editorial and the headline, it might have slipped right by you.

So, just in case, I'll read it out to you; Adults hospitalized with respiratory symptoms from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were enrolled between April 2 and June 19, 2020. "This study, from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PETAL Clinical Trials Network, focused on hospitalized patients with moderate to severe disease." 

See where the problem comes up?

It contradicts the standard usage of hydroxychloroquine-zinc as a supplement to help the body's immune system fight the infection in question early on.

I'll keep going in case you don't believe it.

With antiviral therapies, early treatment is important. The best known example of this is the over-the-counter drug Abreva. Cold sore sufferers are instructed to apply Abreva as soon as they sense a tingling, before a cold sore actually appears. A further reason for early treatment in COVID-19 is to win the race against the cytokine storm that emerges in response to the virus, when the immune system actually attacks the patient’s own cells. This is why proponents of hydroxychloroquine-zinc universally recommended its use early, before hospitalization, rather than late when the body's immune system is effectively overloaded.

See why hydroxychloroquine is ineffective in this study? Because the volunteers were all already hospitalized with an immune system that had been overrun by the viral infection to the point a few of the test participants actually needed to be put on ventilators.

By analogy, to study the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine by assessing patients treated so late would be like testing the effectiveness of parachutes by looking at cases where the parachutes had only been deployed after the volunteer had passed the safe threshold for landing. What you're essentially doing is taking such a study and saying "Parachutes aren't safe! This is a nail in the coffin for anyone who argues that airplanes should have parachutes!"

Now that's pathetic.

Now have some actual studies done with patients in the correct treatment window, where the supplements were administered in safe and measured doses while you sit there and consider the fraility of your so-called fact checkers who have been lying to you this whole time. Oh, and these studies disprove the claim that a 'higher dose' is needed.

I'm not moving any goalposts - you were the one who claimed it was a 'dangerous, unproven' drug. And I know exactly where you got that talking point from. Unfortunately, the claim that “We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19.” has been retracted, citing that the data used in the core study was unverifiable.


Son, take a multi-vitamin, it might help boost your immune system, whether it helps with covid or not, and it's a lot less costly, political, and hypocritical.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 16:23:47


At 12/16/20 04:02 PM, EdyKel wrote:
At 12/16/20 03:46 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 12:59 PM, EdyKel wrote: Never said I trust them, just mocking you for your about face in trusting their study over Hydroxychloroquine while you rip the WHO for what you think is kowtowing to them.
You really are clutching at straws right now, aren't you. Ignoring entire sections on safe use and just going for an unmarked claim that it needs higher dosages to work and taking that as an absolute truth while several other studies break that claim, then trying to conflate reasonable skepticism with 'BLINDLY TRUSTING CHINA'.

Mocking, huh. I expected better of you. Too bad that 'nail in the coffin' was a coilgun round that's cutting through your arguments instead.

It's an interesting study, to be sure. But did you take a close look at how it was done? If you only read the editorial and the headline, it might have slipped right by you.

So, just in case, I'll read it out to you; Adults hospitalized with respiratory symptoms from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were enrolled between April 2 and June 19, 2020. "This study, from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PETAL Clinical Trials Network, focused on hospitalized patients with moderate to severe disease." 

See where the problem comes up?

It contradicts the standard usage of hydroxychloroquine-zinc as a supplement to help the body's immune system fight the infection in question early on.

I'll keep going in case you don't believe it.

With antiviral therapies, early treatment is important. The best known example of this is the over-the-counter drug Abreva. Cold sore sufferers are instructed to apply Abreva as soon as they sense a tingling, before a cold sore actually appears. A further reason for early treatment in COVID-19 is to win the race against the cytokine storm that emerges in response to the virus, when the immune system actually attacks the patient’s own cells. This is why proponents of hydroxychloroquine-zinc universally recommended its use early, before hospitalization, rather than late when the body's immune system is effectively overloaded.

See why hydroxychloroquine is ineffective in this study? Because the volunteers were all already hospitalized with an immune system that had been overrun by the viral infection to the point a few of the test participants actually needed to be put on ventilators.

By analogy, to study the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine by assessing patients treated so late would be like testing the effectiveness of parachutes by looking at cases where the parachutes had only been deployed after the volunteer had passed the safe threshold for landing. What you're essentially doing is taking such a study and saying "Parachutes aren't safe! This is a nail in the coffin for anyone who argues that airplanes should have parachutes!"

Now that's pathetic.

Now have some actual studies done with patients in the correct treatment window, where the supplements were administered in safe and measured doses while you sit there and consider the fraility of your so-called fact checkers who have been lying to you this whole time. Oh, and these studies disprove the claim that a 'higher dose' is needed.

I'm not moving any goalposts - you were the one who claimed it was a 'dangerous, unproven' drug. And I know exactly where you got that talking point from. Unfortunately, the claim that “We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19.” has been retracted, citing that the data used in the core study was unverifiable.
Son, take a multi-vitamin, it might help boost your immune system, whether it helps with covid or not, and it's a lot less costly, political, and hypocritical.


There there. Don't take this too hard. This is the real world, you know - not one that's defined by fact checkers owned by corporate interests and celebrities suffering from outrage addiction, but by independently verifiable data. And when you use falsified data to prop up a claim, it's only natural that it gets disproved by various independent observers with cited sources no matter how hard you throw buzzwords.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 16:26:13


At 12/16/20 04:23 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 04:02 PM, EdyKel wrote:
At 12/16/20 03:46 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 12:59 PM, EdyKel wrote: Never said I trust them, just mocking you for your about face in trusting their study over Hydroxychloroquine while you rip the WHO for what you think is kowtowing to them.
You really are clutching at straws right now, aren't you. Ignoring entire sections on safe use and just going for an unmarked claim that it needs higher dosages to work and taking that as an absolute truth while several other studies break that claim, then trying to conflate reasonable skepticism with 'BLINDLY TRUSTING CHINA'.

Mocking, huh. I expected better of you. Too bad that 'nail in the coffin' was a coilgun round that's cutting through your arguments instead.

It's an interesting study, to be sure. But did you take a close look at how it was done? If you only read the editorial and the headline, it might have slipped right by you.

So, just in case, I'll read it out to you; Adults hospitalized with respiratory symptoms from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were enrolled between April 2 and June 19, 2020. "This study, from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PETAL Clinical Trials Network, focused on hospitalized patients with moderate to severe disease." 

See where the problem comes up?

It contradicts the standard usage of hydroxychloroquine-zinc as a supplement to help the body's immune system fight the infection in question early on.

I'll keep going in case you don't believe it.

With antiviral therapies, early treatment is important. The best known example of this is the over-the-counter drug Abreva. Cold sore sufferers are instructed to apply Abreva as soon as they sense a tingling, before a cold sore actually appears. A further reason for early treatment in COVID-19 is to win the race against the cytokine storm that emerges in response to the virus, when the immune system actually attacks the patient’s own cells. This is why proponents of hydroxychloroquine-zinc universally recommended its use early, before hospitalization, rather than late when the body's immune system is effectively overloaded.

See why hydroxychloroquine is ineffective in this study? Because the volunteers were all already hospitalized with an immune system that had been overrun by the viral infection to the point a few of the test participants actually needed to be put on ventilators.

By analogy, to study the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine by assessing patients treated so late would be like testing the effectiveness of parachutes by looking at cases where the parachutes had only been deployed after the volunteer had passed the safe threshold for landing. What you're essentially doing is taking such a study and saying "Parachutes aren't safe! This is a nail in the coffin for anyone who argues that airplanes should have parachutes!"

Now that's pathetic.

Now have some actual studies done with patients in the correct treatment window, where the supplements were administered in safe and measured doses while you sit there and consider the fraility of your so-called fact checkers who have been lying to you this whole time. Oh, and these studies disprove the claim that a 'higher dose' is needed.

I'm not moving any goalposts - you were the one who claimed it was a 'dangerous, unproven' drug. And I know exactly where you got that talking point from. Unfortunately, the claim that “We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19.” has been retracted, citing that the data used in the core study was unverifiable.
Son, take a multi-vitamin, it might help boost your immune system, whether it helps with covid or not, and it's a lot less costly, political, and hypocritical.
There there. Don't take this too hard. This is the real world, you know - not one that's defined by fact checkers owned by corporate interests and celebrities suffering from outrage addiction, but by independently verifiable data. And when you use falsified data to prop up a claim, it's only natural that it gets disproved by various independent observers with cited sources no matter how hard you throw buzzwords.


Not going to bite your troll shit, son.


At 12/16/20 04:26 PM, EdyKel wrote:
At 12/16/20 04:23 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 04:02 PM, EdyKel wrote:
At 12/16/20 03:46 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 12:59 PM, EdyKel wrote: Never said I trust them, just mocking you for your about face in trusting their study over Hydroxychloroquine while you rip the WHO for what you think is kowtowing to them.
You really are clutching at straws right now, aren't you. Ignoring entire sections on safe use and just going for an unmarked claim that it needs higher dosages to work and taking that as an absolute truth while several other studies break that claim, then trying to conflate reasonable skepticism with 'BLINDLY TRUSTING CHINA'.

Mocking, huh. I expected better of you. Too bad that 'nail in the coffin' was a coilgun round that's cutting through your arguments instead.

It's an interesting study, to be sure. But did you take a close look at how it was done? If you only read the editorial and the headline, it might have slipped right by you.

So, just in case, I'll read it out to you; Adults hospitalized with respiratory symptoms from severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection were enrolled between April 2 and June 19, 2020. "This study, from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PETAL Clinical Trials Network, focused on hospitalized patients with moderate to severe disease." 

See where the problem comes up?

It contradicts the standard usage of hydroxychloroquine-zinc as a supplement to help the body's immune system fight the infection in question early on.

I'll keep going in case you don't believe it.

With antiviral therapies, early treatment is important. The best known example of this is the over-the-counter drug Abreva. Cold sore sufferers are instructed to apply Abreva as soon as they sense a tingling, before a cold sore actually appears. A further reason for early treatment in COVID-19 is to win the race against the cytokine storm that emerges in response to the virus, when the immune system actually attacks the patient’s own cells. This is why proponents of hydroxychloroquine-zinc universally recommended its use early, before hospitalization, rather than late when the body's immune system is effectively overloaded.

See why hydroxychloroquine is ineffective in this study? Because the volunteers were all already hospitalized with an immune system that had been overrun by the viral infection to the point a few of the test participants actually needed to be put on ventilators.

By analogy, to study the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine by assessing patients treated so late would be like testing the effectiveness of parachutes by looking at cases where the parachutes had only been deployed after the volunteer had passed the safe threshold for landing. What you're essentially doing is taking such a study and saying "Parachutes aren't safe! This is a nail in the coffin for anyone who argues that airplanes should have parachutes!"

Now that's pathetic.

Now have some actual studies done with patients in the correct treatment window, where the supplements were administered in safe and measured doses while you sit there and consider the fraility of your so-called fact checkers who have been lying to you this whole time. Oh, and these studies disprove the claim that a 'higher dose' is needed.

I'm not moving any goalposts - you were the one who claimed it was a 'dangerous, unproven' drug. And I know exactly where you got that talking point from. Unfortunately, the claim that “We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19.” has been retracted, citing that the data used in the core study was unverifiable.
Son, take a multi-vitamin, it might help boost your immune system, whether it helps with covid or not, and it's a lot less costly, political, and hypocritical.
There there. Don't take this too hard. This is the real world, you know - not one that's defined by fact checkers owned by corporate interests and celebrities suffering from outrage addiction, but by independently verifiable data. And when you use falsified data to prop up a claim, it's only natural that it gets disproved by various independent observers with cited sources no matter how hard you throw buzzwords.
Not going to bite your troll shit, son.


So now you're claiming that I'm trolling, huh. Really now. Why? Because I've managed to shoot back your 'nail in the coffin' and point out its flaws completely?


Just so you know, I'm not trolling. I argued my points in good faith, and I mistakenly assumed that you did as well. But now that you've completely run out of arguments, you're claiming that I'm 'trolling'.


That's pathetic.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-16 20:41:41


At 12/16/20 01:54 PM, Yomuchan wrote: attempts at initial safety precautions were mocked, and the list goes on.
Maybe Trump was rattled by this case?


I've had enough of this bad faith arguing. You're twisting everything to suit your narrative even if it means grasping at straws. Kindly fuck off.


Slint approves of me! | "This is Newgrounds.com, not Disney.com" - WadeFulp

"Sit look rub panda" - Alan Davies

BBS Signature

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-17 02:09:55


At 12/16/20 08:41 PM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/16/20 01:54 PM, Yomuchan wrote: attempts at initial safety precautions were mocked, and the list goes on.
Maybe Trump was rattled by this case?
I've had enough of this bad faith arguing. You're twisting everything to suit your narrative even if it means grasping at straws. Kindly fuck off.


Why do you automatically assume that I'm arguing in bad faith? Because your sources don't hold up? Because ypur petty arguments have run dry?


Like I said, I don't know what actually happened behind the scenes, but I do know that there was a major intelligence bungle in China perhaps a couple of years ago which COULD have been the cause of the withdrawal of observers to avoid getting them killed by a supa-hyped up tyrannical government out for blood. And if you're claiming that I have the sort of money and power to control several scientists, corporations and studies around the world to 'twist everything', then you're the one grasping at straws.


Second warning, cut it with the foul language and accept the fact that yankee politicians messed up BECAUSE they were following the WHO's initial assessments.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-17 04:39:01


At 12/17/20 02:09 AM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 08:41 PM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/16/20 01:54 PM, Yomuchan wrote: attempts at initial safety precautions were mocked, and the list goes on.
Maybe Trump was rattled by this case?
I've had enough of this bad faith arguing. You're twisting everything to suit your narrative even if it means grasping at straws. Kindly fuck off.
Why do you automatically assume that I'm arguing in bad faith? Because your sources don't hold up? Because ypur petty arguments have run dry?

Because any reasonable person knows it when they see it. I can accept your premises based on scientific evidence, even if they by and large conflict; that's fine. However, what I take huge issue with is reaching for straws over the other parts, which bring the rest of your arguments into serious question.


Even the rest of your reply is bare nonsense: it is easier for you to accept the existence of a grand conspiracy than the actions of an incompetent government.


It takes two to tango, and I'm done.


Slint approves of me! | "This is Newgrounds.com, not Disney.com" - WadeFulp

"Sit look rub panda" - Alan Davies

BBS Signature

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-17 06:30:31


yep


R.D


At 12/17/20 04:39 AM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/17/20 02:09 AM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 08:41 PM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/16/20 01:54 PM, Yomuchan wrote: attempts at initial safety precautions were mocked, and the list goes on.
Maybe Trump was rattled by this case?
I've had enough of this bad faith arguing. You're twisting everything to suit your narrative even if it means grasping at straws. Kindly fuck off.
Why do you automatically assume that I'm arguing in bad faith? Because your sources don't hold up? Because ypur petty arguments have run dry?
Because any reasonable person knows it when they see it. I can accept your premises based on scientific evidence, even if they by and large conflict; that's fine. However, what I take huge issue with is reaching for straws over the other parts, which bring the rest of your arguments into serious question.

Even the rest of your reply is bare nonsense: it is easier for you to accept the existence of a grand conspiracy than the actions of an incompetent government.

It takes two to tango, and I'm done.


And I've pointed out how officials are being incompetent. Glad we agree on that. The only straw-clutching you're seeing here is from the media and their apologists who wanted to shoot nails into the coffin of scientific credibility, but ended up shooting their own foot with the industrial nailgun. And aside from a few people that were labeled 'conspiracy theorists' and disregarded, there was no way to know that a major pandemic was on the horizon. I wish I could have listened in 2017, but hindsight is 20/20.


Also, thanks for pointing this subject out to me - again, it was an interesting read, which brings up several flaws in the political arguments used by people opposed to Trump's administration.


Don't get it yet? I know exactly where this specific point hails from, and why it can be disproved with ease. Ready for it? Hold on to your hat-equivalent because it's going to be spectacular.


Senator. Chris Murphy of Connecticut(D) tweeted this to politicize the pandemic to engage in political mudslinging against a political opponent, but recall that the Predict program was run by government funding, and the job of finalizing how funds are distributed is one of the duties of members of the House of Representatives in the United States House Committee on the Budget.


And what, may I ask, was the house of representatives doing around that time?


Go on. Think.


Getting there.


Almost....


Aha!


Nancy Pelosi announces formal impeachment inquiry into Donald Trump over Ukraine scandal.

24 September 2019


So while the house of representatives were touting lies cooked at the behest of their 'leaders' to own drummmmpppffff, the end of the second term for the Predict program was rapidly closing in. While the house of representatives were trying to impeach Trump over what would eventually be a 'nothingburger', the Predict progam's second term came to an end, with no renewal pending from the House of Representatives.


It would be indeed more accurate to say Nancy Pelosi and the house of representatives shut the Predict program down. And again, let me remind you again who was touting falsified data and basically letting a massive pandemic happen because they didn't want to offend the chinese authorities and opposed Trump's (admittedly half-baked) travel ban for political reasons.


I admit that the US government's response is below average, a (4.1 out of 10) - Trump should have had followed the Taiwanese example from the start, or failing that, fielded operatives lurking in obscure imageboards and taking note when the first cases were reported in late november 2019. Unfortunately, for the sake of political mudslinging, the Predict program was ignored while the House of Representatives went around with their nothingburger of an impeachment campaign 2: electric boogaloo.


Now that's more than just incompetence. It strays into malicious territory, in my opinion.


Once I realized that this could be the huge pandemic in the making that amateur biologists and healthcare workers were warning us about for the last two years, I began preparing in mid-late december. Alas, most of us were called 'conspiracy theorists', for making careful plans and stockpiling food, emergency supplies, funds and water while the WHO was in full damage control mode. Then we were called 'racists' by the mainstream for discussing the outbreak. The sheer amount of salt that flows when I flex on them today has to be seen to be believed.


It's true that it takes two to tango, but what you did was stab your credibility with an easily disproved lie. I'm just sitting here watching you make an embarrassment out of yourself. And no, I'm not going to ask you to stop - it's your life, your choice as to what you ultimately do.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-17 12:26:06


At 12/17/20 04:39 AM, Gimmick wrote: It takes two to tango

OH YEAH?!!

[tangoes on my own]


BBS Signature

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-17 12:46:16


At 12/17/20 11:40 AM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/17/20 04:39 AM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/17/20 02:09 AM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/16/20 08:41 PM, Gimmick wrote:
At 12/16/20 01:54 PM, Yomuchan wrote: attempts at initial safety precautions were mocked, and the list goes on.
Maybe Trump was rattled by this case?
I've had enough of this bad faith arguing. You're twisting everything to suit your narrative even if it means grasping at straws. Kindly fuck off.
Why do you automatically assume that I'm arguing in bad faith? Because your sources don't hold up? Because ypur petty arguments have run dry?
Because any reasonable person knows it when they see it. I can accept your premises based on scientific evidence, even if they by and large conflict; that's fine. However, what I take huge issue with is reaching for straws over the other parts, which bring the rest of your arguments into serious question.

Even the rest of your reply is bare nonsense: it is easier for you to accept the existence of a grand conspiracy than the actions of an incompetent government.

It takes two to tango, and I'm done.
And I've pointed out how officials are being incompetent. Glad we agree on that. The only straw-clutching you're seeing here is from the media and their apologists who wanted to shoot nails into the coffin of scientific credibility, but ended up shooting their own foot with the industrial nailgun. And aside from a few people that were labeled 'conspiracy theorists' and disregarded, there was no way to know that a major pandemic was on the horizon. I wish I could have listened in 2017, but hindsight is 20/20.

Also, thanks for pointing this subject out to me - again, it was an interesting read, which brings up several flaws in the political arguments used by people opposed to Trump's administration.

Don't get it yet? I know exactly where this specific point hails from, and why it can be disproved with ease. Ready for it? Hold on to your hat-equivalent because it's going to be spectacular.

Senator. Chris Murphy of Connecticut(D) tweeted this to politicize the pandemic to engage in political mudslinging against a political opponent, but recall that the Predict program was run by government funding, and the job of finalizing how funds are distributed is one of the duties of members of the House of Representatives in the United States House Committee on the Budget.

And what, may I ask, was the house of representatives doing around that time?

Go on. Think.

Getting there.

Almost....

Aha!

Nancy Pelosi announces formal impeachment inquiry into Donald Trump over Ukraine scandal.
24 September 2019

So while the house of representatives were touting lies cooked at the behest of their 'leaders' to own drummmmpppffff, the end of the second term for the Predict program was rapidly closing in. While the house of representatives were trying to impeach Trump over what would eventually be a 'nothingburger', the Predict progam's second term came to an end, with no renewal pending from the House of Representatives.

It would be indeed more accurate to say Nancy Pelosi and the house of representatives shut the Predict program down. And again, let me remind you again who was touting falsified data and basically letting a massive pandemic happen because they didn't want to offend the chinese authorities and opposed Trump's (admittedly half-baked) travel ban for political reasons.

I admit that the US government's response is below average, a (4.1 out of 10) - Trump should have had followed the Taiwanese example from the start, or failing that, fielded operatives lurking in obscure imageboards and taking note when the first cases were reported in late november 2019. Unfortunately, for the sake of political mudslinging, the Predict program was ignored while the House of Representatives went around with their nothingburger of an impeachment campaign 2: electric boogaloo.

Now that's more than just incompetence. It strays into malicious territory, in my opinion.

Once I realized that this could be the huge pandemic in the making that amateur biologists and healthcare workers were warning us about for the last two years, I began preparing in mid-late december. Alas, most of us were called 'conspiracy theorists', for making careful plans and stockpiling food, emergency supplies, funds and water while the WHO was in full damage control mode. Then we were called 'racists' by the mainstream for discussing the outbreak. The sheer amount of salt that flows when I flex on them today has to be seen to be believed.

It's true that it takes two to tango, but what you did was stab your credibility with an easily disproved lie. I'm just sitting here watching you make an embarrassment out of yourself. And no, I'm not going to ask you to stop - it's your life, your choice as to what you ultimately do.


I think you just wasted several hours of your life writing something that no one is going to read, including the person you are trying to egg on.


At 12/17/20 12:46 PM, EdyKel wrote: I think you just wasted several hours of your life writing something that no one is going to read, including the person you are trying to egg on.


First off, I'm not egging anyone.


Second; - there you go again, lying like a sleazebag politician. Did I break all your arguments that ad hominems (thats fancy talk for personal attacks, just in case.) are all you have left to respond with?


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-17 23:19:11


At 12/17/20 12:55 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/17/20 12:46 PM, EdyKel wrote: I think you just wasted several hours of your life writing something that no one is going to read, including the person you are trying to egg on.
First off, I'm not egging anyone.


then be the better man and abstain from making statements like "The sheer amount of salt that flows when I flex on them today has to be seen to be believed."

Response to Question: Will you take the COVID vaccine? 2020-12-18 04:49:27


At 12/17/20 11:19 PM, S3C wrote:
At 12/17/20 12:55 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/17/20 12:46 PM, EdyKel wrote: I think you just wasted several hours of your life writing something that no one is going to read, including the person you are trying to egg on.
First off, I'm not egging anyone.
then be the better man and abstain from making statements like "The sheer amount of salt that flows when I flex on them today has to be seen to be believed."


If you had any level of reading comprehension, you would have realized that I was referring to the dimwits who kept calling me a 'conspiracy theorist' when I started carefully stockpiling food and water, and planning ahead for a complete lockdown that could have, in a worst-case scenario, may have lasted at least upto mid-2021, and possibly beyond.


"The WHO said its non-transmissible to humans, be reasonable."

"Did the far-right fringe tell you that?"

"You're wasting your time, there's no danger of any pandemic."

"There's no risk of it being a deadly disease. You're overreacting."


Serves them right. I had fun watching them freak out once the lockdowns hit.


Just because I've clearly disproved this 'nail in the coffin' Eddie was so confident about to the point he can't even offer a valid counterargument anymore, is no excuse to get all personal. And if you can't come up with a counterargument and have to settle for personal attacks, then sit there and abstain from trying to make a fool of yourself on the internet. Be the better man and admit when you've been fooled, and strive to do your own thinking, instead of outsourcing it to GatekeepCo #XXXX26A.


I put an african elephant in my fridge but I don't know how to get it out...

I'm usually over here.


At 12/18/20 04:49 AM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/17/20 11:19 PM, S3C wrote:
At 12/17/20 12:55 PM, Yomuchan wrote:
At 12/17/20 12:46 PM, EdyKel wrote: I think you just wasted several hours of your life writing something that no one is going to read, including the person you are trying to egg on.
First off, I'm not egging anyone.
then be the better man and abstain from making statements like "The sheer amount of salt that flows when I flex on them today has to be seen to be believed."
If you had any level of reading comprehension, you would have realized that I was referring to the dimwits who kept calling me a 'conspiracy theorist' when I started carefully stockpiling food and water, and planning ahead for a complete lockdown that could have, in a worst-case scenario, may have lasted at least upto mid-2021, and possibly beyond.


Just because I've clearly disproved this 'nail in the coffin' Eddie was so confident about to the point he can't even offer a valid counterargument anymore, is no excuse to get all personal. And if you can't come up with a counterargument and have to settle for personal attacks, then sit there and abstain from trying to make a fool of yourself on the internet. Be the better man and admit when you've been fooled, and strive to do your own thinking, instead of outsourcing it to GatekeepCo #XXXX26A.


I think you're confusing two different things. People getting tired of being talked down to by a narcissistic moron and then moving on with their day, and you winning something. (Whatever that's supposed to be, I don't know.)


People can only point out flaws to a blind person for so long until they say screw it and move on with their life.

I can't believe I still bother to look at your posts, but they're just so...disturbingly fascinating.

The sheer levels of immaturity, smugness, denial, capacity to ignore things, and immature baiting is sadly humorous.


Just because somebody got tired of trying to explain why the things you're saying are flawed (if not outright incorrect on a worrying level) doesn't mean you won a debate or shut them down. It just means they got tired of seeing you act smug about forcing a narrative and insulting people like an edgy 15 year old from 4chan who didn't get hugged enough as a child.


tl;dr - People quit because they think you're hopelessly delusional, not because of some sick burn you pulled.

...and then they get dragged right back in when you say something so absolutely ridiculous that it just has to be corrected for the sake of other people who might come across it.


Sleep so many dream, sugar prince.

لن أريكم مكان صنع عصير الليمون. నిమ్మకాయ లేదు.

BBS Signature