Vaccines and reducing the world's population.

Discussion in 'Viral/Biological' started by DennisTate, Jul 31, 2022.

PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening. We urge you to seek reliable alternate sources to verify information you read in this forum.

?

Are many influential people willing to use vaccines to reduce the world's population?

  1. No

    9 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. Yes

    7 vote(s)
    38.9%
  3. I hope not

    2 vote(s)
    11.1%
  4. I hope so

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are a serial forum spammer who has admitted that EVERY expert testimony is to be discarded because of some moronic circular batshit reasoning. You don't even come close to being able to speak for "anyone"! Your opinion on what has or hasn't been debunked relies on a) your total ignorance on the matter and b) your pathetic and utterly stupid insistence on dismissing every single piece of rebuttal. So "anyone" with any intelligence at all who takes the time to read will see that you are a cut and paste spreader of unverified, unchecked and useless batshit.

    Sidestepping the question as always and offering moronic circular batshit reasoning to support your evasion.

    Utter bullshit!


    Unbelievably dumb circular reasoning again. It never occurs to your stubborn and very ignorant mind that the problem IS the misinformation, not the idiots who get suckered in to it!

    .
    Totally stupid conclusion. Now you must make the numbers involved, insanely high! What kind of cluelessness can even entertain such an unfeasible and brainless situation?

    .
    "A lot" being tiny numbers statistically. It's not just low, it's virtually nil! And there are MILLIONS of retired or otherwise self-employed people who have no such bullshit fear. You are just making up crap as you always do. The fact of the matter is that it is beyond belief that this number would not be significant - intelligent people are perfectly able to assess data, way better than someone like you! There is ZERO consensus supporting your batshit claims, from the very people most likely to offer it.

    .
    MEH! The batshit is out and 99.999% of the medical fraternity, scientific support infrastructure, academia, what you pathetically label "mainstream" do not support your totally and incessant campaign of ignorance. Your crazy worldview suggests they are all aware of this "truth" and are afraid to go public, or they aren't smart enough to see what you have BLUNDERED into.

    .
    That was being polite. You are like a vacuum for the worst possible internet garbage.

    In 20 years you have learned jack. I have never come across anyone so unversed in every single thing they post about. Your whole mantra is to seek out batshit that supports your uninformed, conspiracy-theorist claims, with a 100% full disregard for science, ALL research, ALL statistics and anything that doesn't fit in with them!

    See batshit, post batshit, NEVER check it, disregard ANYTHING that proves it wrong and defend it at all costs. Your behaviour is pathetic..
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2023
  2. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was thinking the same thing about you. The viewers can go back and read our discussions and decide for themselves. Nobody with any brains simply sides with the person who has the best rhetoric.
     
  3. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your batshit opinion means nothing. You NEVER provide a single thing to disprove anything given to you. You just ignore it like a coward.

    A moronic statement. You don't actually appear to have any "brains"! And since you disregard every scrap of evidence, how the hell you have the nauseating audacity to label it globally as "rhetoric" is baffling. You are invested in batshit and nothing that disproves it is acceptable.
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2023
  4. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
  5. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1. Have any of them directly proven the vaccine caused their conditions? No, is the answer.
    2. This thread is the bullshit "reducing the world's population" - have any of them died? No, is the answer!
    3. Statistically in 12.7 billion vaccine shots, how is your latest batshit contribution significant? It isn't, is the answer.

    See batshit, post batshit, check nothing.
     
  6. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
  7. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Who do you think is going to your stupid batshit links? Who do you think you are? "The truf-warrior"?

    1. Have any of them directly proven the vaccine caused their conditions? No, is the answer.
    2. This thread is the bullshit "reducing the world's population" - have any of them died? No, is the answer!
    3. Statistically in 12.7 billion vaccine shots, how is your latest batshit contribution significant? It isn't, is the answer.

    See batshit, post batshit, check nothing.

    In every case there are historically numerous people who get these identical symptoms WITHOUT any vaccine!
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2023
  8. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
  9. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113


    The utterly moronic campaign continues. Now we have some random guy saying something and voila, see batshit post batshit.

    https://www.coffins.co.uk/blogger-coffins/coffin-supply-during-covid/
    "The first quarter of 2020 looked to be following a typical winter with an increase in the number of deaths, but nothing that would cause undue stress or strain and could be accommodated through the normal flexing of operating methods."

    [​IMG]

    "Early in March, discussions turned to how the UK should prepare to deal with a potential outbreak of Covid-19. The severity of this outbreak was unknown. China, first to be affected reported deaths numbered in thousands, rather than tens of thousands. These were numbers that coffin manufacturing businesses could accommodate as it would in peak ‘flu’
    season. Some funeral directors started to prepare and placed orders for “pandemic stock”."

    https://time.com/5913151/hart-island-covid/
    "At the height of the outbreak last spring, New York’s hospital morgues and mortuaries became overwhelmed, and the mass graves on Hart Island emerged as an expedient option for the city’s fast-rising number of dead. More coffins were stacked aboard the ferry dispatched to the dock here. More trenches were dug. Through the end of October, 2,009 New Yorkers have been buried on Hart Island in 2020, more than double last year’s total of 846."

     
  10. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why do you say "random"? The company he says he works for exists.
    https://casketdepot.ca/

    He was talking about statistics in Canada. Comparing those stats with some from another part of the world doesn't mean the stats he gives are wrong about his part of the world. I wonder how we could verify those stats he gave.

    I didn't see where your info dealt with the increased casket sales rate he alleges happened after the vaccine rollout. If it's there, could you point it out?

    Casket Salesman Blows Whistle: Child Caskets Being Ordered In Bulk, Never Seen In Business Before
    https://rumble.com/v1bwqm3-casket-s...-caskets-being-ordered-in-bulk-never-see.html

    Children Casket Business is Booming as the Media Is Silent
    https://www.americaoutloud.com/children-casket-business-is-booming-as-the-media-is-silent/

    Killing Children for Profit: Europe suffers 1580% spike in Child Deaths following EMA approval of COVID Vaccine for Children
    https://expose-news.com/2023/02/12/killing-children-for-profit-covid-vaccine/
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2023
  11. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your dishonesty on this is staggering. Your batshit source takes a soundbite relating to "vaccine rollout" and extrapolates that as the source! Later on he clearly references the normality of the death rates at 6.50 - he attributes the climbing rates to society returning to normal. Further, your scumbag interviewer is deceptively leading him on and making false assumptions! The ratio of big caskets to small caskets pre-covid 19 according to him was 5 to 1, towards 2022 end it had risen to 5 to 2. This bullshit video fails to take into account the after effects of covid 19 on pregnancy in general and children dying from it and maliciously and deceptively attributes the small LOCAL! rise to child vaccines. Meh!

    You posted a deceptive video from a small business, I posted an account from wholesale for a whole country. My info doesn't need to "deal" with a dishonestly created claim! You are just cluelessly parroting propaganda,

    See batshit, post batshit, check nothing!
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2023
  12. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2023
  13. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
  14. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yep, you are a disgraceful spammer who has no integrity. The issue with all the "dying athletes" was COMPLETELY DEBUNKED and shown to be appalling deception, yet here you are again dumping it on another thread!


    Spam, addressed and debunked!

    Spam, addressed above.

    There's something wrong with you, quite how anyone can do this crap over and over again is very disturbing.
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2023
  15. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This would be a clown doctor who advocates the use of Ivermectin, untested, completely useless, zero field trials and this joker hands it out to human beings. The list isn't "growing", just the pathetic spam of the alternative batshit fraternity!
     
  16. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    No it wasn't. You just have the attitude that it was.

    Watch the video in post #112. All of the people that collapsed didn't die; some of them were injured. Showing examples of people just getting injured doesn't debunk anything. The point is that the rate of athletes collapsing during matches rose sharply after the vaccine rollout.
    https://rumble.com/search/all?q=increase in death rate after vaccine rollout


    Here is some alternative info on ivermectin in case any viewers haven't seen it.
    https://rumble.com/search/all?q=ivermectin
     
  17. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Your attitude is pathetic. I totally debunked your appalling, lying source and here you are defending it. You basically ignored this whole response!

    Ok, the first thing anyone should do is read the data. You clearly haven't and probably never do. So a list of the bullshit attached to this:

    • The "link to the study" is NOT a link to the study. It is a link to the abstract that contains NONE of the actual study. Why is this important? Because it suggests that the user has not read the full study and is only concerned with sound-bytes. FULL STUDY.
    • The study is EXCLUSIVELY surrounding Sudden Cardiac Death and an age limit of 12-35.
    • The study used 8 scientific journals as its total source.
    • Further to the exclusive nature of SCD, it is further defined as such - "SCD is defined as a death occurring within 1 h of the onset of symptoms in a person without a previously recognized cardiovascular condition that would appear fatal."
    • The scope of reporting, limited to 8 journals is further elaborated in the FULL STUDY: "The most important limitation however is that SCD in young athletes as reported in the published and studied papers is certainly underestimated. Most of the events occur in youth potentially involved in sports activities, which are not reported in the literature. SCD is therefore likely to have comprised more than the 1101 athletes in the 38-year period across the world, which we reported. The lack of national or international registers and the uncertainty of the number of athletes involved forms the basis of this problem. An effort to inventory all cases of SCD in the future seems mandatory."
    • There was no internet.
    Now that details just a few issues in the figures from the study that your batshit site has completely ignored, not considered or just lied about. I will assume ALL 3 knowing what these misinformation websites are like. Now let's look at the source for THEIR "data" - HERE!
    • The entirety of the internet. I have no doubt that the people who did this exhausted every search and criteria that they could, given the way they deliberately set-out to skew the results.
    • The list of their people (in the first 20 alone!) - there are 8 people who fall out of the date range used in the study above! And that is by no means an inaccurate representation of their "data". Alarm bells should have been ringing when the FIRST one is 45 years old, many don't have an age noted.
    • The list is not even close to exclusively related to SCD!
    • NONE of the deaths have had their vaccination status confirmed!
    Cause of death first 20 on this pathetic list!
    1. First guy is too old and died of choking in a restaurant!
    2. No age, no name, no record, no cause of death!
    3. This man died after a long term battle with Multiple Myeloma, not SCD! Link here.
    4. This guy is 40 and too old for comparison. No cause of death!
    5. No cause of death found.
    6. This boy was 10 and too young for comparison. He died of a seizure and had a history of epilepsy!
    7. Died of a pulmonary embolism, NOTHING to do with the heart or SCD!
    8. Unnamed. Died of a suspected heart attack, vaccination status not established!
    9. Seizure related, nothing to do with SCD, he suspected the seizure was brought about by his fall.
    10. Suicide!
    11. Wrestler (35) died of suspected heart attack
    12. Aged 43 out of range and no cause of death shown, ran numerous cancer-funding races.
    13. Aged 52 out of range, announces he had a blood clot, didn't die!
    14. Handball player - passed away in "an incomprehensible way. It’s so unreal and pointless." No cause given but certainly not SCD!
    15. Rugby player (large build!) had a heart attack on the field. "Clogged arteries were removed and stents placed." Did not die!
    16. Cricketer aged 40 out of range, died of heart attack, vaccination status not established!"
    17. Referee, 60 years old! No cause of death!
    18. Goalkeeper, 64 years old! Died of brain aneurysm!
    19. Soccer player collapsed due to dehydration and fasting! Did not die!
    20. Soccer player age withheld, but played for "the old men's team" in referenced article! No cause of death.

    ZERO vaccine status, ZERO effective comparison, Large numbers ZERO to do with any relevant symptoms!

    How the hell would YOU know! You never check a damn thing. See batshit, post batshit.

    A total fabricated lie. The comparison used in your completely dishonest source is totally inadequate and deliberately inflated! It contains hundreds of instances where there is nothing serious or relevant at all.

    Spam, addressed countless times. Any medical profession who administers this untested crap should be struck off for gross negligence and disregard for safety.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2023
  18. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2023
  19. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113

    You are the most wilfully ignorant person I have ever come across. You admitted that not a single source that you arbitrarily label is mainstream will ever be considered, let alone read! , by you. That is utterly moronic. Basically it means that you only accept batshit sources and refuse to accept anything else.

    SO! How the hell would you know if ANYTHING was debunked? This bullshit "wonder drug", never properly tested, no field trials, no efficacy testing, no side-effect testing, administered by cowboy doctors who should be struck off, has been totally debunked. It is batshit, off topic and just one of your many dishonest attributes, a pathetic side issue!


    Bullshit, there is ZERO study data!
    https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consu...-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19
    https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o917
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58170809
    https://www.kumc.edu/about/news/news-archive/jama-ivermectin-study.html

    "The ACTIV-6 study enrolled 1,800 participants. These participants received packages at their residences that contained either a dose of ivermectin or a placebo. Because it was a double-blind study, the participants did not know whether they received ivermectin or not. Of the initial enrollment, 1,591 participants with confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported receiving their shipment, and follow-up data were collected by 93 separate study sites across the United States.
    “This trial was innovative in that it used a remote clinical trial design, allowing people in all areas in the U.S. to enroll in a clinical trial and have the investigational drug shipped directly to their house,” explained Schwasinger-Schmidt. “This is different in that most clinical trials require participants to come to a center to receive study medication.”

    The study results
    When the participants’ data were analyzed, researchers came up with two results. The first was the median recovery time, or the amount of time it took patients to report having recovered from COVID-19. The second was the number of hospitalizations or deaths within each study group.

    Researchers found that the median recovery time for those taking ivermectin was 12 days, and those on the placebo was 13 days. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and nine in the placebo group. But these differences failed to be statistically significant, leading researchers to their conclusion that “these findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.”"


    @Scott - you completely ignored the large post above, on-topic that destroys your pathetic claim - explain why?
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2023
  20. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The viewers can look a the info and decide for themselves.
    http://politicalforum.com/index.php...-covid-patients.584669/page-7#post-1072915602

    It doesn't destroy my claim. A few athletes had been collapsing during matches before the covid crisis and some of them were dying which shows that not all of these later cases can be attributed to the vaccine. The rate of athletes' collapsing during matches went up drastically after the vaccine rollout and a lot of them died or were just injured shortly after having taken the vaccine. Just pointing out some cases which were not attributable to the vaccine doesn't debunk the theory that the vaccine is killing and injuring athletes. The fact that the collapse rate went up right after the vaccine rollout is very telling and an objective person would not necessarily believe the theory right away but he would not simply dismiss it as you seem to be doing. Knee-jerk dismissal is not the scientific method.
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/z4jJHbhKF49B/
    https://rumble.com/search/all?q=increase in death rate after vaccine rollout

    You have an authoritative patronizing attitude but your actual argument is very weak.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2023
  21. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
  22. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Pathetic spam cut and paste. The viewers with intelligence will look at the data and the comparison and see very clearly that you are debunked!

    Yes it does. You are afraid to even admit the totally obvious.

    So what! This number is not accurately recorded.

    You are lying! I have detailed the complete failure in your sources so you repeating this deliberate disinformation is blatant dishonesty.

    Pathetic. Using the word "some" when the correct word(s) are "vast majority" - more of your dishonesty.

    Repeating the lie again. The "fact" you say has been thoroughly debunked.

    This from the joker who dismisses every single piece of rebuttal with as much scientific method as a chimp!

    You are the most wilfully ignorant person on the internet, your opinion even on this is utterly clueless.
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2023
  23. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The word keeps being used by me, but it is so very accurate. You are absolutely pathetic. You quote links and a study excerpt, ignore them completely, then dump another of your moronic batshit links!

    https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consu...-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19
    https://www.bmj.com/content/377/bmj.o917
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58170809
    https://www.kumc.edu/about/news/news-archive/jama-ivermectin-study.html

    "The ACTIV-6 study enrolled 1,800 participants. These participants received packages at their residences that contained either a dose of ivermectin or a placebo. Because it was a double-blind study, the participants did not know whether they received ivermectin or not. Of the initial enrollment, 1,591 participants with confirmed cases of COVID-19 reported receiving their shipment, and follow-up data were collected by 93 separate study sites across the United States.
    “This trial was innovative in that it used a remote clinical trial design, allowing people in all areas in the U.S. to enroll in a clinical trial and have the investigational drug shipped directly to their house,” explained Schwasinger-Schmidt. “This is different in that most clinical trials require participants to come to a center to receive study medication.”


    The study results
    When the participants’ data were analyzed, researchers came up with two results. The first was the median recovery time, or the amount of time it took patients to report having recovered from COVID-19. The second was the number of hospitalizations or deaths within each study group.

    Researchers found that the median recovery time for those taking ivermectin was 12 days, and those on the placebo was 13 days. There were 10 hospitalizations or deaths in the ivermectin group and nine in the placebo group. But these differences failed to be statistically significant, leading researchers to their conclusion that “these findings do not support the use of ivermectin in patients with mild to moderate COVID-19.”"
     
    Last edited: Feb 14, 2023
  24. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,371
    Likes Received:
    879
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The studies you posted came from the same group that says the vaccine is safe and effective. An objective person would at least suspect that those studies are bogus.
     
    Last edited: Feb 15, 2023
  25. Betamax101

    Betamax101 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    5,438
    Likes Received:
    857
    Trophy Points:
    113
    As noted, your moronic "scientific method" involves knee-jerk dismissal of ANYTHING that refutes your batshit! Pathetic.

    You have no objectivity whatsoever. A genuinely objective person would look at their own sources and see the blatant dishonesty! Objectivity involves looking at ALL evidence.

    An educational establishment carried out a trial with 1,800 participants and your pathetic conclusion is that it must be bogus! MEH!
     

Share This Page