Pfizer knew and lied

My niece has an effective method of avoiding vaccination. If she sees a needle approaching she faints. I suspect she may not be unique in this regard.
 

Last edited:
Lilac said:
Not denialism at all. Certain organizations & individuals stand a lot to lose if the truth comes out which one day it will.

Many have been hurt not only by vaccine mandates, but from the lockdowns as well. Families were seperated from loved ones when they shouldn't have been. Children have been set back in their education, social development & have been taught to fear. Our economies are pretty much messed up & show no true signs of getting better despite what we hear.

IMO, there are still people who won't let it go & move on.
Click to expand...
I think the covid narrative is pretty much unraveling as the world moves on to something else. It leaves many stuck in the aftermath if they cannot admit it was all an experiment.
 
chic said:
I think the covid narrative is pretty much unraveling as the world moves on to something else. It leaves many stuck in the aftermath if they cannot admit it was all an experiment.
Click to expand...
I, too, think the covid narrative is pretty much unraveling. The world wishes it could move on to something else, but covid is real. It leaves many stuck in the aftermath if they cannot admit it is real.

My opinion, and I personally know and speak with people who have worked for the CDC for decades, and also work with WHO. They are truthful, dedicated people who would not lie to me about this issue.
 

Right Now said:
I, too, think the covid narrative is pretty much unraveling. The world wishes it could move on to something else, but covid is real. It leaves many stuck in the aftermath if they cannot admit it is real.

My opinion, and I personally know and speak with people who have worked for the CDC for decades, and also work with WHO. They are truthful, dedicated people who would not lie to me about this issue.
Click to expand...
When careers are at stake, anyone would lie.
 
Alligatorob said:
Reminds me of a favorite quote:

For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.
-H. L. Mencken

And social media isn't helping.

Don't be too sure of that. Reading and researching posts here did change my mind about mask wearing. I thought that masks would both protect well people from getting sick and sick people from spreading. After a couple of people posted some pretty good links to studies I now believe that while masks can stop the sick from spreading viruses, I no longer believe they protect well people wearing them. As a result I now try to mask whenever I am sick and going out, Covid or any cold or flu. Sometimes even after an exposure when I feel fine. However if not required I don't mask when I am well and pretty sure I'm staying that way.

A relatively minor thing, but it was a mind change. We should all be open to it.
Click to expand...

Alligatorob said:
The masks don't filter out individual viruses, that is why they don't much help the healthy. However they do filter out or remove some aerosols and disperse the breath of a sick person removing some virus and dispersing other. To get Covid and most viruses we have to be exposed to a lot, dispersing the breath of an ill person reduces that risk. It's the reason the plexiglas barriers work.

CDC is primarily funded by Congress, our taxes mostly. The Pharmaceutical companies pay into that, but so do we and a lot of others. The CDC does accept gifts, both directly and through the CDC Foundation. In 2021 out of a budget of $7.8 billion these gifts only represented about $21 million, 0.2% of their budget. Some of these gifts did come from Pharmaceutical companies. see https://www.cdc.gov/partners/gift-funding.html#:~:text=The main source of CDC,determined by the U.S. Congress.

I have a healthy skepticism of what the CDC says, particularly interpretations and recommendations that are not backed up by data. I think they are too politically influenced and in many ways just another government bureaucracy. However they are one of the best repositories for health data. And some of what I cite are peer reviewed papers, not written by CDC employees that are posted on their website. And I do not only cite CDC or papers on the CDC website. I have cited many other sources, but usually only when I believe what they are saying is databased and peer reviewed.

What sources do you believe are the best for understanding these issues?
Click to expand...
I agree that mask wearing is mostly for the protection of others but if someone near me sneezed I would be glad I was wearing one.
 
Right Now said:
I personally know and speak with people who have worked for the CDC for decades, and also work with WHO. They are truthful, dedicated people who would not lie to me about this issue.
Click to expand...
That is a good point, and in my experience true, for most people. In the CDC, as with all US government agencies, whistleblowers are well protected, and most employees are honest people. This is, in part, why peer review works so well it makes sure things are reviewed by independent experts, who are mostly honest people with little incentive to lie.
win231 said:
When careers are at stake, anyone would lie.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't, would you?

And in US government organizations like CDC careers are rarely at stake over things like this. The exception may be some of the senior management, such as political appointees, that is why I said CDC is too politically influenced. That influence effects some of the interpretation and guidance issued, and can sometimes impact which studies get funded. Too much of that in the US government.
 
win231 said:
When careers are at stake, anyone would lie.
Click to expand...
That's exactly what happened. There was no discussion, no debate, no sharing of ideas. There were just mandates. Do this or else. And careers were lost by those physicians who spoke out defiantly before they were censored into silence or vilified and discredited as conspiracy theorists. But I've been watching conspiracy theorists proven right quite a bit in recent years. They were right about covid in my opinion and the fact that it was profit driven and furthered the agenda of the WEF by creating the atmosphere where 24/7 surveillance of entire populations seemed like a worthy idea.
 
Last edited:
ElCastor said:
Far be it from me to disagree with Biden, but with the rapidity Covid evolves (I’ve had it twice) I have to wonder if we’ve seen the end of it.
Click to expand...
We still have Covid to contend with. President Biden stated the pandemic itself was over, not that the virus was over.
This link title is misleading.

seadoug said:
I have an opinion on this, but in this case I'm just sharing info...

https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/payers/biden-declares-covid-19-pandemic-over
Click to expand...
In an interview with 60 Minutes, he announced an end to the COVID-19 pandemic. “The pandemic is over,” the President said, although he added that “we still have a problem with COVID. We’re still doing a lot of work on it ... but the pandemic is over. If you notice, no one’s wearing masks. Everybody seems to be in pretty good shape. And so, I think it’s changing.”

Biden’s declaration caught some of his own medical experts by surprise according to Politico. Other experts and current case data indicate that perhaps the “out of the woods” metaphor might not be as good a fit as the “wave” metaphor when talking about COVID-19. It’s something the country will probably have to deal with every year, the way it deals with influenza.
 
The following quotes are from an article on newsweek titled:
It's Time for the Scientific Community to Admit We Were Wrong About COVID and It Cost Lives.

It's an opinion piece written by a medical student (MD/PhD student). The link to the article is at the end of the quoted sections.

"As a medical student and researcher, I staunchly supported the efforts of the public health authorities when it came to COVID-19. I believed that the authorities responded to the largest public health crisis of our lives with compassion, diligence, and scientific expertise. I was with them when they called for lockdowns, vaccines, and boosters.

I was wrong. We in the scientific community were wrong. And it cost lives.

I can see now that the scientific community from the CDC to the WHO to the FDA and their representatives, repeatedly overstated the evidence and misled the public about its own views and policies, including on natural vs. artificial immunity, school closures and disease transmission, aerosol spread, mask mandates, and vaccine effectiveness and safety, especially among the young. All of these were scientific mistakes at the time, not in hindsight. Amazingly, some of these obfuscations continue to the present day.

But perhaps more important than any individual error was how inherently flawed the overall approach of the scientific community was, and continues to be. It was flawed in a way that undermined its efficacy and resulted in thousands if not millions of preventable deaths.

What we did not properly appreciate is that preferences determine how scientific expertise is used, and that our preferences might be—indeed, our preferences were—very different from many of the people that we serve. We created policy based on our preferences, then justified it using data. And then we portrayed those opposing our efforts as misguided, ignorant, selfish, and evil.

We made science a team sport, and in so doing, we made it no longer science. It became us versus them, and "they" responded the only way anyone might expect them to: by resisting."


I think the above line, that I bolded, sums up why so many no longer trust the medical community. Science is supposed to be a continuous search for facts, rather than a team sport.


"Our emotional response and ingrained partisanship prevented us from seeing the full impact of our actions on the people we are supposed to serve. We systematically minimized the downsides of the interventions we imposed—imposed without the input, consent, and recognition of those forced to live with them. In so doing, we violated the autonomy of those who would be most negatively impacted by our policies: the poor, the working class, small business owners, Blacks and Latinos, and children. These populations were overlooked because they were made invisible to us by their systematic exclusion from the dominant, corporatized media machine that presumed omniscience.

Most of us did not speak up in support of alternative views, and many of us tried to suppress them. When strong scientific voices like world-renowned Stanford professors John Ioannidis, Jay Bhattacharya, and Scott Atlas, or University of California San Francisco professors Vinay Prasad and Monica Gandhi, sounded the alarm on behalf of vulnerable communities, they faced severe censure by relentless mobs of critics and detractors in the scientific community—often not on the basis of fact but solely on the basis of differences in scientific opinion."

"And this despite the fact that pandemic policy was created by a razor-thin sliver of American society who anointed themselves to preside over the working class—members of academia, government, medicine, journalism, tech, and public health, who are highly educated and privileged. From the comfort of their privilege, this elite prizes paternalism, as opposed to average Americans who laud self-reliance and whose daily lives routinely demand that they reckon with risk. That many of our leaders neglected to consider the lived experience of those across the class divide is unconscionable.

Incomprehensible to us due to this class divide, we severely judged lockdown critics as lazy, backwards, even evil. We dismissed as "grifters" those who represented their interests. We believed "misinformation" energized the ignorant, and we refused to accept that such people simply had a different, valid point of view."

"Intellectual elitism, credentialism, and classism must end. Restoring trust in public health—and our democracy—depends on it."

It's Time for the Scientific Community to Admit We Were Wrong About COVID and It Cost Lives


The following is a quote from Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements

"Scratch an intellectual, and you find a would-be aristocrat who loathes the sight, the sound and the smell of common folk."
 
Alligatorob said:
Other than Covid what conspiracy theories have you seen proven right? Not questioning you, just interested.

And what is the "WEF"?
Click to expand...
The WEF is the world economic forum. Other conspiracy theories - the green agenda screams out at me. Is the war in the Ukarine valid? People are suffering as people caught up in wars always are but is this as much Russia's fault or does it profit the U.S. and globalism to promote war in the area? Is it really Nato vs Russia as opposed to Russia vs the Ukraine? It's impoverishing people globally and the less wealth individuals have as disposable income the happier globalists will be because then there will be less private ownership of everything. That's another globalist goal, government owned and regulated everything.
 
Right Now said:
We still have Covid to contend with. President Biden stated the pandemic itself was over, not that the virus was over.
This link title is misleading.
Click to expand...

OK, seems reasonable. On the mask thing, I have long since given up on wearing masks, with one exception. The wife and I are Kaiser subscribers - a holdover from our working days. You cannot enter a Kaiser facility without a mask. A guard at the main entrance will stop you, hand you a mask, and ask that you put it on.

The fact that we have given up on masks does not mean that we believe Covid and vaccination / boosting is a hoax. Those who contend that it is are beyond foolish, and are endangering the lives of those (particularly of our age) who might be lured into believing them.
 
chic said:
The WEF is the world economic forum. Other conspiracy theories - the green agenda screams out at me. Is the war in the Ukraine valid? People are suffering as people caught up in wars always are but is this as much Russia's fault or does it profit the U.S. and globalism to promote war in the area? Is it really Nato vs Russia as opposed to Russia vs the Ukraine? It's impoverishing people globally and the less wealth individuals have as disposable income the happier globalists will be because then there will be less private ownership of everything. That's another globalist goal, government owned and regulated everything.
Click to expand...
Thanks @chic I appreciate the answer.

I have heard the term conspiracy theory a lot, but never really thought about what it means, so I looked it up and found this definition:

Conspiracy theory, an attempt to explain harmful or tragic events as the result of the actions of a small powerful group. Such explanations reject the accepted narrative surrounding those events...

Do you see such a group behind the green agenda? I spent my career in the environmental business, an engineer cleaning up contaminated sites mostly. I certainly see a lot of wrong headed thinking and misdirection, but not sure I see any one "small powerful group" behind it. There are lots of environmental organizations, I think some are mostly for the good, and some are not, but can't point to any one single such group.

Kind of the same story on the war in Ukraine, I agree it is a bad thing, and there are legitimate arguments across the spectrum. But if I had to pick out a single party to blame I'd say Putin and his cronies. But there are others to share that blame.

I looked up the WEF, it seems an interesting organization, they mostly sponsor a big international forum, but probably do other things (https://www.weforum.org/). It's hard to see how they have much power, except to sway public thinking. Do you see them as one of these "small powerful groups"?

I can understand the "reject the accepted narrative surrounding those events" part of the definition. Often our "accepted narrative" is too simplistic and misguided.
 
Alligatorob said:
Thanks @chic I appreciate the answer.

I have heard the term conspiracy theory a lot, but never really thought about what it means, so I looked it up and found this definition:

Conspiracy theory, an attempt to explain harmful or tragic events as the result of the actions of a small powerful group. Such explanations reject the accepted narrative surrounding those events...

Do you see such a group behind the green agenda? I spent my career in the environmental business, an engineer cleaning up contaminated sites mostly. I certainly see a lot of wrong headed thinking and misdirection, but not sure I see any one "small powerful group" behind it. There are lots of environmental organizations, I think some are mostly for the good, and some are not, but can't point to any one single such group.

Kind of the same story on the war in Ukraine, I agree it is a bad thing, and there are legitimate arguments across the spectrum. But if I had to pick out a single party to blame I'd say Putin and his cronies. But there are others to share that blame.

I looked up the WEF, it seems an interesting organization, they mostly sponsor a big international forum, but probably do other things (https://www.weforum.org/). It's hard to see how they have much power, except to sway public thinking. Do you see them as one of these "small powerful groups"?

I can understand the "reject the accepted narrative surrounding those events" part of the definition. Often our "accepted narrative" is too simplistic and misguided.
Click to expand...
covid 11 wef.jpg

Enough said. This guy is my definition of evil.
 
chic said:
Enough said. This guy is my definition of evil.
Click to expand...
I had never heard of him, so I looked him, Yuval Noah Harari, up and found this in Wikipedia:

On 22 July 2022, Current Affairs (magazine) published the article "The Dangerous Populist Science of Yuval Noah Harari", pointing out the lack of scientific support throughout his books: "The best-selling author is a gifted storyteller and popular speaker. But he sacrifices science for sensationalism, and his work is riddled with errors."

Here is a link to the full article: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2022/07/the-dangerous-populist-science-of-yuval-noah-harari

I believe the sacrificing science for sensationalism thing is at the root of many of our problems.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top