On February 15, 2021, Chad Roy, a moisture control specialist from Vermont, went viral on TikTok and on the legacy news media for his videos showing how water vapor from breathing bypasses masks, even N95s, and is widely dispersed.

His simple demonstration provides an elegant… pic.twitter.com/GfRE3byJV0

— Kevin Bass PhD MS (@kevinnbass) January 10, 2024

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

There actually is a bit of science in the form of the inverse square law, backing the 6' rule but that's bare minimum, should actually be more than 8' IMO. At these distances, in theory, your viral particle dose rate is greatly reduced by the square of the unit of distance from an infected person. However, there are other factors, such as modifications for unventilated indoor confined spaces plus time of exposure that also come into play. Mask use, however, is all but completely useless for viral transmission protection.

---

Does mask use impact the inverse square law, with regards to your viral particles reaching other people at a lower dose? Hint: Of course it does. Which is why this topic is so confusing for you guys... it requires thinking about others to understand the value of masks lowering community spread.

---

Even the communist New York Times propaganda rag admitted (based on the most rigorous scientific study conducted on the subject) that mask-wearing offered ZERO benefit WHATSOEVER to prevent spread of the Kung Flu.

Will communist Leftist libtards ever understand that? Probably not. They don't even understand basic fundamental scientific concepts such as the scientific FACTS that there are only 2 genders, men cannot become women, and that unborn children are living human beings.

Even if they ever do come to the understanding that a cloth mask cannot stop microscopic particles, commie tards will continue to wear their mask as a signal of their faux "virtue", a political statement of their religious devotion to Democrat-Leftist ideology, and a sign to their undying devotion to blindly believe whatever their Leftist overlords tell them to believe.


https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/opinion/do-mask-mandates-work.html

Quote:

---

The Mask Mandates Did Nothing. Will Any Lessons Be Learned?

Feb. 21, 2023

The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illnesses including Covid-19 was published late last month. Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist who is its lead author, were unambiguous.

"There is just no evidence that they" masks "make any difference," he told the journalist Maryanne Demasi. "Full stop."

But, wait, hold on. What about N-95 masks, as opposed to lower-quality surgical or cloth masks?

"Makes no difference none of it," said Jefferson.

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

There actually is a bit of science in the form of the inverse square law, backing the 6' rule but that's bare minimum, should actually be more than 8' IMO. At these distances, in theory, your viral particle dose rate is greatly reduced by the square of the unit of distance from an infected person. However, there are other factors, such as modifications for unventilated indoor confined spaces plus time of exposure that also come into play. Mask use, however, is all but completely useless for viral transmission protection.

---

Does mask use impact the inverse square law, with regards to your viral particles reaching other people at a lower dose? Hint: Of course it does. Which is why this topic is so confusing for you guys... it requires thinking about others to understand the value of masks lowering community spread.

---

At least one person on this board (can't remember if it's Oldsouljer or not) has extensive scientific knowledge about the topic from their work experience.

Conversation framing matters, and is what people most frequently. Ignore on here.

First, define whether we are talking about efficacy for individuals wearing properly fitting and appropriately rated masks, or mask mandates.

I think it's been pretty well demonstrated around the world that mask mandates don't work. You don't have high enough adoption rates of people properly wearing quality masks for it to impact population-level viral spread.

And unlike vaccines, which are quick and easy, require no repeated, inputs, or actions, and are impossible to "wear" improperly, I just don't think the limited or nonexistent benefit of mask mandates are worth the political/social capital they consume

The question of personal risk and behavior is different, though. My question for everyone that talks about masks not working is, if they were required to enter a room and share close quarters with a known Covid positive patient in the infectious stage, and they were handed a good mask to wear - if they wanted to - what would they choose?

Or ask the question even differently. If their elderly mother was required to enter the room with a known Covid positive patient, would they encourage her to wear the mask?

If they truly believe masks do nothing, they wouldn't wear the mask and they would tell their mother not to worry about it either.

I think almost everyone would wear the mask, or at least tell their mom to put it on herself.

Civilized said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

There actually is a bit of science in the form of the inverse square law, backing the 6' rule but that's bare minimum, should actually be more than 8' IMO. At these distances, in theory, your viral particle dose rate is greatly reduced by the square of the unit of distance from an infected person. However, there are other factors, such as modifications for unventilated indoor confined spaces plus time of exposure that also come into play. Mask use, however, is all but completely useless for viral transmission protection.

---

Does mask use impact the inverse square law, with regards to your viral particles reaching other people at a lower dose? Hint: Of course it does. Which is why this topic is so confusing for you guys... it requires thinking about others to understand the value of masks lowering community spread.

---

At least one person on this board (can't remember if it's Oldsouljer or not) has extensive scientific knowledge about the topic from their work experience.

Conversation framing matters, and is what people most frequently. Ignore on here.

First, define whether we are talking about efficacy for individuals wearing properly fitting and appropriately rated masks, or mask mandates.

I think it's been pretty well demonstrated around the world that mask mandates don't work. You don't have high enough adoption rates of people properly wearing quality masks for it to impact population-level viral spread.

And unlike vaccines, which are quick and easy, require no repeated, inputs, or actions, and are impossible to "wear" improperly, I just don't think the limited or nonexistent benefit of mask mandates are worth the political/social capital they consume

The question of personal risk and behavior is different, though. My question for everyone that talks about masks not working is, if they were required to enter a room and share close quarters with a known Covid positive patient in the infectious stage, and they were handed a good mask to wear - if they wanted to - what would they choose?

Or ask the question even differently. If their elderly mother was required to enter the room with a known Covid positive patient, would they encourage her to wear the mask?

If they truly believe masks do nothing, they wouldn't wear the mask and they would tell their mother not to worry about it either.

I think almost everyone would wear the mask, or at least tell their mom to put it on herself.

---

Wouldn't wear it. Wouldn't ask my mother to wear it. Because, science. Hilarious that you think people haven't lived this exact scenario multiple times over the past few years.

****, I've gone on vacation with friends with covid multiple times. My parents both have too (their children or grandchildren).

GuerrillaPack said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

There actually is a bit of science in the form of the inverse square law, backing the 6' rule but that's bare minimum, should actually be more than 8' IMO. At these distances, in theory, your viral particle dose rate is greatly reduced by the square of the unit of distance from an infected person. However, there are other factors, such as modifications for unventilated indoor confined spaces plus time of exposure that also come into play. Mask use, however, is all but completely useless for viral transmission protection.

---

Does mask use impact the inverse square law, with regards to your viral particles reaching other people at a lower dose? Hint: Of course it does. Which is why this topic is so confusing for you guys... it requires thinking about others to understand the value of masks lowering community spread.

---

Even the communist New York Times propaganda rag admitted (based on the most rigorous scientific study conducted on the subject) that mask-wearing offered ZERO benefit WHATSOEVER to prevent spread of the Kung Flu.

Will communist Leftist libtards ever understand that? Probably not. They don't even understand basic fundamental scientific concepts such as the scientific FACTS that there are only 2 genders, men cannot become women, and that unborn children are living human beings.

Even if they ever do come to the understanding that a cloth mask cannot stop microscopic particles, commie tards will continue to wear their mask as a signal of their faux "virtue", a political statement of their religious devotion to Democrat-Leftist ideology, and a sign to their undying devotion to blindly believe whatever their Leftist overlords tell them to believe.


https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/opinion/do-mask-mandates-work.html

Quote:

---

The Mask Mandates Did Nothing. Will Any Lessons Be Learned?

Feb. 21, 2023

The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illnesses including Covid-19 was published late last month. Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist who is its lead author, were unambiguous.

"There is just no evidence that they" masks "make any difference," he told the journalist Maryanne Demasi. "Full stop."

But, wait, hold on. What about N-95 masks, as opposed to lower-quality surgical or cloth masks?

"Makes no difference none of it," said Jefferson.

---

---

Here's a note from Cochrane, who published the study:

The Cochrane Review 'Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses' was published in January 2023 and has been widely misinterpreted.

Karla Soares-Weiser, Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, has responded on behalf of Cochrane:

Quote:

---

Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.

It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive. Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask-wearing itself reduces people's risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses.

---

Civilized said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

There actually is a bit of science in the form of the inverse square law, backing the 6' rule but that's bare minimum, should actually be more than 8' IMO. At these distances, in theory, your viral particle dose rate is greatly reduced by the square of the unit of distance from an infected person. However, there are other factors, such as modifications for unventilated indoor confined spaces plus time of exposure that also come into play. Mask use, however, is all but completely useless for viral transmission protection.

---

Does mask use impact the inverse square law, with regards to your viral particles reaching other people at a lower dose? Hint: Of course it does. Which is why this topic is so confusing for you guys... it requires thinking about others to understand the value of masks lowering community spread.

---

At least one person on this board (can't remember if it's Oldsouljer or not) has extensive scientific knowledge about the topic from their work experience.

Conversation framing matters, and is what people most frequently. Ignore on here.

First, define whether we are talking about efficacy for individuals wearing properly fitting and appropriately rated masks, or mask mandates.

I think it's been pretty well demonstrated around the world that mask mandates don't work. You don't have high enough adoption rates of people properly wearing quality masks for it to impact population-level viral spread.

And unlike vaccines, which are quick and easy, require no repeated, inputs, or actions, and are impossible to "wear" improperly, I just don't think the limited or nonexistent benefit of mask mandates are worth the political/social capital they consume

The question of personal risk and behavior is different, though. My question for everyone that talks about masks not working is, if they were required to enter a room and share close quarters with a known Covid positive patient in the infectious stage, and they were handed a good mask to wear - if they wanted to - what would they choose?

Or ask the question even differently. If their elderly mother was required to enter the room with a known Covid positive patient, would they encourage her to wear the mask?

If they truly believe masks do nothing, they wouldn't wear the mask and they would tell their mother not to worry about it either.

I think almost everyone would wear the mask, or at least tell their mom to put it on herself.

---

Masks quickly turn into a circular argument. "Masks don't work because nobody else wears them" gets conflated with "we don't wear masks because masks don't work".

If masks don't do anything, why is every doctor working in the Covid wing of every hospital on Earth wearing a mask, along with other PPE? Why not just skip the mask?

So yes, conversation framing matters a lot here:

• Does the inverse square law of breathing on others reduce viral spread? Yes. Masks amplify that effect.
• Do masks provide any protection for you if no one else is wearing a mask? Not 100%. A properly fitted N95 in many scenarios will provide some protection from Omicron. A loose fitting cloth mask? Basically zero.
• If you sit in a closed room with a sick person for an hour, will an N95 alone protect you? Probably not.

So do masks "work"? Yes, depending on what you mean by the question. Were they better than nothing before the vaccine to help limit spread in the places where most people didn't go feral over mask mandates? Yes. Are most people only focused on whether masks protect them, but too self-absorbed to wear a mask in Wal-Mart when they're super-contagious? Also, yes.

SmaptyWolf said:

---

GuerrillaPack said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

There actually is a bit of science in the form of the inverse square law, backing the 6' rule but that's bare minimum, should actually be more than 8' IMO. At these distances, in theory, your viral particle dose rate is greatly reduced by the square of the unit of distance from an infected person. However, there are other factors, such as modifications for unventilated indoor confined spaces plus time of exposure that also come into play. Mask use, however, is all but completely useless for viral transmission protection.

---

Does mask use impact the inverse square law, with regards to your viral particles reaching other people at a lower dose? Hint: Of course it does. Which is why this topic is so confusing for you guys... it requires thinking about others to understand the value of masks lowering community spread.

---

Even the communist New York Times propaganda rag admitted (based on the most rigorous scientific study conducted on the subject) that mask-wearing offered ZERO benefit WHATSOEVER to prevent spread of the Kung Flu.

Will communist Leftist libtards ever understand that? Probably not. They don't even understand basic fundamental scientific concepts such as the scientific FACTS that there are only 2 genders, men cannot become women, and that unborn children are living human beings.

Even if they ever do come to the understanding that a cloth mask cannot stop microscopic particles, commie tards will continue to wear their mask as a signal of their faux "virtue", a political statement of their religious devotion to Democrat-Leftist ideology, and a sign to their undying devotion to blindly believe whatever their Leftist overlords tell them to believe.


https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/opinion/do-mask-mandates-work.html

Quote:

---

The Mask Mandates Did Nothing. Will Any Lessons Be Learned?

Feb. 21, 2023

The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illnesses including Covid-19 was published late last month. Its conclusions, said Tom Jefferson, the Oxford epidemiologist who is its lead author, were unambiguous.

"There is just no evidence that they" masks "make any difference," he told the journalist Maryanne Demasi. "Full stop."

But, wait, hold on. What about N-95 masks, as opposed to lower-quality surgical or cloth masks?

"Makes no difference none of it," said Jefferson.

---

---

Here's a note from Cochrane, who published the study:

The Cochrane Review 'Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses' was published in January 2023 and has been widely misinterpreted.

Karla Soares-Weiser, Editor-in-Chief of the Cochrane Library, has responded on behalf of Cochrane:

Quote:

---

Many commentators have claimed that a recently-updated Cochrane Review shows that 'masks don't work', which is an inaccurate and misleading interpretation.

It would be accurate to say that the review examined whether interventions to promote mask wearing help to slow the spread of respiratory viruses, and that the results were inconclusive. Given the limitations in the primary evidence, the review is not able to address the question of whether mask-wearing itself reduces people's risk of contracting or spreading respiratory viruses.

---

---

Karla Soares-Weiser is the one who is misrepresenting the findings of the study. The actual authors of the study never state that their findings are "inconclusive". So Karla is flat out lying. To the contrary, the authors of the study did, in fact, issue some conclusions and findings.

Here is the quote from the actual study itself, where it explicitly states that the wearing of medical or surgical masks "makes little to no difference" in how many people caught covid, compared to wearing no mask at all.

Quote:

---

We obtained the following results:

Medical or surgical masks

Ten studies took place in the community, and two studies in healthcare workers. Compared with wearing no mask in the community studies only, wearing a mask may make little to no difference in how many people caught a flulike illness/COVIDlike illness (9 studies; 276,917 people); and probably makes little or no difference in how many people have flu/COVID confirmed by a laboratory test (6 studies; 13,919 people). Unwanted effects were rarely reported; discomfort was mentioned.

---

TheStorm said:

---

Smapty once again, has no clue who he's f'n arguing with... Civ admits that he does, but still chooses to argue with the guy anyway...

---

Nothing against Oldsouljer's experience, but it's extremely unlikely that it trumps the top epidemiologists in the country, including the ones running the NIH the CDC. If you think it does, you've had your brain boiled by politicians and conspiracy crackpots.

FWIW, Oldsouljer was literally just talking about how the inverse square law (a.k.a. distancing) does reduce viral spread. If that's the case, how could you possibly argue that masks don't improve that effect?

SmaptyWolf said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

Smapty once again, has no clue who he's f'n arguing with... Civ admits that he does, but still chooses to argue with the guy anyway...

---

Nothing against Oldsouljer's experience, but it's extremely unlikely that it trumps the top epidemiologists in the country, including the ones running the NIH the CDC. If you think it does, you've had your brain boiled by politicians and conspiracy crackpots.

---

Those people have ZERO credibility whatsoever - Fauci, Walensky, and everyone else toeing the line for the "official" narrative on the covid scamdemic. They lied over and over and over, as is well documented. They know that wearing a cloth mask provides zero protection whatsoever. They just lied to the public about it.

Prior to 2020, there had been dozens of studies over the many previous decades, proving that masks provided no benefit to preventing spread of infection (including, for example, studies done of mask-wearing during the the 1918-20 Spanish flu outbreak). And at the very beginning of covid (in the first month or two), even Fauci came out and said that people should not be wearing masks. Then, suddenly, about 3-4 months into covid they came out with a few bogus "studies" claiming that masks did provide a benefit, and the narrative changed.

This is the fundamental difference, it seems, between so-called "conspiracy theorists" and other anti-Establishment people versus those who still have this unbreakable faith in the so-called "experts" and "authorities" in the "Establishment" institutions and the "mainstream" news....and that difference is, the "conspiracy theorists" can see these dozens of cases of the "Establishment" (government, "mainstream" media) lying and perpetrating frauds and scams on these issues of MASSIVE importance (eg, covid, the real reason for major wars, the "climate change" scam, 9/11, etc), and when we see them perpetrating these gargantuan frauds on issues of such monumental importance, we make the judgment that the "Establishment" has no credibility whatsoever and most of us make the determination that the "Establishment" are, in fact, enemies of the public who are knowingly perpetrating frauds for some malevolent agenda.

Meanwhile, the people on the other side are either not paying attention and oblivious to all the massive levels of deception from the Establishment or are under a form of Stockholm Syndrome where they psychologically can't deal with the reality of the situation and it is too mentally traumatizing to admit the reality of the world we live in (in which it is a fact that the Establishment/government are a criminal cabal that are enemies of the people). Or, these people know that the Establishment are a criminal cabal, but they are wicked themselves and support this malevolent agenda and so knowingly choose to side with it.

packgrad said:

---

It's a cult.

My wife and I were both sick with some sort of virus over Christmas. We told our families of our condition, but all still wanted us to attend. 75+ year old aunt and uncles, 75+ year old parents, babies, teenagers, the whole spectrum of age groups. And we didn't even think about testing for Covid.

Who still tests for Covid?

Jesus.... get over it folks.

---

Strangely, when my entire household came down with it in September, my spouse insisted I test, and the elderly in-laws living with me had a bunch of test kits, so……it wasn't a fun month but I got over it fairly quickly excepting the month long cough, same as when I had it in early 2020…but there were no tests back then.

Oldsouljer said:

---

packgrad said:

---

It's a cult.

My wife and I were both sick with some sort of virus over Christmas. We told our families of our condition, but all still wanted us to attend. 75+ year old aunt and uncles, 75+ year old parents, babies, teenagers, the whole spectrum of age groups. And we didn't even think about testing for Covid.

Who still tests for Covid?

Jesus.... get over it folks.

---

Strangely, when my entire household came down with it in September, my spouse insisted I test, and the elderly in-laws living with me had a bunch of test kits, so……it wasn't a fun month but I got over it fairly quickly excepting the month long cough, same as when I had it in early 2020…but there were no tests back then.

---

I would not put that damn swab up my nose..... I would not trust anything associated with the plandemic.

............but #Nappy you keep putting that COVID jab in your arm. I'm count'n on ya to come through.

Interesting article here.

Citing the crucial scams of covid and "climate change" that they are using to enact tyranny across the world, the lying Marxist NWO shills in the legacy Establishment Lamestream media are ever more concerned that too many people are rejecting them and going to alternative sources of information on the internet, as this Vice article from a few weeks ago shows. They are pushing for Google and other Big Tech companies to implement further measures to censor non-Establishment voices/sources.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/v7bjpm/scientists-explain-why-doing-your-own-research-leads-to-buying-conspiracies

Quote:

---

Scientists Explain Why 'Doing Your Own Research' Leads to Believing Conspiracies

December 21, 2023

---

I find it so hilarious how the Communist Establishment has sought to re-define the word "conspiracy" to mean something along the lines of "a false belief or theory". This is an Orwellian agenda to attempt to re-define and diminish our language. No, that's not what the word means. Look it up in the dictionary. The definition of the word "conspiracy" actually means "a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful".

There are REAL conspiracies going on in the world. Not all conspiracies are "theories dreamed up by paranoid people with no evidence". There are thousands of real conspiracies going on right now - and especially in governments, big corporations, and other spheres of power. You don't think, for example, that there are at least hundreds of major corporations currently engaged in all sorts of illegal schemes to defraud, crimes to gain competitive advantage, etc?

The same thing going on in governments, as it is easy to see when looking at foreign governments throughout history -- such, as acknowledging that obviously the governments of Soviet Russia, Communist China, Venezuela, Cuba, or North Korea are incredibly wicked and tyrannical and engaging in all sorts of conspiracies and horrendous crimes against their own people. But people are always propagandized to believe that the government (and Establishment media, academia, etc) in the country that they live in "could not possibly" be tyrannical or corrupt, and therefore anyone who believes that is a "conspiracy theorist".

Never a huge fan of this QB just like I was never a fan of Trump. Now, this guy is numero uno with me.......both guys are patriots.

Aaron Rodgers Exposes The Shocking Truth About The COVID Death Protocols on ESPN

First, he explained how early treatments had to be vilified to make way for the COVID-19 "vaccines."

"In order for the vaccines to get emergency authorization ... it had to be that there were zero… pic.twitter.com/HfW4B0RZ1H

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) January 10, 2024

#Nappy needs a shot, he'll be protected if he'll wear a mask too.

🇬🇧 ‘In shock’: Two British Airways flight attendants Die Suddenly
An airline has been rocked by the sudden death of two flight attendants; one while on the plane and another in a hotel during a stopover.
I'm sure this happens all the time right?🤔 pic.twitter.com/YTcyAbVr5w

— Alix (@AlixG_2) January 7, 2024

Say it ain't so #Gobbler! Need ur input.

Doctor's finally opening their eyes to cancer rates increasing...they still won't connect the dots.🤔

Cancer is striking more young people, leaving doctors racing to figure out why. “I don’t have a stomach anymore.”

(Wall Street Journal) Cancer is hitting more young people in… pic.twitter.com/jnvbGEJQJ3

— floridanow1 (@floridanow1) January 11, 2024

For the IQ's at the level of #Nappy.

I got suspended 5 times (each suspension got longer and longer) for posting about Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. Then this little doozy of a video got me banned for a year until Musk freed me. pic.twitter.com/8XcGEdd4zH

— LadyPatriot 🍊#Trump2024 (@Pete2Shawn) January 13, 2024

Remember - if you were actually paying close attention - Australia locked down and force vaccinated people even native tribes were coraled and forced vaccinated.

NEW ARTICLE: Australia is building World's Largest Sudden Cardiac Arrest Registry to solve the "mystery" of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Sudden Cardiac Deaths

25,000 Australians now have HEART ATTACKS outside of hospital every year.

90% of these will NOT SURVIVE (22,500 Deaths),… pic.twitter.com/nP8acpvYSX

— William Makis MD (@MakisMD) January 9, 2024

PUBLIC HEALTH NOTICE for #Nappy. Just in case you missed it, pal. Might even be an all-in-one that you can get. Certainly you've got the mask already.



Before the pandemic, doctors recommended just one annual shot the flu vaccine to get you through respiratory disease season. Now health officials say a flu shot isn't enough to keep you safe from contagious and potentially life-threatening viruses.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued new vaccine recommendations Thursday that detail who should get what and when. Several new vaccines are listed for children and adults, including the latest for Covid-19 and shots for respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV, and mpox.

SmaptyWolf said:

---

Jtbridges317 said:

---

SmaptyWolf said:

---

TheStorm said:

---

Smapty once again, has no clue who he's f'n arguing with... Civ admits that he does, but still chooses to argue with the guy anyway...

---

Nothing against Oldsouljer's experience, but it's extremely unlikely that it trumps the top epidemiologists in the country, including the ones running the NIH the CDC. If you think it does, you've had your brain boiled by politicians and conspiracy crackpots.

FWIW, Oldsouljer was literally just talking about how the inverse square law (a.k.a. distancing) does reduce viral spread. If that's the case, how could you possibly argue that masks don't improve that effect?

---

Tell me you're a vegan without telling me you're a vegan

---

Tell me you didn't graduate high school without telling me you didn't graduate high school.

---

#Nappy, here's the link........just look'n out for ya pal!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/other/these-are-the-new-vaccines-you-should-get-and-it-s-not-just-covid-19/ar-AA1mP4a6?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=567737e63d4345759bdefcb52fed53bb&ei=17

This popped in my recommendations this morning, and worth a listen. Short clips from an interview with a prominent Danish doctor, Peter Gotzsche, from at least 2015 (long before the scamdemic), talking about how Big Pharma is organized crime.

Discusses, for instance, how Big Pharma drugs (or "doctor error") are the 3rd leading cause of death in the United States (after heart disease and cancer), killing at least 200,000 people per year.

IQ of 80 should've been able to figure it out by now. Waiting on Sieve, Gobbler and Nappy............I still believe they're got 80 plus points.

WHO calls for World Pandemic Treaty to Prepare for Deadly ‘Disease X’ - “Our Common Enemy”

MY THOUGHTS:
They can wrap the Pandemic Treaty in a pretty bow all they want…but what it really does is force the United States into giving up our sovereignty to a foreign entity.

They… pic.twitter.com/017gPtkVzs

— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) January 21, 2024

🔔The Chinese Communist Party has an Evil plan to use CCP Virus and Vaccine to destroy the US and the world. Miles Guo, the first person who alerted the world about the CCP Virus, is now silenced by DOJ. Why?

🚨🇺🇸COVId-19 vaccines are being used for the mass genocide against… pic.twitter.com/p8hwDE4tLX

— dun chuan (@NFSC88JJ) December 24, 2023

#Nappy, certainly there will be a new jab on the market to protect you. I bet you can get it in combo form.........COVID plus the X. Mask up and do your part, bud. Our very lives depend on it.

NEWS: Disease X is planned and, I believe, ready for release just in time for election season and the WHO treaty. The WEF just talked about it endlessly in Davos. If you want #Trump2024 or simply to remain a sovereign nation this is important. #COVID #vaccines #corruption… pic.twitter.com/OS1jHT3BEa

— Tom Renz (@RenzTom) January 21, 2024

I chased this down and it's 100% true.

Mike Dickson, a big pharma journalist who heckled Djokovic and tried to railroad his career for his refusal to take the Covid Vaccines suddenly collapsed and died at the Australian Open. pic.twitter.com/IQWzxjpmsM

— Citizen Free Press (@CitizenFreePres) January 20, 2024

Tennis star Novak Djokovic recently “raised the bar” in a tweet addressing one of his “biggest" critics' recent death, Sky News host James Macpherson says.

“One of Novak’s biggest critics, sports journalist Mike Dickson, tragically collapsed and died while covering the tennis.. pic.twitter.com/5Pm52mbsxB

— PowerWatcher (@JohnPow51948051) January 22, 2024

#Nappy, please disregard. This is disinformation provided by a MAGA medical pawn.

Search for “Pfizer 5.3.6 post marketing” read it yourself!! https://t.co/CLp4JKHiII

— Theresa M Long, MD, MPH, FS (@LTCTheresaLong) November 30, 2022