3
CarbonMan 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yes, you are right they didn't seem to wait 6 months to publish the data. But they continued the clinical trial after publishing the efficacy. Then they later nuked the trial by vaccinating the people in the placebo group (only after the deaths from all causes in the vaccinate group had surpassed the placebo group).

So they have trial data for more than 6 months. I not sure exactly how long, but in februari 2021 they seem to start vaccinating the placebo, while the data which was submitted to the FDA is from the months leading up to november 2020. So thats about 3 extra months of data collection which should have shown wanning efficacy very clearly.

1
CarbonMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

naw I don't believe that, you can test your antibody response quite easily after getting this therapy. But still, they are playing a dirty game. And we gotta keep pressing facts so that people resposible for giving this to kids are charged.

2
CarbonMan 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well plenty of people who are vax have no problems att all, but the same is true the people who got the actual virus.

I get the for many people the rewards outweights risk with the mRNA therapy but I cant shake the feeling that they are hiding something. I personally know a person who has got a real vaccine injury.

2
CarbonMan 2 points ago +2 / -0

is this the 3 one in a year? Before last year I hadn't seen a single case... strange.

1
CarbonMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

Clear cut defemation! He never took a gun across state line! Sue him!

1
CarbonMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, I agree, I really think my immune system wont have a problem. If I thought so then I would propably take the vax.

But better safe than sorry!

2
CarbonMan 2 points ago +2 / -0

Good info, ordered some Quercetin! Can't unforuntaly get Azithromycin here without a perscription.

1
CarbonMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, I found Quercetin here, so I ordered some! Thanks for the info!

5
CarbonMan 5 points ago +5 / -0

How can a vaccine be approved that only provides 39% protection after 6 months? The limit is typically set to 50% which is seen as really low.

3
CarbonMan 3 points ago +3 / -0

I don't think you would want a public defender unless you really couldn't pay for a good defender....

1
CarbonMan 1 point ago +2 / -1

But remmeber the method is not ivermetic by itself. MATH+ model which seemingly works uses serveral drugs, *one *of them Ivermetin. They will try to confuse people and "win" the arguement by making people only use ivermectin, which by itself is likley not that effective. They did this to hydroxychloroquine which is NEVER used alone. It is a tactic, and that is why it is typically good to let medical proffesionals (although not the ones on tiktok) prescribe treatment according to the FLCCC, who should know this.

1
CarbonMan 1 point ago +2 / -1

HaHa your american ego is pathetic, currently there are lots of countries more free than the US, unfortunatly. In the US it is basically florida and texas that are decent places to live. Wasington is worse Moskva and California is worse that commie China (exclude Tibet and Xingjang). Face it most of your country is falling apart by your facist regime with are just as bad as Canada, France, almost Australia.

4
CarbonMan 4 points ago +4 / -0

my vasectomy only works if all other men have one

1
CarbonMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sad truth is that nobody is willing to pay the brides needed to get EUA approval from the FDA for ivermectin

3
CarbonMan 3 points ago +3 / -0

I wonder why all the drugs up for EUA approval are patented....... It really is strange isn't it? Mordern science has developped drugs to treat almost any illness for over a hundred years. Yet, none of these work according to the "experts". It's almost like the real problem is that nobody is paying the billions in brides required by the FDA inorder for them to grant approve for its use when there is no patent...

view more: Next ›