Here's the link from a health care CEO from his Healthy Skeptic blog:

https://healthy-skeptic.com/2021/07/...ore-can-i-say/

Here's the relevant bullet points:

Let’s start with Delta. Contrary to the misinformation being spread by many, including the so-called experts, the research to date shows:

1. It has a lower hospitalization and death rate.
2. It is perhaps somewhat more transmissible.
3. It does not result in substantially higher viral loads.
4. Vaccines are only marginally less effective against Delta infections.
5. It does not have a worse impact on children.

Now let us move on to vaccine effectiveness, where we find that:

1. People who are vaccinated can get infected, but do so at lower rates than the unvaxed.
2. People who are vaccinated and get infected have lower viral loads than the unvaxed who become infected.
3. People who are vaccinated and get infected are less likely to be infectious and transmit.
4. People who are vaccinated have much lower rates of hospitalization and death than do those who are unvaccinated and get infected.
5. The research is actually mixed as to whether vaccination or prior infection provides a stronger adaptive immune response.
6. If you understand adaptive immunity, whether from infection or vaccination, in regard to respiratory viruses, none of the above is a surprise, e.g., the performance of flu vaccines and the difficulty in developing an RSV vaccine.

Now what do we need, other than a complete replacement of said political leaders and experts.

1. Provide case, hospitalization and death data by vaccination status and give us days after second dose that the case was identified in the case of “fully” vaccinated individuals. Full adaptive immunity is unlikely in 14 days, it takes weeks for memory B and T cells to be completely in place.
2. Give us the age structure of cases, hospitalizations and deaths in the vaccinated as well as the unvaccinated.
3. Show us at least a very representative sample of cycle numbers from supposedly positive PCR tests in both the vaxed and unvaxed cases. I am certain this will reveal much higher cycle numbers and lower viral loads in the vaxed cases.
4. Do representative sampling of supposed positives from vaxed and unvaxed persons and attempt to culture the test swabs. I am again certain this will show much less presence of viable virus among the vaxed group.
5. Give us complete reinfection cases among the unvaccinated, including hospital and death rates. Reinfections among the unvaxed are the equivalent of breakthrough infections in the vaxed and a direct comparison about rates and outcomes would be helpful.
6. Stop hiding how many hospitalizations listed as CV-19 ones aren’t actually for CV-19. The state of Minnesota started doing this for breakthrough infections but it should be done for all cases, so we can compare true serious outcomes.

Would you go to a lawyer if you were sick, or would you go to a doctor?

WE should sue pfizer, j&j, and moderna for releasing a placebo on us...

You mean the head of a medical corporation? Someone who knows the jargon, and how all the bullshit works? Someone who was sued by the government (for more BS) and instead of rolling over, fought them for years. And won?

Nope, I'll take this guys word over the CDC or the WHO, any day.

Edit--BTW, my 89 year old father was tested for Covid, twice, and both tests returned as POSITIVE. He then received the much more accurate antigen test which showed that he'd never had Covid. Oh, no symptoms either. I took a DEEP DIVE at the website of the company that created the Covid tests, and while they were full of information, none of it showed me how many PCV cycles they ran during a test. As you probably know, after a certain number of cycles, a positive result is assured. My emails and phone calls requesting PCV cycle information were also not returned.

Coincidence? I think not.

The deep state™ got to Mitch McConnell! He's a brainwashed liberal democrat now!

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/28/mcco...-kentucky.html

I like the concept. It makes sense.

It's funny that this page disputes the "45,000 died within 3 days from CDC whistleblower" and their logic is "she guesstimated the value". It does mention that she's a data analyst and that's what they do - statistical sampling, but they don't mention that "guesstimating" is how hospitals are logging a large percentage of Covid cases/deaths already - no test needed. Nor does it make the connection when they state "health issues and deaths that, chronologically, occur after vaccination may be caused by underlying illnesses or other factors unrelated to a vaccination, none of which is known until each report is authenticated and each cause of death is investigated" - - as if the currently inflated "Covid Death Toll" isn't comprised of an overwhelming majority of 80yr old+ people with multiple co-morbidities and many are in hospice already. As in they are already dying from disease or dying of age. Way different picture than being presented. Obviously.



Thanks for sharing this. It's true there is too much concealment or obfuscation with "data". Media has earned it's "Best Supporting Actor" award many times over with how well they've skewed information and kept the non-thinking populace afraid controllable.

Walensky came out yesterday to say that point #1 isn't the case. So... that was funny. But overall, yes - I'd agree, show all the data. Asymptomatic cases of vaccinated and unvaccinated. Symptomatic cases of vaccinated and unvaccinated. Hospitalizations via ACTUAL not percentages. Or, continuously use the same metric - %beds occupied, etc. When the cases go from 400 to 600 it's a 50% increase in cases OMGGGGG... but when the cases drop from 600 to 300 - silence. Then they go up from 300 to 600 - CASES WENT UP BY 100%!!!!

Give all the data. How do you think people feel if it was something like.... of the people in the hospital who tested WITH covid (though here for another reason, and as such are asymptomatic), 40% are vaxxed and 60% are unvaxxed. Hell - 60% vaxxed and 40% unvaxxed. Of the symptomatic, 70% and 30%. How would people respond? WHY isn't that data being shared? WHY isn't that data being marketed? WHY IS DATA AT ALL BEING MARKETED?

Then it goes to ... all of the stations that pushed....... smolette, covington, kavanaugh, fine people on both sides, omitted "they let you", russia hoaxes - why do all of these stations that continue to cry wolf still hold some type of credibility? It boggles me.

I member when Kamila and Biden said they wouldn't trust a rushed to market vaccine.


"ONLY IF IT'S COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT!" "If some polititian (trump) tells me, noooope!"

Except now "listen to the governor of Alabama" says Biden. Media apparently thinks I give two shits what Mitch thinks? Alright. Makes sense. Listen to the experts!

So whatever Walensky says, prolly do the opposite. I'm sure you also realize that the newest CDC mask mandates (out today) are based on a study that failed peer review, right?

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...13c5199045.png
Well, they spit bullshit apparently...

And was based on a vaccine placebo not approved in the usa...

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...c7a1b367a.jpeg
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...34878ad435.png

No disagreements here.

Speaking of placebos...

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.mia...398af68ddd.png

See previous statement about people who can't pave the roads but can coordinate an international conspiracy. The cognitive dissonance is strong.

Do you trust Pfizer's data or not? 😊

Do you trust the government's vaccine approval programme? 😊

This is a Soviet-era poster. The caption at the bottom reads "Evolution?"

https://scontent-ort2-2.xx.fbcdn.net...95&oe=61296A3C

Curious about your statement on paved roads as I've traveled through much of the US and have found roads everywhere.

​​​​​​ As a liberal, i fully trust and back big pharm. They are here to help us from getting sick from the unvaccinated who are not sick from the virus we are vaccinated against.