Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
What she told her husband is what the media is suggesting that EVERYONE who is getting vaccinated do to anybody who isn't getting vaccinated. And also doing to them what she did to him.

Guilt them.

Guilting him to guilt them.



Here's the steps, if you missed me talk about them before.


STEP 1: Give the vaccine to the 50 to 60% of people who are terrified of the virus and would do anything to get it.

STEP 2: Give the vaccine to the 15 to 20% of people who are just so f-ing tired of how we've been forced to live the last year that they just want it to go away and will get vaccinated so they can get back to their old lives.

(Steps one and two will have quite a bit of overlap, both in the timeframe and/or like-mindedness.)

STEP 3: Guilt the shit of the remaining people. Not all of them will be guilted into it. But some of them will.

STEP 4: Ruin the lives of people who still refuse. This can be done, and will be done, in a variety of ways. (This can only begin once there is a legitimate surplus of vaccinations without any remaining demand for them).

One of the biggest will be by allowing corporations to force vaccinations otherwise face termination from your job (the article from South Carolina I posted earlier today is actually about a bill being considered in the state to PROHIBIT companies in the state from doing this).

But then there's just the general guilting that will never end until the media stops talking about it. If you haven't been paying attention to the way these things work online the last few years, that guilting will quickly turn to HATE. This is going to make for a very hostile work environment for many people at this point. Imagine the RWED, but in a live office setting... in every workplace around the country. (and with weak-minded, terrified people truly believing that somebody like me is threatening their life by my mere presence in front of them without having had the shots).

If they really want to make the issue bad, they'll start instituting an ID card... maybe even provide you with a handy little lanyard to wear it like a dog collar whenever you leave your home.

Worst case is that when enough people have already gotten it and the rest refuse that the Legacy Media starts referring to those who resist vaccination as Bio Terrorists.

---

Quote:

---

People Who Recover From COVID-19 At "Very Low Risk" Of Re-Infection: Study
Saturday, Jul 10, 2021 - 11:32 AM

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

People who have contracted COVID-19 and recovered should know that the risk for re-infection is very low, a doctor said after a study he worked on was published.

Researchers analyzed records from Curative, a clinical laboratory based in San Dimas that specializes in COVID-19 testing and has during the pandemic been conducting routine workforce screening. None of the 254 employees who had COVID-19 and recovered became re-infected, while four of the 739 who were fully vaccinated contracted the disease.

“The big takeaway was that if you are not vaccinated, and were not previously infected, one, you have a very high risk getting infected—24 percent of employees over a year tested positive. However, on the flip side, if you were vaccinated or previously infected your risk was near zero,” Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, clinical professor of preventive medicine and medicine at the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, told The Epoch Times.

Klausner and Dr. Noah Kojima of the University of California, Los Angeles’ Department of Medicine joined with Curative workers to analyze the records. They released a pre-print, or pre-peer reviewed version of the study online this week.

Researchers found that of the 4,313 employees who were not previously infected or fully vaccinated, 254 became infected.

The findings add to the growing body of research that indicates people who had COVID-19 and recovered enjoy a similar level of protection as those who have gotten a vaccine, following a study in the United Kingdom and one by Cleveland Clinic researchers.

“It should give confidence to people who have recovered that they are at very low risk for repeat infection and some experts including myself believe that protection is equal to vaccination,” Klausner told The Epoch Times.

“And we’re trying to update policy such that people who have recovered have the same privileges and access as people who are vaccinated.”

According to federal guidance, vaccines should be administered to people irrespective of whether they’ve had COVID-19 in the past.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said officials are aware of evidence suggesting natural immunity among those who have been infected but has not altered its recommendations to incorporate that evidence.

“We do not comment on non-CDC authored papers. We continually evaluate the science that leads to our guidance, and if it needs to be changed, we will be base that on our own research and studies,” a spokesman told The Epoch Times in an email last month.

A transmission electron micrograph shows SARS-CoV-2 virus particles, isolated from a patient. (NIAID)

The limitations of the new study, which has been submitted to a journal and is being peer reviewed, include the possibility employees could have tested positive for COVID-19 outside of the routine screening, or employee testing program.

The group plans to conduct more analysis on the Curative data.

Dr. David Boulware, professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, told The Epoch Times via email that the study “adds to the body of literature that generally healthy adults <65 years old with prior COVID-19 infection are generally not at risk of recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection in short term after initial symptomatic infection.”

SARS-CoV-2 is another name for the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, which causes COVID-19.

Boulware, who was not involved in the research, noted that the median age of those tested was 29 years old and very likely included few people 65 years old or older, or many people without immune system problems.

“Thus, this may not apply to elderly persons or persons with substantial co-morbidities—but does likely apply to adults 18-65 years of age without major medical problems,” he said, adding that because the follow-up time period of those studied was relatively short, the paper does not give insight into longer-term protection.

“Long term protection is more unknown, which is why persons with prior infection still are recommended to receive at least 1 vaccine dose, but there is not any urgency to receive the vaccine (and waiting ~3 months likely would be fine),” he said.

Klausner said that besides bolstering the idea of natural immunity, the study shows that vaccination in the workplace is important.

“We need to continue to promote workplace vaccination requirements. Businesses have the authority and have the ability and have the legal power to require employees get vaccinated,” he said. “And I think this did the support that benefits of that.”

---

Quote:

---

So for the vaccines, there are more options worldwide. In the States, the options are currently restricted to the genetic ones. Many people are uncomfortable with those for various reasons, and might be more comfortable with the Novavax product. I have no financial ties to Novavax, just to mention any potential conflict of interest. I’m just expressing what I perceive to be the vaccine landscape....

I’m going to stick my neck out, but I’m in close contact with Andrew Hill, who’s doing the meta-analysis, and the work of Tess Lawrie, who’s now published another meta-analysis from worldwide Ivermectin data—and the data keeps getting stronger and stronger in favor of ivermectin as having some protective activity within a safe dosing range. That seems to be impacting on various emerging economies that don’t have access to vaccines and is impacting on the event rate for severe COVID disease and death.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:

People Who Recover From COVID-19 At "Very Low Risk" Of Re-Infection: Study
Saturday, Jul 10, 2021 - 11:32 AM

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,

People who have contracted COVID-19 and recovered should know that the risk for re-infection is very low, a doctor said after a study he worked on was published.

Researchers analyzed records from Curative, a clinical laboratory based in San Dimas ...

---

Quote:

---

... that specializes in COVID-19 testing and has during the pandemic been conducting routine workforce screening. None of the 254 employees who had COVID-19 and recovered became re-infected, while four of the 739 who were fully vaccinated contracted the disease.

“The big takeaway was that if you are not vaccinated, and were not previously infected, one, you have a very high risk getting infected—24 percent of employees over a year tested positive.

---

Quote:

---

However, on the flip side, if you were vaccinated or previously infected your risk was near zero,” Dr. Jeffrey Klausner, clinical professor of preventive medicine and medicine at the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, told The Epoch Times.

---

Quote:

---

The findings add to the growing body of research that indicates people who had COVID-19 and recovered enjoy a similar level of protection as those who have gotten a vaccine, following a study in the United Kingdom and one by Cleveland Clinic researchers.

---

Quote:

---

According to federal guidance, vaccines should be administered to people irrespective of whether they’ve had COVID-19 in the past.

---

Quote:

---

Dr. David Boulware, professor of medicine at the University of Minnesota, told The Epoch Times via email that the study “adds to the body of literature that generally healthy adults <65 years old with prior COVID-19 infection are generally not at risk of recurrent SARS-CoV-2 infection in short term after initial symptomatic infection.”

---

Quote:

---

“Thus, this may not apply to elderly persons or persons with substantial co-morbidities—but does likely apply to adults 18-65 years of age without major medical problems,” he said, adding that because the follow-up time period of those studied was relatively short, the paper does not give insight into longer-term protection.

---

Quote:

---

“We need to continue to promote workplace vaccination requirements. Businesses have the authority and have the ability and have the legal power to require employees get vaccinated,” he said. “And I think this did the support that benefits of that.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

You know, there was a study that indicated being vaccinated with 2 different vaccines for your first and second shots offered superior protection from COVID-19. I wish 'they' would allow for cross-vaccination.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Thanks Sigs. That's what I've been saying.

Glad to have you on board.



--------------------------------------------------

And he who is not sufficiently courageous to defend his soul — don’t let him be proud of his ‘progressive’ views, and don’t let him boast that he is an academician or a people’s artist, a distinguished figure or a general. Let him say to himself: I am a part of the herd and a coward. It’s all the same to me as long as I’m fed and kept warm.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Your "pro-science" people consistently lie to you and never factor in natural immunity toward the herd immunity goal.

Your "pro-science" people are injecting kids with mystery cocktails and they don't even need it.




They'd better be right that the lab rats who took the vaccine won't ever suffer any long term ill effects, or that's a lot of kids that are going to be messed up for life when they never had any reason to be.

Most of them, without their consent.

These kids can choose to be a different gender at 5 years old, but they can't say no to being a test subject for Big Pharma.

That's Our World in 2021.


--------------------------------------------------

And he who is not sufficiently courageous to defend his soul — don’t let him be proud of his ‘progressive’ views, and don’t let him boast that he is an academician or a people’s artist, a distinguished figure or a general. Let him say to himself: I am a part of the herd and a coward. It’s all the same to me as long as I’m fed and kept warm.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Every time your "points" get debunked you either retreat into denial or you find YET ANOTHER reason to wring your hands and cry wolf!

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Every time your "points" get debunked you either retreat into denial or you find YET ANOTHER reason to wring your hands and cry wolf!

SIX: I don't retreat. I deny your misinformation and parroting of Legacy Media lies on the subject, all while laughing at the fact that two normally rational people change their entire way of thinking about things on this particular issue. For some reason, for you and Kiki, there ARE weapons of mass destruction in Iraq this time.

---

Quote:

---

SIX: They're crying wolf, and you're being duped.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: First you wanted old people to die.

SIX: No I didn't. You're oversimplifying that issue because it suits your argument now.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Then you said the virus was "nothing".

SIX: The virus IS nothing.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Then you were against lockdowns. Then you were against MASKING.

SIX: I was against masking FIRST. Then I was against lockdowns. Because that's the order they came up.
I still am.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Then you were against vaccines.

SUX: Yes. I'm not an anti-vaxxer. I'm anti THIS vaccine.
You already know why.

---

Quote:

---

SIGNY: Now you're wringing your hands "Think of the CHILDREN! "
NOBODY IS MANDATING VACCINES FOR CHILDREN.

SIX: Yes. They are.

---

Quote:

---

SIX: And this time "for the children" actually means something. You're sticking shit in their arm that was never tested because you're scared.

---

Quote:

---

SIX: Aside from the mental problems you've ensured many of the children will have growing up by ripping them from their lives for a year, Covid was harmless to them before.
Not anymore. If anything goes south with that untested vaccine, there is no reset button for them now. And unless [if not] it outright kills them, they have a very long life to live with those [possible consequences where you only have a decade or two to do the same.

SIGNY: If you're going get tweaked about something, at least make it about something real. (I would say the same to JO)

SIX: It's all very real.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
There is zero fear on my part.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I don't like the prospect of Government controlling everything.

I also don't like how easy it is to corrupt the minds and wills of people I respect either.

Everybody has a price, they say. Seems they found yours.



--------------------------------------------------

And he who is not sufficiently courageous to defend his soul — don’t let him be proud of his ‘progressive’ views, and don’t let him boast that he is an academician or a people’s artist, a distinguished figure or a general. Let him say to himself: I am a part of the herd and a coward. It’s all the same to me as long as I’m fed and kept warm.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I'm not anti-any one of those vaccines.

I've already fucking told you this.

Go read through my old posts. I'm not repeating myself.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
I'm not anti-any one of those vaccines.

I've already fucking told you this.

Go read through my old posts. I'm not repeating myself.

---

Well, here's the thing. What is your personal chance of getting rabies? Pretty small I'd say! Yet rabies is a required pet vaccine in Indiana, no exceptions allowed. https://www.in.gov/rabies/pet-vaccination-laws/

And your personal chance of getting smallpox? Zero, considering it's been wiped off the face of the planet.

What is your personal risk of getting hepatitis A or B; or diphtheria, tetanus, or whooping cough; or measles, mumps or rubella; or polio; or chickenpox; or meningococcus? Yet ALL of those are required in Indiana for children to go to school. https://www.in.gov/health/immunization/files/2021-2022-School-Immuniza
tion-Requirements-ENGLISH-Final-July2021.pdf

So, if you're really not anti-vax and you don't care about all those other vaccines - especially the mandated ones - why do you care so much about SARS-CoV-2?

---

Quote:

---

So, following what you posted, KIKI: If getting vaccinated DOESN'T reduce tranmission (because vaccines are active in deep tissue as opposed to peripheral tissue like nose) then is there is a reason to push for vaccines population-wide?
Because a vaccination program won't stop the spread of Covid, right? But it will stop serious illness and death (for the most part)?

If that's the case, how does the measles vaccine (for example) work to stop epidemics? Doesn't the same logic apply? Or does the measles vaccine just make transmission invisible/inconsequential?

I need a primer on that.

*****

Also, another question, if you may: Once you get infected for real, by the peripheral route, does that mean that you now have a long-term immune response in your periperal tissues as well? (At least, to that particular variant?)

*****

So, tell me where I'm wrong: If people get vaccinated (which offers protection against serious illness and death) and THEN get exposed to the real deal and have to fend it off one way or another, either asymptomatically ... or not ... isn't that kind of the IDEAL way to create longer-lasting, more complete immunity?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Also, another question, if you may: Once you get infected for real, by the peripheral route, does that mean that you now have a long-term immune response in your (peripheral) tissues as well? (At least, to that particular variant?)

---

Quote:

---

So, tell me where I'm wrong: If people get vaccinated (which offers protection against serious illness and death) and THEN get exposed to the real deal and have to fend it off one way or another, either asymptomatically ... or not ... isn't that kind of the IDEAL way to create longer-lasting, more complete immunity?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Switching to a sequence of two DIFFERENT vaxs provides superior protection. That makes sense. While vaxs target the spike protein, they use different snippets of that protein.

The solution seems obvious to me.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
... Also, different vax technologies can stimulate different arms of the immune system.

Anyway, initial information about the efficacy of using different vaxs looks good, and countries are actively pursuing this, even though information is sparse. Well, it may not be sparse, but I haven't found an efficient selection of search terms to dig it out from everything else.

A few links are found within this article.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/05/05/993882203/giving-
2-doses-of-different-covid-19-vaccine-could-boost-immune-response

How's your connection coming along?

---

Quote:

---

The natural human response to a virus is to mobilize two distinct arms of the immune system," says Gritstone CEO Andrew Allen. One utilizes antibodies; the other relies on something called CD8 T cells. Unlike antibodies, CD8 T cells don't recognize a virus directly, but they do recognize a cell that has been infected by a virus and they can destroy the infected cell.

Gritstone has developed two different vaccines to activate each arm: a viral vector vaccine and an mRNA vaccine. The viral vector vaccine is very good at stimulating the production of CD8 T cells.The mRNA [vaccine] makes a really good antibody response. And so potentially by combining these, you kind of get the best of both worlds," Allen say

...If it's such a good idea, why isn't it used routinely?

Pulendran speculates there are two main reasons. One has to do with the way new vaccines are approved.

"Regulatory authorities love simplicity," Pulendran says. "The simpler the vaccine regimen, the more palatable they find this to be."

The other reason is that while mix and match may make scientific sense, it doesn't always make business sense.

"For example, if Company A makes one vaccine and Company B makes another vaccine, unless there's some overarching incentive for the two companies to enter into some sort of a marriage, I think either company would in general prefer to go along with their own," Pulendran says.

---

Quote:

---

Though, as I've said before, we won't get rid of SARS-CoV-2 anywhere until we get rid of it everywhere. I think it's still within reach. But whether or not we have the global will remains to be seen.

---

Quote:

---

Decline In UK COVID Cases Signals Coming "Inflection" For US As Delta Fears Subside

---

Quote:

---

Analysts at Goldman have reached a similar conclusion: while rising cases may lead to more cautious consumer behavior, we ultimately view the economic and medical risks from the delta variant as manageable, given convincing evidence that the vaccines help prevent serious illness.

The implication for the US is pretty clear.

---