China Wuhan Virus Pandemic
- Thread starter Arch Dornan
- Start date
Chiron
Well-known member
Honk! HONK! HONK! HONK!!!!!!
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
Disclose.tv on Gab: 'JUST IN - Police are moving in, ready to arrest t…'
Disclose.tv on Gab: 'JUST IN - Police are moving in, ready to arrest truck drivers and seize equipment if they continue to block the highway at the U.S.-Canada border crossing in Alberta, per local media.'
Are we gonna see them do what should have been done with Antifa? Gonna look really good on Canada.
I really wanna see this now. Go ahead. Show your true self Trudeau.
What a tool.
TheRejectionist
TheRejectionist
Major John Hopkins study finds lockdowns were a big mistake, 'should be rejected out of hand' · American Wire News
A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf (jhu.edu) [The Study]
Edited to add some key points raised in their conclusions:
"Our study fails to demonstrate significant positive effect of mandated behavioral changes (lockdowns)."
"But it should be clear that one important role for government authorities is to provide information so that citizens can voluntarily respond to the pandemic in a way that mitigates their exposure."
"The evidence fails to confirm that lockdowns have a significant effect in reducing COVID-19 mortality. The effect is little to none."
"However, lockdowns during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic have had devastating effects. They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence, and undermining liberal democracy. These costs to society must be compared of the benefits of lockdowns, which our meta-analysis has shown are marginal at best. Such a standard of benefit-cost calculation leads to a strong conclusion: lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument."
A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf (jhu.edu) [The Study]
Edited to add some key points raised in their conclusions:
"Our study fails to demonstrate significant positive effect of mandated behavioral changes (lockdowns)."
"But it should be clear that one important role for government authorities is to provide information so that citizens can voluntarily respond to the pandemic in a way that mitigates their exposure."
"The evidence fails to confirm that lockdowns have a significant effect in reducing COVID-19 mortality. The effect is little to none."
"However, lockdowns during the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic have had devastating effects. They have contributed to reducing economic activity, raising unemployment, reducing schooling, causing political unrest, contributing to domestic violence, and undermining liberal democracy. These costs to society must be compared of the benefits of lockdowns, which our meta-analysis has shown are marginal at best. Such a standard of benefit-cost calculation leads to a strong conclusion: lockdowns should be rejected out of hand as a pandemic policy instrument."
Last edited:
Doomsought
Well-known member
We knew that going in. We knew lock downs don't do anything to pandemics since the black death.
posh-goofiness
Well-known member
Related research:
Edit: Welp. IPFS does have limits, I suppose. Conventional link:
We did. I'm just making sure everyone has resources to use in discussion with others.
How to murder a dissident.
Step 1. Have the CIA fuck with the brain of his car remotely so he gets in a high-speed rollover accident from the throttle being stuck wide open.
Step 2. Sedate him at the scene and airlift him to a hospital.
Step 3. Vent, propofol, fentanyl, morphine, keep him sedated while fucking up his lungs.
Step 4. Wait, he pulled it all out and walked up to the staff naked like the fucking Terminator? What the fuck?
Step 5. Where is he going? Come back! We haven't finished killing you yet!
Also, some stuff from a recent hearing:
Step 1. Have the CIA fuck with the brain of his car remotely so he gets in a high-speed rollover accident from the throttle being stuck wide open.
Step 2. Sedate him at the scene and airlift him to a hospital.
Step 3. Vent, propofol, fentanyl, morphine, keep him sedated while fucking up his lungs.
Step 4. Wait, he pulled it all out and walked up to the staff naked like the fucking Terminator? What the fuck?
Step 5. Where is he going? Come back! We haven't finished killing you yet!
Also, some stuff from a recent hearing:
Last edited:
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
Yooo what the fuck is going on here? What the hell? Can I get some more context in a little Tl;Dr? That is fucking insane shit, straight out of the dissident killing playbook. I am looking on the second video but couldn't tell, was he one of the people speaking out?
From some comments seems that medication would have caused his pancreas to be fucked up. It explains why they told he was being treated for Pancreatic shit, it would cover the death even better than just Covid label. "Covid + Pancreatic complication"
Last edited:
And now I won't be eating anything by Hershey's.
Report: All-American Company Fires Unvaxxed Employees, Asks Them to Sign 9-Page Agreement to Stay Silent (westernjournal.com)
Report: All-American Company Fires Unvaxxed Employees, Asks Them to Sign 9-Page Agreement to Stay Silent (westernjournal.com)
Hershey's is shit chocolate anyways. They're like the natty lite of chocolate.
Get you some quality Chocolate. My opinion is that since I eat it so rarely and sugary treats are bad for you, I'll splurge on the good shit when I decide to have Chocolates. Make the most of it. No reason to throw off my nutrient macros for cheap shit chocolate.
I don't think I've bought a Hershey's product in over a decade.
Last edited:
Reese's Peanut Butter Cups yo. Only reason I still buy Hershey.
Last edited:
Sobek
Disgusting Scalie
COVID-19: Democratic Voters Support Harsh Measures Against Unvaccinated
While many voters have become skeptical toward the federal government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a majority of Democrats embrace restrictive policies, including punitive measures against those who haven’t gotten the COVID-19 vaccine.
www.rasmussenreports.com
Look at this fucking insanity
– Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters would oppose a proposal for federal or state governments to fine Americans who choose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine. However, 55% of Democratic voters would support such a proposal, compared to just 19% of Republicans and 25% of unaffiliated voters.
– Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Democratic voters would favor a government policy requiring that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Such a proposal is opposed by 61% of all likely voters, including 79% of Republicans and 71% of unaffiliated voters.
– Nearly half (48%) of Democratic voters think federal and state governments should be able to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications. Only 27% of all voters – including just 14% of Republicans and 18% of unaffiliated voters – favor criminal punishment of vaccine critics.
– Forty-five percent (45%) of Democrats would favor governments requiring citizens to temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Such a policy would be opposed by a strong majority (71%) of all voters, with 78% of Republicans and 64% of unaffiliated voters saying they would Strongly Oppose putting the unvaccinated in “designated facilities.”
– While about two-thirds (66%) of likely voters would be against governments using digital devices to track unvaccinated people to ensure that they are quarantined or socially distancing from others, 47% of Democrats favor a government tracking program for those who won’t get the COVID-19 vaccine.
When the Stalinists show their true face.COVID-19: Democratic Voters Support Harsh Measures Against Unvaccinated
While many voters have become skeptical toward the federal government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, a majority of Democrats embrace restrictive policies, including punitive measures against those who haven’t gotten the COVID-19 vaccine.
Look at this fucking insanity
– Fifty-eight percent (58%) of voters would oppose a proposal for federal or state governments to fine Americans who choose not to get a COVID-19 vaccine. However, 55% of Democratic voters would support such a proposal, compared to just 19% of Republicans and 25% of unaffiliated voters.
– Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Democratic voters would favor a government policy requiring that citizens remain confined to their homes at all times, except for emergencies, if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Such a proposal is opposed by 61% of all likely voters, including 79% of Republicans and 71% of unaffiliated voters.
– Nearly half (48%) of Democratic voters think federal and state governments should be able to fine or imprison individuals who publicly question the efficacy of the existing COVID-19 vaccines on social media, television, radio, or in online or digital publications. Only 27% of all voters – including just 14% of Republicans and 18% of unaffiliated voters – favor criminal punishment of vaccine critics.
– Forty-five percent (45%) of Democrats would favor governments requiring citizens to temporarily live in designated facilities or locations if they refuse to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Such a policy would be opposed by a strong majority (71%) of all voters, with 78% of Republicans and 64% of unaffiliated voters saying they would Strongly Oppose putting the unvaccinated in “designated facilities.”
– While about two-thirds (66%) of likely voters would be against governments using digital devices to track unvaccinated people to ensure that they are quarantined or socially distancing from others, 47% of Democrats favor a government tracking program for those who won’t get the COVID-19 vaccine.
Jimmy, pass me the M2 Browning! We got some Reds to harvest!