Good that he recanted in the end and told his friends to get the vaccine.
Looks obese and over 60? Probably in the demographic that would have benefitted from the jab. Where are the news articles of the 25 year olds getting heart attacks after getting the vaccine? I know this is happening but I don’t see any articles on the side effects. Weird.
And I love these one off antidotes!
99.9% survival rate under 60.
Broken record. If you are old and or have co-morbidities, get the shot. Otherwise, it might not be your best choice. Easy enough.
Don’t get the jab if you are 20 and healthy.
They always talk a big game (like Indiana), then POW. Then another loser will make up another excuse to justify their current belief. Then poof.
Wash
Rinse
Groundhog day
I don’t talk a big game (except in pick up basketball). Just living in reality.
Again- who knows if it was Covid? The tests have proven highly unreliable. All of that data is garbage.
Lol, yeah, who knows? If only we had doctors and medical facilities and other sciency stuff. In fact, who knows anything at all? People have been wrong before so maybe we’re living on Mars and it’s not flat or spherical but cube-shaped!
You’re saying the PCR tests that they relied on to diagnose had no issues?
You mean a subsection of them?
According to The NY Times who analyzed data from 3 states (millions of records) they found a 90% false positive rate.
If you want to call that a “subsection” so be it.
Source?
Should I be surprised that your source didn’t mention 3 states with millions of records having 90% false positive rate? In fact, the article doesn’t once use the phrase “false positive”.
What the article is arguing that the tests were too sensitive, and people with very low viral load were being counted in the positive numbers, but that’s not very helpful because they had so little virus they were likely to not be infectious.
Which don’t get me wrong, is a huge problem, and that’s why discussions about sensitivity and cycles had to happen (and perhaps continue to happen - that article is very old).
But when you have a man being treated by doctors in a hospital, literally dying of the coronavirus, it’s laughable to suggest that this old PCR test sensitivity is misdiagnosing him.
You’re really annoying when you do stuff like this.
In three sets of testing data that include cycle thresholds, compiled by officials in Massachusetts, New York and Nevada, up to 90 percent of people testing positive carried barely any virus, a review by The Times found.
3 states 
By the time this article was written it was August 2020… there were tens of millions of cases nationwide. NY and Mass were the epicenter of cases.
You think the times only reviewed a data set of a couple hundred to include on this huge article that was read by millions?
They looked at all of or the majority of tests in these states.
Knock it off. The PCR tests are highly flawed and produce false positives because they have a sensitivity scale that can be activated.
Want more cases- turn the dial down. Want less- turn the dial up.
1 Like
And they are not all in agreement and only one side is being silenced
He who controls positivity parameters controls the world right now…That’s why I’ve said “fuck this shit” for a longtime.
I assure you, being told fake facts, asking for sources, and then eventually being something totally different from the initial claim is MORE annoying.
LMAO at you spewing garbage all the time and then calling people annoying when you get called out.
Yes, Mass had 85 to 90 percent high-cycle positives, which was troubling (as I said above). NY found 870 positives with a high cycle count in that month… Which doesn’t even mean all of those are low viral load, just that they have the capacity to be. I’m not seeing the “millions of data” you talk about. Knock it off.
I agree with this, which is why it’s important for these discussions to happen. now, this was a year ago, so I’d hope standards have been implemented since then. You can research into that if you like.
Logical inference: to make a step in reasoning; to move from a premise to a logical consequence; to “carry forward.”
I’m sorry that your strict form of debate doesn’t allow your opponents the luxury of inference.
When The NY Times says they looked at COVID data from 3 states and when they also publish a piece for the nation to read regarding said data that it’s safe to infer there were millions of cases comprising that data.
But if you want to die on this hill- so be it.
So all of this semantics to then agree with the ultimate point. Awesome.
Inference is different from logical inference. making up numbers isn’t logical.
You’re the one posting definitions of “logical inference” and then accuse me of semantics? lol.
I agree that the test cycles needs to be standardized, but i vehemently disagree that there’s any question at all that this radio personality had covid.
Equating sensitive PCR tests with a dying man’s diagnosis is FAR FAR FAR from logical inference.