You have expressed you opinion on the matter and I have expressed mine. Once again you are insisting your subjective opinion is objective fact and insisting I must accept it. Well I am not accepting it so go ahead and pull your hair out of whatever it is you need to do to get over it.
Then why, praytell, does the media say they (the Pfizer and J&J vaccines) reduce the risk of hospitalization by 100%? linky
Also, you might want to double check on your level of contact with reality in regards to communication with Special Operation Media Relations.
A lot of people can be killed for that.
Especially if they are not with Media Relations credential when it’s not of their business.
No, it implies safety to the extent that any vaccine is safe. Obviously there’s always the chance that the doctor could trip and fall, knock over a heavy piece of equipment, and crush you under it. But we don’t consider those 0.00000000000000000000000001% chances in any other scenario so we don’t consider them here.
But if you just add a simple qualifer and say “reasonably safe”, “generally safe”, or “mostly safe” then you make a fair statement.
No, you make a statement that vastly exaggerates the risks. “Reasonably” and “generally” imply a significant level of risk that is still worth taking. In reality the risk is negligible and is not worth discussing.
If you make a statement that basically induces people to throw caution to the wind, I am going to rebel.
Congratulations, you’re stupid and immature and self destructive. Responsible adults do not rebel against safety advice just because it doesn’t contain the exact wording they want to hear.
I feel extra risk there.
Your feelings are worthless against the overwhelming evidence that you are wrong.
No, I am insisting that the objective and indisputable evidence is correct and matters more than your precious little feelings. You can deny it all you like because you’re too stubborn to admit defeat but that just makes you the covidiot equivalent to the people who die of preventable head injuries in motorcycle crashes because they refuse to let the government tell them to wear a helmet.
That’s your interpretation. Whenever I say anything, I actually imply in the vast majority of cases. I never talk in absolutes. The reason I use absolutist language is because it cuts down the amount of disclaimers I have to write.
The risk you think is there is just because you don’t understand what mRNA vaccines are. They do nothing that a virus wouldn’t do to you.
I know one good reason they need to wear a helmet.
It’s because of how they need to be fixed when uttering such attacks against sanity, that’s why.
Because they need to get their head checked in for it.
That helmet can save their life compared to how much force is required to fix their problem.
–
Again, if one does say A.
It doesn’t mean that they mean B.
Because someone else said that if they said A.,
that they mean B.
Well, I am done here, I have other police matters to deal with, enjoy your head protection, and, good luck with that, in case you need a 2nd one.
1:45 New York time.
I’m also busy with marriage and just cleared $900 for it, despite another $1,200 bill in storage and rent for 3 units of storage,
for which I have to use the same inventory program which the same source of attacks seeks to forfeit,
and try to make it seem like if it was not sane to mention it,
and that, despite other attempts to alienate those inventory to seek forfeiture and the investment in their storage services.
So yes, I do not only charge back for the tax, but, also the service costs, and other costs against my marriage.
Also not that, due to pandemic, the actual 3rd unit was unused all month, which is to be used to move the 2nd unit into the 3rd, while updating inventory of the content,
while also using the 2nd to move content from the 1st unit into the new space from the 2nd,
which was scheduled to be done last July 2021,
which is delayed with forums post and false accusation about attacks about diversion about mental health I don’t have the right to be abusing my fiancée with which I report to Interpol for acts of war against out sanity,
as confirmed by the military police who offer me police clearance and application in police work to arrest them, and also as confirmed from military doctor for scientific purposes.
So yes, conspiracy has nothing to do with facts.
Conspiracy has to do with planning.
Most of the cases I work on don’t have the time to deal with the planning of those acts, because they in fact plan to omit the facts.
I am not charging them for conspiracy if they did due to treason against the law.
It doesn’t matter what they plan compared to the pandemic they did.
In fact, they seek forfeiture in spoils of war with authorities who don’t have that authority.
They also don’t have authorities to make military diversions from Public Works.
In other words, they connive, and plan.
They don’t publish their plan to work against public plans and public work , and attack publishing.
Yeah, one more thing,
if my family had to be silenced and permanently bound to secrecy as you tried to make me be,
I would have a duty to God to protect them against those attempts, and live somewhere where our works can be more public and that we can benefit from the benefit from our works, and that we can benefit from the rewards from our works, and that other can benefit from the publishing of our works.
Not to be abused by security trying to make money out of nothing by trying to forfeit our work as bad, when it’s good and for the benefit of all humanity,
when they try to make it seem like if my work was not possible to be designed to benefit all humanity when it is,
and when the recording and the registering of the benefit of the work to humanity is attacked and sought to be discredited from us,
to be crediting other authorities who they misrepresent as illegal or ill to inform others about if they attack benefit to society to the point of causing a global pandemic with and under false pretense to hide some local communication gap.
The virus doesn’t need words or reports to communicate.
Those forms of communications are human.
We need those.
The virus doesn’t.
They seek to make us benefit from security from secrets we don’t need who work against the benefit of the publishing of our work, by misinterpretation of trade secret, enough that it makes the military doctor paranoid, because they try to make other paranoid, illegally so.
In fact, I would never need any security from them because they act as terrorist attacking my work and trying to make it seem illegal to prosecute them legally for doing it.
They also abuse others with intent to control.
There is no way my wife would be safe with those people.
They are completely insane and out of contact with reality,
and if not, then, should be forced to be out of contact with reality so as to protect mankind and humanity from their abuse of knowledge of the reality.
They never made money with that and never will.
It’s a sick system and sick attacks intent to cause illness and misrepresent it as with healthy intent.
–
Showing results for irrelevant
Search instead for irreleventSearch Results
Featured snippet from the web
Irrelevant means not related to the subject at hand. If a rock star becomes irrelevant, it means people are not relating––or even listening––to his music anymore. It isn’t part of what people are thinking or talking about. The opposite is relevant, meaning related.
Here , relevant means,
related to communication.
It doesn’t include the other 75% omitted part of the system which is not talked about.
So, even at best, relevant to 25% of the systems.
50% off of the 50% system relevancy.
In other words, gossip.
–
gos·sip
/ˈɡäsəp/
noun
- casual or unconstrained conversation or reports about other people, typically involving details that are not confirmed as being true.
“he became the subject of much local gossip”
Similar: _ tittle-tattle ,
tattle , rumor (s) , whispers , stories , tales , canards , tidbits , idle talk , scandal , hearsay , malicious gossip , whispering campaign , smear campaign , bavardage , on dit , Kaffeeklatsch , labrish , shu-shu , dirt , buzz , mudslinging , goss , scuttlebutt , tea , skinder , bruit , chat , talk , conversation , chatter , heart-to-heart , tête-à-tête , blether , blather , conference , discussion , dialogue , exchange , adda , chitchat , jaw , gas , confab , natter , chinwag , rabbit , crack , rap , bull session , gabfest , mag , yarn , confabulation , colloquy
Opposite: _ facts , the truth
verb
- engage in gossip.
“they would start gossiping about her as soon as she left”
Similar: _ spread rumors , spread gossip , circulate rumors , spread stories
–
Gossip
Description
Gossip is a mass medium or rumour, especially about the personal or private affairs of others; the act is also known as dishing or tattling. Wikipedia
–
Gossip magazine
Magazine genre
Description
Gossip magazines are magazines that feature scandalous stories about the personal lives of celebrities and other well-known individuals. In North America, this genre of magazine flourished in the 1950s and early 1960s. Wikipedia
–
So,
EVE Online,
and EVE Online forums
both use information systems which are scientific
non-gossip systems which are based on truth and facts.
CCP also is a company based on truth and facts and uses those information systems.
If someone wanted to try to use those systems to discuss other things not related to facts and try to change facts,
the system would detect it and ,
the humans reading what the robot detected wouldn’t need to be robots to find to which level and details they do.
The system is 100% facts and truth.
When someone seek to forfeit my work,
which work is 100% facts and truth,
it is my duty to God to protect those I care for against the entity which attacks the integrity of my work.
I analyze if they cause 15% or more damage against operation of the system.
I have no obligations under any military system to associate with them ever.
Oh for the absolute love of Bob.
You link to a U.S. state government website and identify it as “the media”.
I say 100 percent safe is not possible and you switch it up to “100 percent reduced risk of hospitalization” which has had the “for Covid 19” chopped off from the vital caveat preceeding the breakdown of individual vaccines, which was…
All the available vaccines are very safe and great at preventing hospitalization and death from COVID-19.
100 percent reduced risk of hospitalization for Covid 19 is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from safety from hospitalization from complications from the vaccine itself!
Plus your own link says:
"In clinical trials, researchers measure how well a vaccine prevents illness in a controlled setting. "
CONTROLLED SETTING. The REAL WORLD is different.
Plus, plus the link I submitted earlier said 10 people required medical attention after the shot for allergic reactions…read HOSPITALIZED.
OMFG. So the whole friggen world has to know YOUR personal habits now?? I will again quote the link from above:
All the available vaccines are very safe and great at preventing hospitalization and death from COVID-19.
“Very” safe they say. Not just “safe”. This is for reasons of the common use of the English language. I would give a close friend the luxury of telling me he never talks in absolutes. But YOU are just off in your own little corner of Where The Hell IDK.
Sounds like you are saying viruses have no risk. Yeeeeaaaaaah…
1 Like
If anything, very safe is stronger than safe.
There is no virus in an mRNA vaccine.
Your usual toying with the nuance of words is as unamusing and unhelpful as ever. “Feel” is expressing opinion. And I am entitled to mine without your mad dog attacks.
This began with you insisting the vaccines were “safe. period”. Well that’s saying too much too soon in my opinion. But if you want to sit out on that limb you go right ahead. I won’t be joining you. Something is bound to go wrong somewhere, and I will make it completely clear now that when it does, it won’t matter where or why, but only that it did, despite your insistence the vaccines were safe…period. I won’t be accepting any backtracking.
You said it will do no more than a virus does. Is what a virus does harmless? No.
Maybe in your part of the world. My experience indicates much different.
I think you are just getting caught up in details that don’t really matter. The risk of vaccines is obviously vanishingly small. We have over 500 million data points to back up that claim at this point. How much more data do you need to make your mind up? You can’t just say we don’t know yet because you can play that game forever. It’s like asking why to something, you can ask why forever and never be satisfied.
I put an upper bound on it. If you aren’t worried about catching viruses then you shouldn’t be worried about an mRNA vaccine. If you want me to tighten the upper bound then I will say that they do less than a virus because it only instructs your cells to make part of a virus which cannot do anything.
Okay well, I’m not arguing about how to use this word anymore. To me, it does not matter than much.
Non specific data but its going to take some time to explain over 2000 deaths.
It might not have been any of the vaccines. Then again, it might have been. I am not making a hard and fast decision yet. Time is vital.
https://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19
I love viruses. I sprinkle them on my morning cereal along with random fungi and bacteria. Yum! Safe!
Well that’s the claim. History has told me to be skeptical of doctors and scientists giving over-confident opinions about their newest creations, even the newest creations of their colleagues.
Its a bit soon to be laying that at my feet. Mass distribution of these vaccines has just begun.
Do you know that it’s possible to know stuff?
You be quiet. Who the hell do you think you are… I’ve muted you so I don’t have to read your tyrannical ideas.
I’ve muted you, too. I noticed that all you want to do in this forum is rile ppl up and start a fight. I’m not on this forum to endlessly argue like you.