Comments by "sharper68" (@sharper68) on "CityNews" channel.

  1. 24
  2. 8
  3. 7
  4. 7
  5. 6
  6. 6
  7. 6
  8. 6
  9. 6
  10. 5
  11. 5
  12. 5
  13. 5
  14. 4
  15. 4
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. 4
  19. 4
  20. 4
  21. 4
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24.  @benx2200  He has little to lose as he builds a cottage industry based on telling people what they want to hear. Buddy will be getting paid too if he is not already rich. The fact 6.55 billion doses have been issued. Even if you took your reports as gospel (and I do not) they are undermined by massive number of doses issued. We should be seeing failure everywhere by your spin. Not a tiny drop in the bucket even if your reports are true. People have been misrepresenting vaccines and the now the pandemic forever. There is a cult following for any idea that props up existing preconceptions and feelings. There is a business serving that feeling. Apply your logic to the other side of this question. Why would every single health agency on the planet lie on behalf of a couple vaccine vendors? Are all almost all the expert virologists overtly lying in a way that will hurt others for a paycheck even when they do not work for the vendors in question? Is the entire peer viewed community giving up on their scientific responsibility and ignoring it for cash? Do you honestly think only a handful of fringe grifters are correct and honest and most everyone else is lying? Bounds of reason. If this vaccine was toxic, would virtually the entire world leadership, the medical community, the military, the captains of industry take it? Why is it only a bunch of loopy fringe dwellers have the answers in your mind? Please note a dozen anti vaccine accounts make up 65% of all vaccine misinformation. Your spin does not make sense if you step back from it just a few inches.
    3
  25. 3
  26. 3
  27. 3
  28. 3
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 3
  35. 3
  36. 3
  37. 3
  38. 3
  39. 3
  40. 3
  41. 3
  42. 3
  43. 3
  44. 3
  45. 3
  46. 3
  47. 3
  48. 3
  49. 3
  50. 3
  51. 3
  52. 3
  53. 3
  54. 3
  55. 3
  56. 3
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. 2
  61. 2
  62. 2
  63. 2
  64. 2
  65. 2
  66. 2
  67. 2
  68. 2
  69. 2
  70. 2
  71. 2
  72. 2
  73. 2
  74. 2
  75. 2
  76. 2
  77. 2
  78. 2
  79. 2
  80. 2
  81. 2
  82. 2
  83. 2
  84. 2
  85. 2
  86. 2
  87. 2
  88. 2
  89. 2
  90. 2
  91. 2
  92. 2
  93. 2
  94. 2
  95. 2
  96. 2
  97. 2
  98. 2
  99. 2
  100. 2
  101. 2
  102. 2
  103. 2
  104. 2
  105. 2
  106. 2
  107. 2
  108. 2
  109. 2
  110. 2
  111. 2
  112. 2
  113. 2
  114. 2
  115. 2
  116. 2
  117. 2
  118. 2
  119. 2
  120. 2
  121. 2
  122. 2
  123. 2
  124. 2
  125. 2
  126. 2
  127. 2
  128. 2
  129. 2
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133. 1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. 1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. 1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1
  153. 1
  154. 1
  155. 1
  156. 1
  157. 1
  158. 1
  159. 1
  160. 1
  161. 1
  162. 1
  163. 1
  164. 1
  165. 1
  166. 1
  167. 1
  168. 1
  169. 1
  170. 1
  171. 1
  172. 1
  173. 1
  174. 1
  175. 1
  176. 1
  177. 1
  178. 1
  179. 1
  180. 1
  181. 1
  182. 1
  183. 1
  184. 1
  185. 1
  186. 1
  187. 1
  188. 1
  189. 1
  190. 1
  191. 1
  192. 1
  193. 1
  194. 1
  195. 1
  196. 1
  197. 1
  198. 1
  199. 1
  200. 1
  201. 1
  202. 1
  203. 1
  204. 1
  205. 1
  206. 1
  207. 1
  208. 1
  209. 1
  210. 1
  211. 1
  212. 1
  213. 1
  214. 1
  215. 1
  216. 1
  217. 1
  218. 1
  219. 1
  220. 1
  221. 1
  222. 1
  223. 1
  224. 1
  225. 1
  226. 1
  227. 1
  228. 1
  229. 1
  230. 1
  231. 1
  232. 1
  233. 1
  234. 1
  235. 1
  236. 1
  237. 1
  238. 1
  239. 1
  240. 1
  241. 1
  242. 1
  243. 1
  244. 1
  245. 1
  246.  @topperresistencia186  It is silly trying to appeal to authority when in fact the "authority" on this subject DOES NOT agree with you. Picking and choosing your experts is a thing done for politics or to validate your preconceptions. When you ignore the consensus and cherry pick your data to suit a narrative you are being unscientific. It devalues your voice in the conversation where the science not your feelings or fears should count. In science that means going with an ever evolving open consensus on the data by experts from all perspectives. The third dose does not validate any anti vax complaints. It is well understood some types of virus' have a limited duration on the effectiveness of the antibodies generated for them over time. This decreasing of the potency of protection is true for both natural and induced immunity. Many vaccines have a booster shot associated with them. That does not mean these vaccines are useless or ineffective. That they are now concluding we will need boosters does not erase the need or effectiveness of the vaccine in preventing infection and hospitalization of the infected. Just that we me need another shot to maintain our defenses. The same decrease in protection would be true if you catch it naturally too. This means you face the respective risks each time you contract the virus. If you have not caught it before being vaccinated you have no protection at all. The very nature of your immunity plan means you will become a vector again spreading it further. This is problematic.
    1
  247. 1
  248. 1
  249. 1
  250. 1
  251. 1
  252. 1
  253. 1
  254. 1
  255. 1
  256. 1
  257. 1
  258. 1
  259. 1
  260. 1
  261. 1
  262. 1
  263. 1
  264. 1
  265. 1
  266. 1
  267. 1
  268. 1
  269. 1
  270. 1
  271. 1
  272. 1
  273. 1
  274. 1
  275. 1
  276. 1
  277. 1
  278. 1
  279. 1
  280. 1
  281. 1
  282. 1
  283. 1
  284. 1
  285. 1