Werewolf said:

---

A picture is worth a 1,000 words and typing not required

---

Would it be fair to say, since you guys are always saying the wu flu is safe for 99.9% of people with the endpoint being "death," that the Vax is safe for that age range since the myocarditis rate is between 52-105 per million (0.01%) with the endpoint being "myocarditis" which is treated with NSAIDs for a few days? Not saying I'd run out and inject my 15yo son if I had one with a normal immune system and bmi, just trying to make sure we look at all sides of this stuff.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

https://dailycaller.com/2022/05/24/long-covid-psychosomatic-coronavirus-symptoms-study-nih/

Quote:

---

New Study Finds That Long COVID May Not Actually Exist

A new National Institutes of Health (NIH) study is raising questions about just how real "long COVID" is.

The study found that there was no evidence of long-term COVID-19 infection in patients who were six or more weeks removed from the onset of symptoms, even if those patients reported that they were experiencing "long COVID." Further, the study found that individuals who reported having long COVID were disproportionately women and individuals with history of anxiety disorders.

"Exploratory studies found no evidence of persistent viral infection, autoimmunity, or abnormal immune activation in participants with PASC," the authors concluded. "Abnormal findings on physical examination and diagnostic testing were uncommon."

[...]

---

Welp. Another one (piece of the official narrative) bites the dust.

---

Actually, no, that wasn't the interpretation of the authors. Did you even read it?

1. The study included only 189 previously infected, all self enrolled more than 3 months after infection, from a catchment area of likely several million infections around DC. Not exactly a cross sectional analysis with much power. There were 84.1 million infections in DC... and they captured a whopping 189 of those, and you feel you can magically make solid conclusion based on that?

2. Given the reported long symptoms (fatigue, brain fog, anxiety etc) and the fact that very few of the Infected cohort were sick enough to be hospitalized, is it surprising there were very few with objective findings?

3. Again, another study using PCR data that you call bullsht, but quote the study like it's truth.

4. Even in this small cohort with self reported symptoms that they feel reduce their QOL, in this day and age where we are to recognize mental health/ post infection ot traumatic psychological issues/ anxiety and depression, you are calling bs on their post covid issues? Based on 189 people that had mild dz over 1 yr in DC? And your conclusuon is it doesn't exist? Come on, man.

5. Do you think residual symptoms studied in a cohort of icu survivors would have similar findings?

6. Have you ever considered that many infectious diseases have similar post-infectious syndromes? Do you call bullsht on those too?


https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/974572?src=wnl_tp10_daily_220530_MSCPEDIT&uac=414664EX&impID=4281921

Link to a more reasonable interpretation of the study imho

Werewolf said:

---

Dr. Mike Yeadon's Three Key Troubling Takeaways From This COVID Dilemma

1.) The international global response to all of this (lockdowns, masks, mandates). "That's a massive hazard, what your government's doing."

2.) The 'vaccines' don't work and are likely toxic by design. Our governments could be intentionally trying to kill us.

3.) "The passivity of most people, I think, is the most frightening part of this entire thing. . . . There's not a single peer of mine from any company across the world [that has spoken out]."

@CovidTruthNetworkOfficial

---

Right. The subjects in the small cohort with subjective symptoms of long covid are presumed unreliable because they're women with anxiety, but yeadon is a compellingly reliable source of all things covid. Dude was fired from Pfizer in 2011, worked in asthma and copd, has no background in vaccine work or virology or medical practice, was a staunch supporter of vaccines before a mysterious about face, and made 100s of millions selling his startup to Novartis making him part of the elite+ you hate until they spread unsupported bullsht. He's never treated a single patient with covid. He's never developed or studied an mRNA vaccine. There's a great reason none of his peers support his bullsht. And it's certainly not because his peers or my peers in medicine are bots controlled by big pharma. That's the biggest fallacy here, and damn that's saying something.

Werewolf said:

---

When a person 1st hears censored information or comments of a highly accomplished scientist - one that was a respected former Chief Scientist for a major pharmaceutical giant. Yeadon comes forward to resist the narrative .......at his peril.......as he stands in the way of the train barreling down the tracks out of control and an impending trainwreck.

Pretty strong words don't ya think?

---

Not really. Dude was not THE chief scientist. He was one of 1000+ Pfizer VPs, and led a team researching meds for asthma and COPD, and I don't think his background makes him uniquely qualified to make such statements that should be believed without question.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Head of Pharma at Bayer admits that the covid vaccines are "gene therapy" (VIDEO):

https://rumble.com/vwg9b5-head-of-pharma-at-bayer-admits-that-the-mrna-vaccines-are-gene-therapy.html

Quote:

---

Stefan Oelrich, head of Bayer's pharma department delivers a speech during the Opening Ceremony of the World Health Summit 2021.

Several things he said are significant here:

1. he lays out in simple terms that mRNA vaccines are, indeed cell and/or gene therapy. (whether this can be read to be an admission they are specifically gene therapy is debatable as he uses the two terms as a compound category)

2. he's thrilled that people accepted it. "if we had surveyed 2 years ago if people were willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body we would have probably had a 95% refusal rate."

3. he sees this as the big future thrust for Bayer.

4. and he sees the pandemic as "having opened eyes about innovation."

---

---

At this point after 600M doses, it's just semantics and opinions. Are they true gene therapy? Not really. Do you want to burn them in effigy if they are a form of gene therapy? Do they alter your genetic code? You act like it's some mystery how mRNA works.

Gene therapy will, in time, likely be the answer to many horrific diseases like ALS, Parkinson's, some cancers, rare diseases like Batten dz. Are you going to whine about it if you have a loved one with a devastating dz and gene therapy can cure it? I'd bet not. My niece had infantile Batten and it was horrific for her and our family. We tried stem cells in the brain, gene therapy, and everything we could. We raised 100s of thousands to support the labs and trials. It was too late for her, but the war continues for those families that are to come. I'd use pixie dust if it worked.

I just don't get what you're trying to accomplish here with the constancy of this. Trying to change our minds? You've made it clear you don't want the vaccine. Great! Your choice. We get it and we're so happy for you. But I will take a page from yall's hero Dr Yeadon and ask that you allow others to make their own decisions for them and their loved ones. Hell, man, most have already made their decision, so I guess you're just trying to make them feel like sht about it? That's really awesome, man.

Yeadon actually gives good advice here. Maybe yall should heed it.

So because this Bayer says it, then it's true and everybody else lied?? Ok. Sounds reasonable.

Stefan saying it doesn't "prove" anything, so you repeating it doesn't "prove " anything.

https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/blog/why-mrna-vaccines-arent-gene-therapies/

This explains it in simple terms.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Mormad said:

---

So because this Bayer says it, then it's true and everybody else lied?? Ok. Sounds reasonable.

Stefan saying it doesn't "prove" anything, so you repeating it doesn't "prove " anything.

---

Right, right....nothing proves anything anymore. It's all "just semantics and opinions" now. The truth cannot be found. There is no absolute truth anymore.

---

No. You're just not proving anything.

Mormad said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Head of Pharma at Bayer admits that the covid vaccines are "gene therapy" (VIDEO):

https://rumble.com/vwg9b5-head-of-pharma-at-bayer-admits-that-the-mrna-vaccines-are-gene-therapy.html

Quote:

---

Stefan Oelrich, head of Bayer's pharma department delivers a speech during the Opening Ceremony of the World Health Summit 2021.

Several things he said are significant here:

1. he lays out in simple terms that mRNA vaccines are, indeed cell and/or gene therapy. (whether this can be read to be an admission they are specifically gene therapy is debatable as he uses the two terms as a compound category)

2. he's thrilled that people accepted it. "if we had surveyed 2 years ago if people were willing to take gene or cell therapy and inject it into your body we would have probably had a 95% refusal rate."

3. he sees this as the big future thrust for Bayer.

4. and he sees the pandemic as "having opened eyes about innovation."

---

---

At this point after 600M doses, it's just semantics and opinions. Are they true gene therapy? Not really. Do you want to burn them in effigy if they are a form of gene therapy? Do they alter your genetic code? You act like it's some mystery how mRNA works.

Gene therapy will, in time, likely be the answer to many horrific diseases like ALS, Parkinson's, some cancers, rare diseases like Batten dz. Are you going to whine about it if you have a loved one with a devastating dz and gene therapy can cure it? I'd bet not. My niece had infantile Batten and it was horrific for her and our family. We tried stem cells in the brain, gene therapy, and everything we could. We raised 100s of thousands to support the labs and trials. It was too late for her, but the war continues for those families that are to come. I'd use pixie dust if it worked.

I just don't get what you're trying to accomplish here with the constancy of this. Trying to change our minds? You've made it clear you don't want the vaccine. Great! Your choice. We get it and we're so happy for you. But I will take a page from yall's hero Dr Yeadon and ask that you allow others to make their own decisions for them and their loved ones. Hell, man, most have already made their decision, so I guess you're just trying to make them feel like sht about it? That's really awesome, man.

---

My mother was diagnosed with Muscular Dystrophy in her early 20's and for the next 60+ years, she woke up every day hoping they would find a cure for her condition. Since the cause of her disease is genetic, she understood gene therapy would likely be the ultimate cure. We discussed it often over the years and she read everything she could on potential gene therapy treatments, in hopes something would be found. If medical science had found a treatment involving gene therapy, she would have been the first in line to sign up for the treatment. I have ZERO issue with gene therapies and their use to cure many severe diseases. I really do not understand the resistance to the use of gene therapy to cure diseases.

Just today, there were reports of a potential treatment/cure for metastatic pancreatic cancer - a treatment that involves genetic modification of a person's T-Cells. Seems like a good use of gene therapy, but if you believe people on this thread, gene therapy is the work of the devil and needs to be rejected.

Also, calling the mRNA vaccines "gene therapy" only proves someone does not know what "gene therapy" means. It is a term being thrown around to scare people into not getting a vaccine "proven" to be effective in reducing severe Covid infection and deaths.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Daviewolf83 said:

---

Also, calling the mRNA vaccines "gene therapy" only proves someone does not know what "gene therapy" means. It is a term being thrown around to scare people into not getting a vaccine "proven" to be effective in reducing severe Covid infection and deaths.

---

Then I guess the head of pharma at Bayer doesn't know what gene therapy is either. And when says that the covid mRNA vaxx is "gene therapy", he says it in a positive way, encouraging people to get all the next wave of gene therapy vaccines that they have coming down the pipeline.

When I call the mRNA vaxx gene therapy, I do so not to "scare" people. I do so because it is THE TRUTH. How people choose to view that truth (positively or negatively) is up to them. Me personally, I don't trust King Fauci and the NIH, Big Pharma, DARPA and whoever else to produce gene altering vaccines that will actually help and benefit humanity. Actually, I think their motivation is the 180 degree opposite of that.

I think God designed my genetics and immune system just fine. If you think Fauci, the NIH, and DARPA can improve it...then I guess a sucker is born every minute.

---

Hahaha, you don't see the complete irony in fully trusting "the head of pharma at Bayer " when he calls mRNA vaxxes "gene therapy" when it clearly is not while simultaneously screaming you don't trust "big pharma" and "whoever else to produce gene therapy" because you don't trust their "motivation?" That's almost as rich and bass ackwards as you constantly using PCR based data that you clearly opine as crap to "prove" your points.

Again, it is not a mystery how mRNA works. It is also not a mystery how gene therapy is defined. I offered a link that described it very simply for you. But you can't figure it out I guess. You say transgenders are trying to redefine biology, but you're guilty of the same thing for your own misguided agenda. You would rather trust the incorrect words of one big pharma man who you say you inherently dont trust because of "motivations." It's funny to me. Redefining biology. Who would have guessed.

Werewolf said:

---

GP, I say "happy train ride" to these two docs and anyone that wants to follow them over the cliff. I say let em' go. Focus on those dearest to you.

Unfortunately, we have family and friends on the same damn train. I continue to share the censored information as best I can and I have had significant results with 75-80% having vaccine regret.

The other issue is when too many of em' simply comply, roll up their sleeve and take the next jab as they're told or as fooled. I think we have 50% but we must all stand strong with a "he$$ no".

---

75-80% with vaccine regret because you've explained (completely erroneously with no supporting evidence) that they're on a train heading for a cliff? After they've chosen for themselves that it was right for them? Does that feel good to you? And that helps them how? That accomplishes what other than needlessly scaring them? I honestly can't believe 75-80% fell for the misinformation you provide here.

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Mormad said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

Daviewolf83 said:

---

Also, calling the mRNA vaccines "gene therapy" only proves someone does not know what "gene therapy" means. It is a term being thrown around to scare people into not getting a vaccine "proven" to be effective in reducing severe Covid infection and deaths.

---

Then I guess the head of pharma at Bayer doesn't know what gene therapy is either. And when says that the covid mRNA vaxx is "gene therapy", he says it in a positive way, encouraging people to get all the next wave of gene therapy vaccines that they have coming down the pipeline.

When I call the mRNA vaxx gene therapy, I do so not to "scare" people. I do so because it is THE TRUTH. How people choose to view that truth (positively or negatively) is up to them. Me personally, I don't trust King Fauci and the NIH, Big Pharma, DARPA and whoever else to produce gene altering vaccines that will actually help and benefit humanity. Actually, I think their motivation is the 180 degree opposite of that.

I think God designed my genetics and immune system just fine. If you think Fauci, the NIH, and DARPA can improve it...then I guess a sucker is born every minute.

---

Hahaha, you don't see the complete irony in fully trusting "the head of pharma at Bayer " when he calls mRNA vaxxes "gene therapy" when it clearly is not while simultaneously screaming you don't trust "big pharma" and "whoever else to produce gene therapy" because you don't trust their "motivation?" That's almost as rich and bass ackwards as you constantly using PCR based data that you clearly opine as crap to "prove" your points.

Again, it is not a mystery how mRNA works. It is also not a mystery how gene therapy is defined. I offered a link that described it very simply for you. But you can't figure it out I guess. You say transgenders are trying to redefine biology, but you're guilty of the same thing for your own misguided agenda. You would rather trust the incorrect words of one big pharma man who you say you inherently dont trust because of "motivations." It's funny to me. Redefining biology. Who would have guessed.

---

There's absolutely nothing contradictory in that. I don't trust the head of Bayer enough to actually take his advice and submit and be injected with their mystery magical juice, do I? I just "trust" him only so far as to agree that he's telling the truth about these mRNA vaccines being "gene therapy", that alters your DNA.

Stated another way, I believe Big Pharma that they are actually producing gene therapy (that alters your DNA), but I do NOT trust them enough to actually be a dupe and be injected with it. Why? Because I believe that these DNA-altering gene therapies will be harmful. How is there any "contradiction" in that?? There is absolutely none whatsoever.

---

Oh well, chalk it up as one more lie you believe