Comments by "Hobbs" (@hobbso8508) on "NBC News"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hikikomori_trader
"Recent experimental research shows that many mammals, including cats, dogs, bank voles, ferrets, fruit bats, hamsters, mink, pigs, rabbits, racoon dogs, tree shrews, and white-tailed deer can be infected with the virus.
Cats, ferrets, fruit bats, hamsters, racoon dogs, and white-tailed deer can also spread the infection to other animals of the same species in laboratory settings."
Like candy from a baby.
"The chimpanzee version of the virus (called simian immunodeficiency virus, or SIV) was probably passed to humans when humans hunted these chimpanzees for meat and came in contact with their infected blood.
Studies show that HIV may have jumped from chimpanzees to humans as far back as the late 1800s.
Over decades, HIV slowly spread across Africa and later into other parts of the world. We know that the virus has existed in the United States since at least the mid to late 1970s."
Just too easy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brandona.deimel5155 They saw it coming and hedged their bets. People had seen an even like this coming for years, and preparing a vaccine early is the only way to get to market.
The co-founder of BioNTech designed the Pfizer vaccine in an afternoon on the 25th of January 2020. They made an agreement with Pfizer, and created the physical vaccine in a few weeks. Due to the simplicity of the vaccine the turnaround time was easy to keep short.
From there they were allowed by the FDA to do simultaneous pre-clinical trials, meaning they were doing cellular and animal testing at the same time. They were also putting billions behind the endeavour, allowing them to put hundreds of people on the task. Usually drug trials are done by a couple of scientists slowing working through the steps over years, but with the urgency they used massive funding to accelerate the testing, running hundreds and hundreds of plates a day knowing they would be at the front of the FDA queue.
By late April they already had clinical trial approval, with the phase 1/2 trials (combining them for speed) getting their first dose on the 23th of April and running until the 22nd of May.
Recipients were reviewed over the course of 6 months for side effects, but with no immediate problems they started their phase 2/3 clinicals (also combined) in 4 different countries, recruiting thousands as early as July and running to November.
EUA came through in December, and by them the earliest injection had been over 8 months ago, far past the 6 month threshold set on long-term side effects by the FDA given the urgency.
In February they started phase 3 trials on adolescents aged 12-15 and pregnant women at 24-32 weeks.
Now that it is fully approved the earliest injection was around 16 months ago. Earliest largescale trial was 14 months ago. They were testing it on cells and animals around 18 months ago.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@robotron17
"approximately 100 million people have been fully V'd for an average of 5 months (far more if you include people receiving a single dose) Almost 3 million people die in an average year, so statistically, over 1 million of those V'd people have died"
Well yes, but actually no. The severely immunocompromised don't get vaccinated, such as late stage cancer and kidney failure type people. Their bodies don't have the immune response to actually process the vaccine, so they just don't get it.
"“If you look at the history of vaccines, you know that virtually all long-term adverse effects of a vaccine occur between 15 and 30 days after you get the dose – 45 days at the most", there should be 200k-300k reported deaths"
Well actually no. If you use that specific quote as your basis then the deaths would have to happen within that 45 day window, meaning instead of using a years worth of data to come out with you numbers you should actually be looking at the proportion of people who died within 45 days. that means your number is off, assuming we're looking at 3 million, by around 8-fold. They also only report suspected cases, which doesn't include a whole host of potential causes. They aren't going to submit the guy crushed by a vending machine to VAERS.
"Also, they dismiss every V death because the V likely kills you by exacerbating pre-existing conditions, so when you have that stroke, they just say "it was your time"."
Actually they review the coroner report, figure out based on how many people annually have strokes if there is an uptick in frequency and look at if there is any actual reason this could happen through the mechanisms of the vaccines. The idea they just say "it was your time" is utter lunacy.
"Of course, an all-cause mortality study of V vs. UnV would tell the true story, which is why THAT is not reported"
It's not reported because the FDA and CDC already do this, they just aren't prone to giving out personal medical records.
1
-
@robotron17
There is a big difference between health immunocompromised and dying in a hospital bed from cancer. You know, the people really close to death. Also, quoting something that advocated for boosters while push an anti-vax angle is more than funny.
"I already adjusted for this."
No, you didn't. you just took 10% of 3 million and called it a day, ignore multiple other factors. For example when you say:
"Roughly 2m people in the over 65 group die every year. So 1M is a good ballpark for V'd deaths at this point. And of those 1M, roughly 300k should die in 45 days"
Wrong and wrong. Not only are your vaccination numbers for over 65s too low, amusingly, your 30% proportion isn't even close to accurate. The real number is more like 12% at best, which also ignores people dying before than can be vaxed, meaning they wouldn't count in the vaccination stats, and people at deaths door not being vaxed.
"The coroner, Brenda Bock, says two of their five deaths related to COVID-19 were people who died of GUNSHOT WOUNDS!"
Colorado clarified that they draw a distinction between something being related and something being the cause. the related deaths don't go into the state stats.
State stats are also not VAERS making this even more irrelevant than it already was.
"They don't do this"
Yes, they do. I even quoted where they said they do exactly this. Your ignorance of government institutions is your own folly, not mine.
"They very clearly don't want accurate reporting of this. You're ULTRA naïve and just plain wrong to boot."
Projecting again I see.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@zs3101
"just one person can not be poisoned with a military grade chemical weapon and survive, but 5000 people WILL with immediate irrevocable death"
You would know, ey comrade?
"The Lancet research showed no traces of chemical agent that would go against OPCW convention in Analny tests"
Oh look, the actual Lancet article about the Novichok nerve agent poisoning:
"Severe poisoning with a cholinesterase inhibitor was subsequently diagnosed. 2 weeks later, the German Government announced that a laboratory of the German armed forces designated by the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) had identified an organophosphorus nerve agent from the novichok group in blood samples collected immediately after the patient's admission to Charité, a finding that was subsequently confirmed by the OPCW."
The Associated Press reported on the 31st of January this year that 5,100 people were arrested at pro-Navalny protest across Russia:
"Over 5,100 arrested at pro-Navalny protests across Russia
The massive protests came despite efforts by Russian authorities to stem the tide of demonstrations after tens of thousands rallied across the country last weekend in the largest, most widespread show of discontent that Russia had seen in years. Despite threats of jail terms, warnings to social media groups and tight police cordons, the protests again engulfed cities across Russia’s 11 time zones on Sunday. Navalny’s team quickly called another protest in Moscow for Tuesday, when he is set to face a court hearing that could send him to prison for years. The 44-year-old Navalny, an anti-corruption investigator who is Putin’s best-known critic, was arrested on Jan. 17 upon returning from Germany, where he spent five months recovering from nerve-agent poisoning that he blames on the Kremlin. Russian authorities have rejected the accusations. He was arrested for allegedly violating his parole conditions by not reporting for meetings with law enforcement when he was recuperating in Germany."
My favourite part is the last bit where he was arrested for not reporting to law enforcement while recovering from almost dying. You can't make it up.
As for London, those 190 people were all fined. None of them are still in jail. So sure, sanction away comrade.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fegelfly7877 Well that can't be the exact title as searching the exact phrase yields no results, but no issue, I'll dig it out myself.
Alright, found it. So according to the actual article, 80% of the UK population is vaccinated, and of those there were there were 22,318 cases in the last week of August. This compares to the 20,744 who were unvaxed.
He then clarifies the stats for the whole month. According to the quote from the article:
"The data actually shows that between 7th August 2021 and the 3rd September 2021 there were 47,580 cases among the unvaccinated population, 21,020 cases among the partly vaccinated population, and 41,748 cases among the fully vaccinated population. Meaning there were 15,188 more cases among the vaccinated population."
Counting partial vaccinations is dodgy at best but I digress.
Then he says this:
"So now that we’ve cleared up that the experimental Covid-19 injections clearly do not prevent infection or spread of Covid-19"
Well that's just not true. According to the very stats just presented case rates among the vaccinated are lower. This is because there are 4 times more of them. To get an accurate rate you first need to even out the population sizes when looking at cases. This means the number of cases per population of the unvaxed is 4 times higher than the vaxed.
"According to table 16 of the report between the 28th August 2021 and the 3rd September 2021 there were 36 admissions to hospital related to Covid-19 among the unvaccinated over 60 population, whilst there were 7 admissions on the partly vaccinated population.
However, there were a huge 299 admissions among the fully vaccinated over 60 population, and the same pattern can be seen for the weeks previous all the way back to the 7th August 2021."
This shift to the over 60s is a bait and switch. Over 60s in the UK are 92% vaccinated (just checked, it's actually 93.3%), so any stat relevant would be related to rate, which is 12 times (the higher percentage actually pushes this to 15 times) higher in than the numbers given for the unvaxed population. This actually pushes the hospitalisation rate to higher in the unvaxed group.
The author even shows a complete lack of understanding of this when he says:
"Therefore, this shows that the Covid-19 injections are increasing the risk of hospitalisation when exposed to Covid-19 by 70% rather than reducing the risk by the 95% claimed by the vaccine manufacturers and authorities."
"Therefore, the true number of deaths by vaccination status between the 5th August 2021 and the 26th August 2021"
This is just playing with the stats. He took out the last week intentionally as the trend didn't meet his needs. He then goes on to say:
"Therefore, this shows that the Covid-19 injections are increasing the risk of death when exposed to Covid-19 by a huge 566% rather than reducing the risk by the 95% claimed by the vaccine manufacturers and authorities."
Completely ignoring the rates and population differences again. Even if you take his cherrypicked timeline at face value, you're still looking at the same number of deaths in vaxed and unvaxed overall. What's worse is the majority of those deaths are in the over 60s population, which means you are against focusing on a group with a 92% vaccination rate. So his numbers show the exact opposite of what he claims, with death rates dropping in the vaccinated over 60s.
Maybe pick someone who understands what a rate is next time, or maybe someone who presents all relevant data.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1