Coronavirus: COVID-19

Lucem Ferre · 05-05-2020, 08:55 PM

Womp womp is probably the noise of you gagging as you deep throat my ding dong.

Anteater · 05-05-2020, 09:00 PM

It is certainly nice to know that quite a few of you trust big pharma at face value over actual scientists with decades of experience and credibility. Especially after the debacle a few pages back when we discussed the actual composition of the virus and what scientists had to say about it.

Is it because she's a woman?

**Frownland** · 05-05-2020, 09:10 PM

Lol good one

Anteater · 05-05-2020, 09:12 PM

Ready to surf on the 5th wave of feminism.

Lucem Ferre · 05-05-2020, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

It is certainly nice to know that quite a few of you trust big pharma at face value over actual scientists with decades of experience and credibility. Especially after the debacle a few pages back when we discussed the actual composition of the virus and what scientists had to say about it.

Is it because she's a woman?

I didn't watch the video. But I did read the article and I can tell you with certainty that she, and you, are completely jumping the gun because everything in that article says there isn't any sufficient data to prove that it does cause any disease interference. Something clearly said. There is a suggested hypothesis that it may cause people to catch things in the coronavirus family.

Then this article filled with multiple scientists confirmed everything I thought and explained better why it's incomplete data with things I didn't even think of.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/no...k-of-covid-19/

Maybe it's because I went through these studies before when looking up the non existent link between soy and testosterone reduction, but it's pretty sad that you have to get schooled on how to comprehend scientific data from a high school drop out.

Now suck my ding dong.

Anteater · 05-05-2020, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

I didn't watch the video. But I did read the article and I can tell you with certainty that she, and you, are completely jumping the gun because everything in that article says there isn't any sufficient data to prove that it does cause any disease interference. Something clearly said. There is a suggested hypothesis that it may cause people to catch things in the coronavirus family.

Then this article filled with multiple scientists confirmed everything I thought and explained better why it's incomplete data with things I didn't even think of.

https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/no...k-of-covid-19/

Maybe it's because I went through these studies before when looking up the non existent link between soy and testosterone reduction, but it's pretty sad that you have to get schooled on how to comprehend scientific data from a high school drop out.

Good article. But it doesn't account for the timeline she mentioned in regards to the vaccinations they got in Italy prior to the coronavirus outbreak nor the age group. The elderly in general don't have great immune systems to begin with. Virus interference would explain how they became particularly vulnerable when we didn't see explosions quite like that in other parts of Europe at the same time. Also, Oxford did a study on virus interference that demonstrated that (in general) they saw an increased risk of "Noninfluenza Respiratory Virus Infections" as a result of influenza vaccination within certain time periods.

Lucem Ferre · 05-05-2020, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

Good article. But it doesn't account for the timeline she mentioned in regards to the vaccinations they got in Italy prior to the coronavirus outbreak nor the age group. The elderly in general don't have great immune systems to begin with. Virus interference would explain how they became particularly vulnerable when we didn't see explosions quite like that in other parts of Europe at the same time.

Didn't watch the video. Probably don't need to ta know that she's most likely jumping to a conclusion that doesn't have sufficient data to prove.

9 times out of ten if they are dishonestly interpreting studies or articles or statistics or any kind of information at any point they will continue to misrepresent things or push that same dishonest narrative.

Doing more research on this girl, and she has a history of doing this. I history of dishonestly interpreting statistics to push an anti-vaxxer agenda. The only way you can take her seriously is if you think there is some massive conspiracy to silence her. You're in tinfoil area now.

I don't even want you to suck my ding dong now. That's a privilege you lost.

Anteater · 05-05-2020, 09:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

Didn't watch the video. Probably don't need to ta know that she's most likely jumping to a conclusion that doesn't have sufficient data to prove.

9 times out of ten if they are dishonestly interpreting studies or articles or statistics or any kind of information at any point they will continue to misrepresent things or push that same dishonest narrative.

I'll probably be standing in line along with everyone else if a big company comes out with a vaccine sometime before I die of old age.

The entire point of why I shared the video was primarily to demonstrate capitalism's biggest failing in regards to how these pharmaceutical organizations have set themselves up to take advantage of people during these large scale panic-driven situations. She has personal experience at being smooshed when she presented data that would have cost them millions. There has to be something that doesn't cost someone thousands of dollars to treat something like this, but the financial incentive isn't there to explore what she talks about.

Lucem Ferre · 05-05-2020, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anteater

I'll probably be standing in line along with everyone else if a big company comes out with a vaccine sometime before I die of old age.

The entire point of why I shared the video was primarily to demonstrate capitalism's biggest failing in regards to how these pharmaceutical organizations have set themselves up to take advantage of people during these large scale panic-driven situations. She has personal experience at being smooshed when she presented data that would have cost them millions. There has to be something that doesn't cost someone thousands of dollars to treat something like this, but the financial incentive isn't there to explore what she talks about.

Nah, she's a literal anti-vaxxer using incomplete and unrepeatable data that not even her colleagues that worked on her studies agreed with. She deserves to be silenced for spreading harmful misinformation and deserved to be discredited for thinking a single study counts as complete data.

Anteater · 05-05-2020, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

Nah, she's a literal anti-vaxxer using incomplete and unrepeatable data that not even her colleagues that worked on her studies agreed with. She deserves to be silenced for spreading harmful misinformation and deserved to be discredited for thinking a single study counts as complete data.

What exactly are you citing there in regards to the video? She points out what she perceives as some issues with one particular type of vaccination, but specifically says she is not an anti-vaxxer and supports them under most circumstances.

05-05-2020, 09:10 PM	#2003 (permalink)
Frownland SOPHIE FOREVER Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: East of the Southern North American West Posts: 35,541	Lol good one __________________ Studies show that when a given norm is changed in the face of the unchanging, the remaining contradictions will parallel the truth. d e a f b o x