listless reads

I wonder if they fear being ostracized by "fellow" coworkers who have made other peoples health status their business.

I do not know the vaccination statuses of my coworkers. I mind my business.

Literally made no sense. The topic is mandating. Even in your scenario, the person has a choice to let it wait to dry up...despite your example being a poor hypothetical of the subject matter.

Nice mild case then. love building my natural antibodies.

I wonder if they'll use "suspected but unconfirmed covid-19 patients" again.

I do. I smelled the unlawful gov't overreach earlier this year. So I started a family nurse consulting firm. Will transition to FT in matter of weeks.

That doesn't even make sense.

and it would be appropriate, although you'd have to have it on repeat. these things take awhile It's okay guys, Just say you don't look at emerging data.

"patriot" is subjective. History doesn't repeat, it rhymes. Home of the free until you're not.

Ah yes, Good ole socialism. "be alive to the fatal notions of emergency and exception. Be angry about the treacherous use of patriotic vocabulary."

...LOL but the study had to be conducted. whether it was published by the lancet is a mute point "laymen"

no. that's not what he said. "if you get a CT of 35 or more, the chances of it being replication competent are miniscule." he then continues talking about them being dead nucleotides, etc. Then you look at what CT they're being run at, at its 40-45 CT. The presence of something there, doesn't mean infection. You have to take quantum leaps (each cycle is an exponential dive "zoom"). Well let's dive a bit deeper than reuters fact checking a reference his exact statement. "PCR is intended to identify substances qualitatively, but by its very nature is unsuited for estimating numbers. Although there is a common misimpression that the viral load tests actually count the number of viruses in the blood, these tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all; they can only detect proteins that are believed, in some cases wrongly, to be unique to HIV. The tests can detect genetic sequences of viruses, but not viruses themselves. What PCR does is to select a genetic sequence and then amplify it enormously. It can accomplish the equivalent of finding a needle in a haystack; it can amplify that needle into a haystack. Like an electronically amplified antenna, PCR greatly amplifies the signal, but it also greatly amplifies the noise. Since the amplification is exponential, the slightest error in measurement, the slightest contamination, can result in errors of many orders of magnitude."_ ________________________ So how can it diagnose something if it can't detect the virus itself? his words. not mine. ________________________ I'm not aware of any link of covid to child trafficking.

baloney.

The agencies are the "regulators." although if you dive into the history, you will find many former directors of these regulators also working in big pharma. Conflict of interest. You will also find they are fund by associations that are in turn funded by big pharma. COI. CDC in particular made the RT-PCR test. Makes big money. And not to mention those fat checks our government writes out in our names. Many individuals, like fauci, and some of his compatriots at the NIAID, own patents for the Moderna vaccine. here's a reference. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6935295-NIH-Moderna-Confidential-Agreements.html If you quantify "immunity" by 6-8 months...I mean I guess? But then I'd have to inquire as to the explanation for Israel's issues right now, with the highest vaccination rates, but a raging virus case count. I'd also like to point to this study as get your thoughts if vaccination is the simple means to a covid end. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897733

The threshold at which it detects that material is smaller and smaller with each cycle. anything over 35 (per fauci) is chalked up as 100% false positive. PCRs are being used at 40-45 CTs. There is evidence. It's in the manufacturer's guidelines. Refer to the CTs mentioned above. the creator of the PCR test was adamant that it was not to be used to diagnose. I put that because you stated Covid was unique, I.e. symptoms, imaging, labs, etc. Autopsies would then be definitive because they'd actually take the lung tissue samples. but they're stating "its hard to answer" in comparison to seasonal flu. and no. We work with the "very contagious and virulent" covid everyday. Opening a body for autopsy isn't going to increase exposures in the right setting. Investigative measures are exactly why autopsies are conducted. An infective pathogen is probably the best reason to open someone up and find out what's going on. How can something that doesn't provide immunity in any sense add to immunity in anyway?

This is why conflict of interest information is very important. The CDC is making billions from Covid. Their "studies" are biased. Goes for NIH and NIAID. Very interesting that the vaccine wasn't designed to reduce infection rates and induce immunity...but is reducing infection rates. I guess an added surprise..?

Very true. And they've never developed a successful mRNA vaccine in those 30 previous years but I guess when our backs are against the wall, we submit an application for approval using a group of 3410 "suspected but unconfirmed COVID-19 [patients] in the overall study population," and get FDA approval anyway. https://www.fda.gov/media/144245/download

Then, in response to your dislike, let me reference a previous comment you liked. hypocrisy at its finest.

I am realizing very quickly that people on this forum are not very objective. haven't come across a single study reference -_- Please, if you ever want to pass on useful information my way, do so. always open to sharing ideas and learning new perspectives.

PCR tests were created for manufacturing of sampling. You will have to read into the test to get details. But now they're being used for measuring viral loads depending on what Cycle threshold is reached. Absurdity. _________________________________________________ Researchers and scientists are not immune to monetary gain. So when these researchers/scientists/doctors are found to have ties with the manufacturing companies that produce these instruments, there is a severe COI. It's so very important as to have its own field that is addressed in each study. Most glance over the names. I personally look into the names to see their affiliations. ___________________________________________________ refer to around 10:30 of this video. For something supposedly "unique" to covid, they have a hard time describing it. Weirdly enough, there was even a move to stop autopsies all together. why any research institution would want to inhibit autopsies of infected individuals is beyond me. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00414-020-02317-w So my words aren't empty, refer to the introduction. "Contrary to the initial recommendation of the German Robert Koch Institute (RKI) to avoid autopsies of COVID-19 deaths if possible [1], this institution has recently changed its recommendation and currently acknowledges the benefits and value of autopsies in the context of pandemic control." Hope this helps to clear up confusion or maybe even gives you more questions. Questioning is at an all time low nowadays. cheers. baloney. vaccine can't "boost" natural immunity.

How do I feel? Disgusted...? FDA approval is kind of mute for me due to the funding they receive. The regulators are hollow shadows of their former selves.

Soooo....my idea is that the rhetoric is insidious ;) see how that works? creative thinking ?

In a way, Yes, but not entirely. That's not my contention exactly. My point is that the PCR test is faulty and is being misused. I haven't seen/read studies relating to Covid that used other means of measuring data outside PCR tests, or even sVNT tests. I'm still remaining as objective as possible, hoping there will be a different means by which tests are conducted, although I'm not holding my breath. It seems like the scientific community is just going to keep using these tests despite the COIs. It even gets as interesting as researchers not disclosing their affiliations with companies involved in the testing in some of these studies. Yet we continue to use PCR tests to diagnose when they were created for manufacturing. If the tests are faulty, why wouldn't the data be? just posing questions.

I put the definition for context as to mitigate confusion. Multiple ways to use the word. No disrespect intended. _______ and no. The rhetoric this post is, and incites, is insidious. The rhetoric will accumulate more division.

Full Definition of insidious 1a: having a gradual and cumulative effect : SUBTLEthe insidious pressures of modern life b: of a disease : developing so gradually as to be well established before becoming apparent __________________ All this rhetoric is going to amount to more division on top of the division that's already infecting us.