Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire FDA: Heart Attacks 71 times more often for Vaccine takers

Fuggin A Right Jack

This can be tested statistically very easily. If someone had access to reliable vaccination associated (even if only suspect) illness data they could easily test if there was any significance to the illnesses.

The government with a bottomless pit of fiat currency will not spend the effort or money to create a reliable database of vaccine illnesses.

Friends mother died from a clot going to her brain after her first shot, two weeks after the jab....dead.

A very good explanation. Thank you.

The huge issue is that, while there are obvious problems with the mRNA tech, giving everyone, even end of life hospice patients etc, the vaccine blurs the data.

I personally think it's on purpose.

But, right now, both sides of this are cherry picking data and selectively omitting data. I pretty much said fuuck it after the CDC made the Cleveland Clinic alter it's vaccine recommendation.

Man, do I hate hearing these stories.

In ten years, you'll be marveling at how TRH had it right way back in 2021.

What was sad is that these folks were freaking out scared over the virus. She lived with them, took their son out of school and he did online in order for him not to possibly bring it home to her. They were so excited when the vax came out, she was one of the first I knew to get it. Her other son is a doctor and had her flown to his hospital and he was hands on doing everything to save her life. Sad. Great family.

All you can do at this point is make the best decision you can on the information you trust and hope its not based on fear , lies, or paranoia.

I carry at least three aspirins all the time.

Sorry to hear it. Can you please specify which jab was involved, if known?

It’s pretty simple for me. It comes down to two factors. First, I know my risks with Covid and I find them perfectly acceptable. Therefore, even if I believed that the vaccine was one hundred percent safe, I wouldn’t feel particularly motivated to get the shot. But since I know that no vaccine is completely safe, I feel no need to take on the additional risk of a vaccine. Secondly, it is well established and even admitted by the CDC that the vaccine does nothing to moderate the spread of the disease. Therefore, I have no public responsibility to take the vaccine.

These points are entirely logical and unassailable. Therefore, I view any attempt to argue against them with suspicion. Any attempt to do so, is at very best misguided but quite possibly maliciously motivated. The more strident those who would seek to change my mind become, the less I trust them. The less I trust them, the more unlikely it is that I will ever get the shot.

Prezactly.

Latin does not make something profound or intelligent.

Truth is, cause very, very, very often does precede event. So who gives a sht if someone comes up with a Latin phrase to obscure this obvious truth.

Well said.

I think that is very well said.

Any problem with those who've chosen otherwise based upon their own risk analysis? Serious question with no malice.

Darn. Now i have to find another conspiracy theory to believe in. Another one has been proven true.

Word

Problem? No. Though I doubt many of them actually did a risk analysis, because if they did, 99% of people would decide as I have.

Fair enough. Thanks for the response.

Regarding 99% agreement with your choice, would that be those who possessed the same information and had the same personal risk factors as yourself, or literally 99% of all persons? Fot instance 90+% of physicians, my 82 year old step-father, all 50 sitting governors, Mr and Mrs Trump. One percenters or just those of differing circumstances? No malice. I agree 100% with what you wrote previously. To each his own, there's nothing more important.