Topic: A vaccine buffet. (Read 490 times)

Okay, so now you are agreeing that the excess deaths data that I've been sharing for the past 2 years are accurate? The charts that show a massive increase in death from any reason, coinciding exactly with peaks of Covid infections, going back to early 2020, nearly a year before the vaccines were available?



Each data point on that chart shows ~10 unvaccinated deaths per 100,000 unvaccinated population, per week. So multiply 0.0001 by the total number of unvaccinated people, and you have the number of deaths per week. Quite a large number, yes? This isn't "falsifying a few death certs".



I wish you understood data better. The two charts are calculated differently, as explained in my link. The ONS standardise data by 'person-years', the US does not. What is relevant here is the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated within each chart. You can't dismiss this by saying "yeah, but apples and pears are different so it's all invalid". Not that the difference is 20-fold anyway, no idea where you get that from. Are you trying to calculate 25/10?



His actions and inactions in response to Covid have been directly responsible for killing a lot of people, yes. His only motivation is self-interest, he's doing everything he can at the moment to save himself from getting kicked out. I'm sure he'd happily let half the country burn, and millions die, just so long as he came out of it okay. There is never any need to unpick his motivations, self-interest is the only one he has.

The FDA like any crony government organization agrees as long as they get their bilk from the drug companies:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.59265269

Here's why:

  https://www.bitchute.com/video/5876rgion4a5/

I saw an even later one going with the same 'UK Health Security Agency' data but which also covered mortality, but don't see it now.  It was similarly alarming, especially considering that it only counted deaths from 'covid'.  Hints of why this is alarming comes from the all-cause mortality figures leaking through, and it appears more and more likely that the 100% increase in catching 'covid' if one is jabbed is simply an artifact of a general immune system decline among the jabbed who are catching other things as well at comparably higher rates.  In other words, VAIDS.  England at least had the good sense to do an about face of forcing the death jab.

As for the American data, when you are down in the 1/100,000 range, you can pay off a few people to falisfy a few death certs and get any rate figures you want.  Stories of paying off hospitals to get desired data have been a fixture of this who scamdemic from the start.  But you are welcome to try to put forth an alternate hypothesis about why the figures are different between the two countries by 20-fold.  I'd be interested to hear it.  Maybe for some reason Bojo wanted to fake like his government is responsible for killing and maiming even more people than they did, but I'd need to have some sort of plausible reason why he would wish to do such a thing.  Or maybe AstraZeneca is just that bad?

Oh yeah, another way the 'case' numbers are faked is to set the PCR to 20-some cycles when testing a jabbed person while leaving them at 40-some for people who are not.  In that manner you can get false positives on pureblood people who die from anything, and again, when you are at 10/100,000 it's not going to take a lot of fraud to get the graphs big Pharma and their 'public health' assets would like to see.

Because the ONS data for England on this specific subject only run to that point. If you are really unable to discern a pattern from that chart, then try the US data, which runs to December.
Or alternatively, desperately try to claim, without any evidence, that before and after the charted period the exact opposite trend was occurring. If that's your argument, then I can see another trend: your ever-diminishing credibility.


https://ourworldindata.org/covid-deaths-by-vaccination



What are you talking about? If you're unable to see the trend in that chart, then it doesn't surprise me that you're also unable to see the note at the bottom: "Note: Unvaccinated people have not received any dose. Partially-vaccinated people are excluded. Fully-vaccinated people have received all doses prescribed by the initial vaccination protocol. The mortality rate is age-standardized to account for the different vaccination rates of older and younger people."

Then why is your chart missing the last four months of data?  Is it because VAIDS is really kicking in in a big way of the last month or two?  I mean, the latest national data seems to show a 100%+ NEGATIVE efficacy for the de-pop shot gene therapy.  In other words, 'it means it's working' so to speak.

Another thing is that when you play the 'jabbed less than 45 days ago are unvaxxed' game, the chickens come home to roost as time goes by.  Especially as you run out of suckers who can be induced to roll up their sleeves.

There is an abundance of data out there. I mean, it's certainly clear that you are vastly more likely to die of Covid if you're unvaccinated.


https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/england-covid-19-mortality-rate-by-vaccination-status?country=~All+ages


And the data do suggest quite clearly again that irrespective of reason for death, you are more likely to die (all causes) if you are unvaccinated.
You can look at the data yourself if you want. For the UK, the ONS has everything you'll need. This is a good starter.
And this analysis of the ONS data seems quite robust, so is worth a look if you don't want to build the charts yourself. It particular, it includes a good demonstration of one chart that may lead to an erroneous conclusion if context is not considered very carefully.

News articles can be misleading if they are removed from their context (which they usually are). 'An increase in heart attacks' doesn't mean anything. A 50% increase? A 0.0000001% increase? And under what circumstances, etc.

I guess this is the part that makes it hard to prove whether it's a side-effect or not. So far the only thing I've seen in some articles is an apparent increase in heart attack cases in some of the fully vaxxed but I don't think they've done a study to check whether the heart health of those people has decreased after the vaxx.

As Cnut237 mentioned, history has showed us that vaccines are unlikely to pose such risks in the long-term and most are found within the first few days. On top of that, the framework around side effects is pretty vague, every week, hundreds of people die for a variety of reasons, the chance of someone being vaccinated and dying by something else a few days or even weeks later is overlapping with statistics and it could be a simple coincidence. However, such incidents have to be recorded as possible side effects, which might have nothing to do with vaccinations themselves.

I didn't said it's not impossible, more like I'm wondering what these effects would be and how widespread they would be. Would it be something like 1/100, etc.

If I do get one and it's a very rare long-term side-effect, they I can at least tell myself that I took the right risk - it's rare and I'm just unlucky to be one of the few to get it.

If it is widespread though, I can imagine an outrage happening (assuming they can actually trace it back to the vaccine). On the bright side I'd have a lot of people to empathize with and share complaints, etc. "We Are All In This Together" amirite? 

Well of course, it's not impossible that there will be unknown effects that manifest several years (or later) down the line... but you have to ask yourself how likely this is.

A vaccine isn't like some pill that you take every day, that builds up in your body and continually replenishes itself. You only have a few doses of the vaccine, ever. Once you've had it, it degrades quickly because the substance isn't replenished, because you're not having a follow-up shot the next day. We have decades of vaccine history, and we don't have any evidence of late-manifesting effects. It's not impossible in the sense that nothing is impossible, but really it's incredibly unlikely. A vaccine is more like a set of one-time instructions to learn, rather than a continually replenishing shield.

If you drink a lot of alcohol regularly, you may get liver damage further down the line, due to cumulative damage from many years of heavy drinking.
If you never drink, but have one isolated night of heavy drinking, this isn't going to suddenly manifest as liver damage 30 years later. Your liver is either damaged right now, or it's not. There's no continually replenishing source of alcohol in your body to build up the damage.

Continuing with my Ivermectin notes from above:

Whatever 'sickness' I had for this last episode threatened to cause more joint pain than the last.  Another difference is that it is having at least some impact on my upper lungs.  I have unusually strong lungs I think just based on my history which I won't go into.  This morning I felt a little more shitty, and if I coughed hard I could even feel a little bit of pain in the upper part of my lungs.  Maybe.  Anyway, I downed two Ivermectin.

The results so far have been typical.  Noticeable relief in 4 hours, and almost complete alleviation within 6.  Now, 12 hours after the dose, I feel basically fine, but I do have dense but modest amounts of phlem in my nose and trachea at least.  I haven't been able to generate a good oyster since I quite smoking (25 years ago) and still cannot under my present condition.

At this point in my Ivermectin experiments I can with decent reliability predict what impact it will have at what times for whatever family of 'flu-like' ailments is going around my present city and country of domicile.  Many many people are complaining of very similar observations: Seemingly individual instances of ailment often with a short duration fever, and it has now been maybe 6 weeks since the complaints started.

Yeah, it appears those who suffered from immediate side-effects (like the woman I saw on TV that started bleeding in the gums and other part) seemed to be just a small portion of those who got vaccinated. The thing we probably need to observe now would be if there's any long-term effects but with the amount of people who got it and probably the time it'll take to appear, might be hard to isolate.

Indeed you are, glad to hear everyone is mending/mended!

Curious if you are willing to share at which point in the timeline the peyronie's disease occurred?

---

Sorry, I'm still a no for this 'buffet', I have no trust for the guys creating and distributing this, it's not as tested as everyone claims, and it really shouldn't even be called a 'vaccine'. I'll keep my 'buffet' desires for food.

As for injecting children with 3 shots of this, the 5-12 (or even <18) age range is definitely a no for me.

This article points out some of the reasons why I'd be concerned:
ref: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8437699/     [Full disclosure, a research company who appears to have done some work with Pfizer in the past has an 'expression of concern' against this article, and is "re-reviewing" it, as of December.]

I've seen no real standards in collecting or reporting, everywhere seems to do it a bit differently and much of it relies on human entry, some places seem to take word-of-mouth numbers from facilities/humans, which just opens up multiple levels of error and corruption, and then some guy at the top aggregates it, puts his spin on it, and presents it to everyone. Multiple levels of human error and/or human corruption (which stems primarily from political, social and institutional pressures) can, and will, occur.. the environment COVID and the governments have created via mandates, shutdowns, etc. help increase those pressures, and I believe further skew the data.


Data feels too inaccurate for the types of decisions being pushed on a mass scale, and solely basing it on one side of the data, it seems like an inhumane decision based on politics, finances, and minimal data & trials... combined with a big-headed scientific medical community.

I know several people who vaccinated simply due to the social stigma of being 'unvaccinated', that shouldn't happen.
Others are probably just buying/printing fake vaccination cards.  

The data doesn't feel accurate enough to make these types of blanket decisions on a mass scale.. I really don't think it can be accurate in this environment, and I think that's [at least, partially] intentionally done.

Nothing is GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) absent as much data as is needed to assess safety.  At least not before the regulators were totally bought and paid for by the entities they are supposed to be regulating.  Long term safety data associated with the particular types of lipid nanopartical formations use in the two mRNA gene therapies in question is missing, or locked up as a trade secret.  The FDA wants 70 YEARS to release this data and have gone to court to try to get it that much time.

Prior to the 'new normal' a part of 'approving' a drug was letting the victim and their doctor know what was in it (via an 'insert' which is still to my knowledge 'intentionally left blank' in all cases so far.)  The argument about 'trade secrets' is bogus because nobody else could get approval with stolen technology.


One of the main problems was that the initial story circulated to the peeps (medical professionals, John Doe, etc) is that the injection components stayed in the muscle into which it was injected.  That was a bald-faced fuckin' lie.  Authority to tell any lie necessary to get needles into arms seems to have been granted.  Maybe under 'national security' prerogatives?

Anyway, these LNPs have an affinity for certain organ tissues and migrate to them over a period of time.  The ovaries and spleen where the two main organs which had such an affinity (with Pfizer at least) and that is known because the Japanese requested the biodistribution surveys from Pfizer and the data leaked.  (Japan declined Pfizer, at least initially, and also rejected batches of Moderna which were full of metal chunks and other weird shit.)

What, exactly, the U.S. FDA knew about the bio-distribution issue remains to be seen, and again, if they get their way, that could be 70 years out.


It seems quite clear to me that if an injection is mis-applied and goes into an artery or vein, a lot more of the the LNPs than desired hit the heart.  Athletic people have bigger arteries for increased blood-flow, and probably more well functioning hearts which make them even more prone to damage when the mRNA infects heart cells.  Seems to me that the designers of the scamdemic kinda wanted to see what would happen in the case of an accidental 'mainline' because the the guidance for this intermuscular injection was to NOT aspirate which is a method whereby a person doing the injection can detect if they hit a vessel or not.

An amazing amount of stuff about this 'covid-19' operation stinks to high-heaven.  In fact, almost every aspect which can be seen at all.

mRNA technology and lipid nanoparticle tech that are used in the top two vaccines, Pfizer/BioNTech & Moderna haven't been around for decades. We understand them to be generally safe, absent of any long term data. There's research dating back years involving lipid nanoparticle cytotoxicity, and it is only recently that it's being uncovered that some of the potent side effects from the vaccines are in fact caused by LNP's and not the spike proteins formed by the mRNA. Not a bad trade if you're dealing with someone that has managed to be unexposed to COVID and has significant underlying conditions. Though I'm skeptical after 2 years of anyone that hasn't been in contact with COVID in some way.

Issue is, vaccination is being pushed onto people who don't need it (ie the naturally immune and/or young folks).

I'd say it's unreasonable to be concerned about immediate side-effects, at least if you're taking one of the major vaccines. Over 10.2 billion doses have been administered, so we have a lot of data on this. It's not like we're guessing, and it's simply not true that "the studies haven't even been done yet".

It's less unreasonable to be concerned about some unknown side-effects manifesting at some future point. Obviously we can know what happens now, but can only predict what will happen in future. Nevertheless, vaccination has a long history, and we can examine that history in order to gain a better understanding of likely future behaviour. Vaccine side-effects generally show up within a few weeks or at most a few months. We can certainly go back to the 1960s with this pattern. We can't say it's impossible that there will be delayed side-effects in future, but we can make an educated guess rather than a blind guess.

This is the issue, people are being forced to get vaccinated with mandates. Issuing a vaccine mandate, putting someone in the position to decide between their job/livelihood or getting the vaccine is forcing the vaccine. No one serious disputes the vaccines are effective in preventing hospitalization or death; surely they serve some efficacy in reducing severe COVID illness. Ignored in the "safe and effective" conversation of vaccines are the pertinent safety issues that might arise from side effects. There is no long term data on the vaccines, someone performing a cost/benefit calculation derives a different conclusion depending on their own personal circumstances. The logic doesn't hold up for a vaccine mandate with a preventative therapeutic still requires long term studies for side effects.

Do you believe it is unreasonable to be concerned about long term side effects, or even immediate side effects, when the studies haven't even been done yet?

Pre-COVID, I've never seen anyone be called an anti-vaxxer or conspiracy theorist for inquiring about side effects from therapeutics with limited clinical trial info. I wonder what happened.

Firstly, I never mentioned that I got infected while having 3 doses administered, I had two, while almost 7 months had passed from my second dose, if that matters anyway. Although, no one is forcing anyone to get vaccinated, whether we like it or not, vaccines have been proven effective, while there's no need to worry about these so-called future side effects.

While sanitizing and wearing a mask is part of being cautious, vaccines also provide precautionary safety measures, firstly, by decreasing chances of infection, and secondly, severely decreasing chances of death or severe illness.

I'd say look at the data, and particularly the comparison between vaccinated and unvaccinated (as a proportion of total vaccinated and unvaccinated) for infection, hospitalisation and death. You are less likely to become infected if you've been vaccinated. You are far less likely to require hospitalisation if you've been vaccinated. You are vastly less likely to die if you've been vaccinated. I've shared the charts on this many times, as have others. We have abundant data now, so we can rely on facts rather than guesswork.


I don't think that's true.


We predict the future based on what we know in the present, which is that the vaccines are safe and effective. 10 billion doses administered, countless lives saved. "Let's not save lives because there may be serious side-effects in the future despite no evidence pointing to this" is not a valid argument.


Sanitising and wearing masks helps to slow the spread, and to save lives, yes. As does vaccination.

Nowadays I'm thinking awareness is more important.
I don't think the vaccine helps. Because people are getting infected even after getting vaccinated. Just like you got infected from Coronavirus even after getting 3 doses of vaccine!!

In every country, the government is forcibly vaccinating almost everyone. But no one is thinking about the side effects that can cause great harm in the future, the only way to keep yourself safe is to keep your hands sanitized, keep yourself clean and use a mask.

Also had a colleague at work who got his booster shot with Pfizer, after two shots of AZ. Unfortunately, the AstraZeneca vaccine and its recorded side effects cases also impacted vaccine credibility for a large amount of people, including anti-vaxxers who used it as a stepping stone to bash on vaccinations, based on a limited number of cases. Unfortunately, it could also have assisted in my parents not wanting to get vaccinated, despite them being over 50-60 years old, with a few underlying conditions.

Quote from: philipma1957 on February 09, 2022, 08:16:00 AM

...
and a very bent dick known as peyronie’s disease

Comes from butt-fucking.

Quote from: philipma1957 on February 09, 2022, 08:16:00 AM

treatment for the bent dick involves massage and bending it straight.
...

Nah, you're doing it wrong.  What you wanna do is wrap the base in a bunch of duct tape, get a long pipe which fits pretty well down to the bend, then give it a good reef.

This is just how good science works. The advice is always "This is what we think right now, but the advice may change as new evidence emerges".
Initially the data on vaccine efficacy and safety came from the trials data, which was obviously based on single supplier. It wasn't that you shouldn't mix vaccines because that's bad, it was that you shouldn't mix vaccines because we don't know yet how safe or effective it will be.

Since then more than 10 billion doses of vaccine have been administered worldwide, and a lot of data have become available on safety and efficacy of mixing vaccines, for whatever reason (supply issues, concerns over a particular type of vaccine, etc).

"First they said this, now they're saying this instead" is evidence of good science. Changing your opinion based on the data is a strength, not a weakness.

She dodged multiple bullets so to speak.

she had an unknown underlying condition.

silent acid reflux which was caused by an still other underlying condition. a surface level liver cyst.

the liver cyst was big 690 ml almost the size of a bottle of wine.
that pressed on her stomach
that leaked enzymes rather than stomach acid so the reflux was painless.
when the enzymes get into her throat and lungs 🫁 they basically predigested the surfaces which is why the covid found a nice home.

she was in hospital jan 7 to jan 13 2020. they did not quite clear the infection
so she had a low fever on and off from jan 13 to march 17. a newer doctor gave her the anti viral valtrex
it knocked out the fever it never came back.

but the lungs were still being stressed by the digestive enzymes.

multiple doctors and finally in oct we rushed her to emergency room they figured out the cyst issue as it had swelled to 690 mm almost ¾ of a quart

they drained it. so the stomach was not pushed the digestive enzymes stopped stressing her
lungs. they gave her steroids the 400 day coughing finally stopped may of 2021.

we were very lucky that the gp guessed to give her an antiviral in march 2020. that killed off the virus 🦠

her oxygen went from 92 to 98 her heart went from 110-115 to 70-75

btw that is a way a lot of people die from covid. your body will rece the heart up to get a decent oxygen level. and if your heart cant run high and fast for a long time you die.

Can not tell you how fortunate we are to have survive this shit.

oh we did lose a relative to covid fall of 2021.  she feared vaxxing. she went to a funeral of a covid victim caught the delta and she died at 67 last fall.

 

I find the whole thing confusing. Like first they are telling people that they shouldn't mix the vaccines and now they are telling us that just whatever, that it doesn't matter.

Glad you've both made it through okay, and particularly your wife as her experience sounds pretty horrific.

I'm interested in cases from late 2019. I had Covid-like symptoms in November 2019, normally I am lucky enough to be able to shake off viruses quite quickly with only mild symptoms, but this one hit me much harder than usual. I've heard a few other stories of similar experiences from around the same time, we were told it wasn't Covid-19 as it wasn't here (the UK) at that point. I suppose we'll never know, but I do wonder.

I had covid strain one coming out of Italy to New York
I had pfizer vacs 1,2
I had very mild covid delta
I took pfizer booster.

so three shots
and two covids
so far I am still here.

Damage done =

 sense of smell is poor
and a very bent dick known as peyronie’s disease
 
treatment for the bent dick involves massage and bending it straight.
my wife has been doing a lot of work on this with me and it is now straighter

most men are too embrassed to talk about this but you do not want to get it from covid or any other reason.


my wife had

covid strain one
two pfizer shots
very mild delta
third pfizer shot


she was very very very sick from covid one which we got dec 2019

she had 2x pneumonia
was in hospital two times in 2020
her lungs took from jan 2020 to june 2021 to heal
she is one tough bitch
i am a lucky guy to have her as a wife.

Continuing on with the 'Ivermectin experiments'...

It continues to be the case that nearly everyone I know have a situation where their whole families have periodic shitty feeling episodes which often include a short-duration fever.  There are actually helicopters flying over my city at a MUCH higher rate than was the norm (poor country) and people are getting suspicious, but in fact the same things health things are being reported (to me) in more rural areas where a helicopter is never observed.

Several days ago I woke with a sore nose/throat yet again, and yet again it progressed into body aches over the day (although more joint aches than a genuine sickness several weeks ago.)  As an experiment I went ahead and downed a few Ivermectin.  By the normal 6 hours I was feeling at least not worse.  The next 24 hours felt kinda crappy (and kinda 'zoned out' or 'relaxed' which is common for me with this drug) but less crappy than I would have predicted given the instigation of this 'flu'.  The next day (today) I was feeling more crappy so I downed one more.  Now, about 6 hours later, I feel pretty 'great', but also a little 'relaxed' as mentioned above.

---

Relatedly and more on-topic, my country (of current domicile) has every 'covid-19 vaccine' known to man by this point so it seems.  A lot of it 'donated' by wealthy countries.  When it expires, someone in 'authority' signs a paper saying that the expiry date is 'extended' and still good-to-go.

There seems to be kind of a kind of a competition between the 'big fish' local officials who've authorized 'big fish' jabs (Pfizer,  Moderna, Sinovac, etc) and smaller local officials who seem to have something going with the various smaller pharma companies to help in testing out their wares.  in my area here was some Taiwanese and another Chinese testing going on replete with reports of police telling unsophisticated rural farmers that they would go to jail if they refused the jabs.  The big-fish seem to have caught wind of it and have now made laws against more local operations.

In fairness, I should say that these are things I've read somewhat in the local papers and somewhat from what I've heard word-of-mouth on the street, and neither source is particularly reliable, but it's exactly the kind of cluster-fuck which I would expect to see.  In point of fact, I chose a 'developing world' domicile (well before the scamdemic started), precisely BECAUSE I predicted a disorganized cluster-fuck in SHTF scenario.  A more 'orderly' society could efficiently march people right into the gas chamber.  A less organized country should have a lot more out-of-the-way holes to hide in.  Seems to be playing out just as I projected.

Fortunately for me is has been a LONG time since I expected any government to help with my protection in almost any way and my default position was to just take that role on for myself.  My taxes are nothing more than the extortion fees I pay for corp/gov racketeering, and I certainly don't expect effective oversight of financial or medical systems as part of the deal.  Thus it's not a big deal to move to a less 'developed' society.  Soon we'll see the effects of 'natural selection' pressures differentiating people who, by nature, loved big brother and those who don't.  I'm cautiously optimistic that the dynamics will favor me.

This may have happened to an extent in my country (UK) too, where AZ was the main vaccine, but became the subject of media scare-stories (driven in part, I'm sure, by some understandable anti-UK sentiment coming from the continent).

This has led to a situation where many people here are mixing vaccines. My first 2 shots were AZ, but the booster was Pfizer. I didn't have any choice over this, the decision was made for me by the NHS.

Interestingly, there are studies* that suggest a mix-and-match vaccine buffet may confer greater protection than staying with a single manufacturer.





* Anti-vaxxers take note: the Professor Snape in this video is not the character from Harry Potter.

It seems the brands available did played a part in vaccine hesitancy. In my country it took months for vaccination to take off. What was mostly available from the national government was Sinopharm. Not much people show up that some vaccination centers close early in the afternoon. When polled people said they really wanted to take a vaccine and afraid of getting infected but they don't want anything from China. The local governments decided to buy Western brands and the national government eventually followed suit.

Got the Pfizer (the first non-China brand that arrived) and got 2 doses. Did felt slight chest pains initially though I haven't got myself tested yet (I'm broke). Convinced me to not take boosters.

OP, your first responder gives good advice. You waited this long why decide to get the potentially unsafe shots now?



You nailed it perfectly, thank you good sir.

I prefer the mRNA ones because they have the "cleanest" process. They're 100% created synthetically in a lab, with no ingredients from animals, and they contain just the lipid-encased mRNA and some inactive ingredients which I consider to be about as harmless as water. The flu vaccine for comparison is usually either grown in chicken eggs or in cells taken from dogs, which I see as a much "dirtier" process. Between Pfizer and Moderna, there doesn't seem to be a big difference. Pfizer has seen wider usage and testing, while Moderna seems to evoke a stronger immune effect. If I was worried about vaccine side-effects, then perhaps I'd prefer Pfizer, while if I had a weakened immune system, perhaps I'd prefer Moderna.

J&J, AstraZeneca, and Sputnik-V are very similar to the mRNA ones in that they contain genetic code which causes your body to create spike protein, but instead of delivering the genetic code directly via mRNA, it's delivered via a modified adenovirus. Some people are concerned about being injected with genetic code, and such people should not feel any better about J&J/AstraZeneca/Sputnik-V than Moderna/Pfizer, since it's basically the same idea. Involving the extra adenovirus seems like an additional complication and source of possible side-effects to me, and it seems that these vaccines are somewhat less effective than the mRNA vaccines, so I don't like this technology as much as mRNA. J&J was originally touted as only needing one dose, but from what I've heard more recently, it sounds like this was mainly a difference in marketing, and J&J should've really had 2 doses as well to evoke the same immune response.

The mRNA vaccines have been very rarely associated with myocarditis (especially in young men), while the viral-vector vaccines have been very rarely associated with serious blood clots (especially in young women). If you have a choice between them, perhaps you should therefore take your sex into account. Myocarditis is a more common side-effect for the mRNA vaccines than the blood clots are for the viral-vector vaccines, but it's also less likely to be serious.

For those worried about the genetic code aspect, Novavax, Sinopharm, and CoronaVac use a more traditional vaccine manufacturing process where they inject you with inactivated versions of the virus (Sinopharm and CoronaVac) or just pure spike protein (Novavax). However, these types of vaccines need to contain an adjuvant, a drug which boosts your immune response. Sinopharm and CoronaVac use aluminium hydroxide as the adjuvant, which I would not particularly want to be injected with because there is some slight evidence that it could have neurological side-effects. Novavax uses an adjuvant which comes from the soap bark tree, which sounds a bit better to me because it's more natural, though there hasn't been much study on long-term effects of this AFAIK. I personally feel a lot better with the vaccines which don't need to contain this additional adjuvant drug, but if you're nervous about the genetic-code aspect, you might weigh the risks differently than me.

So my final ranking would be:
 1. Pfizer / Moderna
 2. AstraZeneca / J&J / Sputnik V
 3. Novavax
 4. Sinopharm / CoronaVac

If I was afraid of getting COVID, then I'd take even the Chinese vaccines if that was all that was available. They're probably no worse than some over-the-counter drugs in terms of safety, and they will provide some protection from COVID. If I would only be annoyed to get COVID, then I'd personally probably only accept the other 6 vaccines I mentioned, and I'd greatly prefer the mRNA ones.

I already got the Pfizer one - but only because the choice was either that or Sinovac. So far hasn't died yet and hopefully not dying within 5 years.

Sincerely, this is the piece of information that is not really made relayed to individuals before vaccine administration and I feel its very wrong. Of course the names might be mentioned but with the free nature of it and the fact that, only a type might be administered within a region by government authorised agencies, one is left without the option of choice.

Just like this user rightly said, he got exposed after taking a vaccine. I get the point that, government and its agencies are doing what they could to ensure the vaccines is made available to everyone within a short time but, merely asking what are the allergies a person might have doesn't seem like enough as, a few others aren't even aware if they've got one.

Unfortunately, I had no option to choose which vaccine I should take. The educational institution was opened in a hurry and the only condition was to be vaccinated. And the vaccine called AstraZeneca was being given at the health complex next to where I live. Since I didn't have much time, I took the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Even after getting the vaccine, I was exposed to a new wave called Omicron, Bad Luck! Not only me but almost everyone has been affected. I think one should be careful not to rely entirely on vaccines. Nose masks and hand sanitizers should be used. It will be possible to reduce this epidemic if everyone is alert from their respective places.  But not to mention the vaccine, after the discovery and adoption of the vaccine, however, the Corona situation returned to normal.

Your thoughts are childish.
You don't have to leave yourself to fate, you have to fight.

The vaccine is designed to protect us from covid.

Yes, I don't disagree that there will be some side effects, but are you staying healthy without the vaccine?
Doctors would not insist on taking the vaccine again and again if the vaccine did too much harm.

Do a 360 and moonwalk away.

Pretty sure I had the Delta vaccine..

Seems to be working well..

I said nothing whatsoever about 'covid-19'.  I said whatever I (and seemingly practically everyone I know in the country) had recently was in my case, and several people's, put to an end with Ivermectin.

Looks like 'covid-19' is a catch-all for a variety of similarly developed biological agents released onto a population, and also a re-name for various other ordinary ailments such as seasonal influenza.  Also the label the stick on ailments such as bacterial pneumonia and fungal infections which are significantly aggravated by careful chosen policies such as recommending/demanding the use of cloth masks.

More and more the word 'covid-19' is synonymous with gene therapy side-effects which is exactly what I predicted would happen before they even started mass-jabbing people under EUA.

Anyway, looks like Ivermectin was kind of a sleeper wonder-drug which helps with a very wide range of issues.  To the degree that the gene therapies work by infecting cells with designer genetics, Ivermection may well be effective against harm from the so-called 'covid-19 vaccines' as well.  No wonder they went full-court press on stamping out Ivermectin.  As usual, the sheeple took the 'horse pasted narrative' hook-line-sinker...and many extra will be maimed or die because they did.

You're providing no valid sources whatsoever, while still claiming that a drug that still doesn't have sufficient testing against Covid-19, is a safe and effective treatment for patients. In the meantime, you're against vaccinations which have already proven effective, it doesn't make any sense.

On top of that, Ivermectin founders have indeed won the Nobel prize, but that has nothing to do with Covid-19, but only for its ability to battle parasitic worms. Winning the Nobel prize doesn't make it a Covid-19 treatment.

If there is no omicron vaccine I will chose pfzier because their products are always good and recommended. But as it stands now, the International common law Court of justice has banned the sale, use, distribution or application of all this vaccines so I won't choose any again .

These 'developing world' countries are given a quota to hit or they don't get the IMF and World Bank funding to run their countries and pay off their politicians.  They report whatever they are told to by the globalists (who assign most of their political leaders), but it really doesn't mean anything on-the-ground.

The media were reporting swamped hospitals on the same day I went to one to try to get a sick girl some help and found it to be for all intents and purposes mothballed.  The one I found which was open (to 'negative PCR test' people only) was very very empty, but they at least gave her a hospital bed for 10 days to keep her from dying.  Cost me a lot out of pocket though.  More than the average person could save in 10 years.


In my household we all got some interesting long-running series of minor cold then minor flu things.   As I reported earlier, after three days I finally took some of my Ivermectin and, whatever it was, it was totally gone in 6 hours.

One of my house-girls had the thing linger on while the rest of us got over it.  After a few weeks we got her a massage and I gave her some Ivermectin.  After the first dose she was almost back to normal with minor re-occurrences.  After the second dose (several days later) it totally disappeared.

One of the silver linings of this plandemic is that I found out about Ivermectin.  In my experiences so far it seems to be a fuckin wonder-drug.  Whoever found it should get a Nobel prize in medicine for the discovery.  Oh wait, they did!

  https://newsrescue.com/2015-nobel-prize-winning-ivermectin-inhibits-infection-by-hiv-1-and-denv-studies-reported/

Effective against a couple of the globalist's favorite little gifts for the 'overpopulated' countries.  HIV and DENV.  Worse still, the peeps can afford it.  No wonder the globalists and their media propaganda machine hate it so much!

In the meantime, Mexico has one of the highest fatality rates from Covid-19, or are these statistics also rigged by big pharmaceuticals? I don't understand where you got the information that Ivermectin is effective against Covid, it's an antiparasitic for worms, unless you're a horse, I don't see much use.

On top of that, you anti-vaxxers are hilarious, you are against vaccinations because they haven't been "tested" enough, according to your claims, however, you'll trust a drug which has no ties with treating Covid-19, but is actually used for parasites. Since when is a vending machine in Mexico providing medical advice?

In Mexico they have healthy buffet on offer from vending machine. No ID needed.

None. Last April/May I already got two jabs and it's enough for me. Actually, I had opportunity to choose from these 4 vaccines and took Pfizer without thinking much. I just wanted to stay away from Astra Zeneca. Though, even without getting vaccinated, most likely that I would have light covid - I'm young and healthy person. In general, I got vaccinated just get covid passport.
But now, when omicron is spreading, vaccination is more or less pointless. For most people it have mild symptoms and vaccine don't give much protection from getting infected. Omicron is best vaccine now.

None. I'll let my own immune system handle this shit.

Chose one of them randomly If you are >60. At that age If you don't die from covid19, you'll either die from a heart attack, diabetes or just flu so it really don't make a difference. Get one if you give af. If not, still get none.

You have left out Omicron. This is nature's vaccine,and it is the most effective. It is also the safest.

You decide to get vaccinated and you visit the nearest government approved health center to take your shot of the COVID vaccine. These are all the vaccine options available;

Moderna - Which is approved for people who are  12 years and older, two standard dosage required.

Pfizer-BioNTech - Which is approved for people who are 5 years and older, two standard dosage required.

AstraZeneca - Which is approved for people who are 18 years and older, two standard dosage required.

Janssen (Johnson & Johnson) - Which is approved for people who are 18 years and older, one standard dosage required.

If you have the opportunity to select the vaccine you want to take? Which vaccines (give reasons) will you prefer as your first and second dosage? (Mixed dose schedules)