WestCanMan

And then when ivermectin was used in the real world, as it was in Uttar Pradesh, and covid rates fell dramatically, those inconclusive studies provided the rationale for saying "correlation is not causation". Basically, "when ivermectin was used in our labs it didn't work very well, so we won't attribute the success of the covid fight in Uttar Pradesh to the use of ivermectin." How convenient. Oddly enough, one of the reasons cited for the decline in bad covid outcomes in Uttar Pradesh was "acquired immunity from prior covid waves", but our "scientists" here refused to consider acquired immunity was even a thing. People who had covid before just had to get the jab because acquired immunity couldn't be taken into consideration. So acquired immunity was used as a tool when they needed it, and discarded when they wanted to push more vaccines. FYI the actual reason for vaxing healthy young adults was because they have rockstar stats. I.e., whatever vax-status group you put those people in is gonna look good because bad outcomes just don't happen to them, and it's a massive population. If you were Big Pharma wouldn't you want to have "15M Canadians in your vaxed group who all have a 0% chance of dying of covid" in your group? By contrast, 95-yr-old COPD sufferers are gonna die whether they're vaxed or not, because they're easy pickins for covid. Whoever ends up with those people in their vax-status group is gonna look weak, because they're all gonna die instantly if they get sneezed on. So there's no pressure put on those people to take the jab. Back at the beginning of the 'pandemic', when it was first theorized that HCQ might be a useful tool for fighting covid, triggering a massive wave of hate and scorn from leftists (yes, HCQ was highly political) The NEJoM and The Lancet published an article that showed no increase in positive outcomes, and an increase in deaths. The article was seized on by left-wing media outlets and heralded as 100% proof that HCQ didn't work, and then it was quickly retracted due to the flawed methodology and large-scale assumptions based on small sample sizes using the aforementioned flawed methodology. It might seem like one small article, but in the larger picture, just remember that it was: extremely easy to get anything published in a medical journal that was positive about the vaccines impossible to get anything published that was negative about the vaccines extremely easy to get anything published in a medical journal that was negative about alternative treatments, impossible to get anything published that was positive about alternative treatments, It's like an acceptance filter that amplifies one frequency while attenuating all others. Our MSM operated the same way. When Trudeau screwed up, as he did multiple times, our media ignored that aspect of the story, and no matter what Trump did, there was a negative spin put on it. Eg, somehow there was a strong net positive message from the MSM because Trudeau allowed people to fly directly to Canada from Wuhan and walk around in our airports, care homes, public pools, restaurants, buses & trains, etc, and it was a net negative for Trump to stop people from Wuhan from doing that. So, how do these same people say that "social distancing works", but "preventing people from travelling to your country from a covid hotspot is useless"? That's not f'ing science, it's just MSM bullshit that people accepted because they were programmed to accept any criticism of Trump. TBH, if people are legitimately scared of a pathogen, and have faith in a remedy, there's no need to force them. But this covid farce completely obliterated all trust in our institutions like the CDC and NiH, which were caught lying, retracting, moving the goalposts, falsifying narratives about at-risk populations, and walking back their promises over and over and over. I appreciate your tone, candor, and reasonableness, but I'm sorry, that is 100% wrong. The reason that they needed "emergency order approval" instead of just regular approval was because the full long-term testing had not been done. That's by definition, so there's no real margin for error there. And that statement is based on a mix of false assumptions, false data, lies about testing, completely ignoring vax injuries, etc: the 'vaccines' were never designed to stop or prevent the spread, and Pfizer and Moderna never did any testing at all to see if their jabs prevented the spread of covid, nor did they make any such claims. Yet the CDC (Rachel or Rochelle Wolinsky I think her name was) and NiH (Fauci) both clearly stated that "the vaccines prevent the spread of covid, and you can't pass along covid if you're vaxed". That's "THE LIE THAT FORCED FIFTY MILLION VACCINATIONS". In the end, we now know that the jabs were entirely useless at preventing the spread of covid. The chart i posted earlier today shows just how massively hospitalizations increased after we jabbed 85% of Canadians in 2021. we were hearing reports of serious injuries to young people, and even deaths, long before our health authorities admitted that those things were actually happening. Canadians were under the impression that the covid jabs never caused any harm to anyone at all, long after that was known to be 100% false The success of the vaccines was lied about in advance, after the trials were done, and lied about at every stage of the vaccination campaign. The data from Israeli ICUs was in while we were still being told the vaccines had extremely high success rates. The total lack of a need for vaccines in young adults and children was never fully explained to Canadians. They had a 0% need, and the vaccines were never intended to prevent the spread, so THE POTENTIAL BENEFIT FROM AND NEED FOR VACCINATING HEALTHY YOUNG ADULTS AND CHILDREN WAS ALWAYS ZERO PERCENT. When you combine a 0% need with even a 1% chance for serious injury, the choice to not vaccinate was crystal clear. Canadians were led to believe the opposite. Again, that's entirely based on false information. If the at-risk population wanted to take the jabs, that was always good enough "Vaccine success" has only ever been evident, or should I say "allegedly evident", in clinical trials, not in real-world data, as far as Canada is concerned. 2022 was our worst year ever, and almost 90% of our vaxed deaths were among the multi-vaxed. How many 19-yr-olds should realistically suffer grievous injuries to save some 90-yr-olds? As a person who's much closer to 90 than 19, I say the answer is zero. When I'm 90 I don't want a 19-yr-old to to risk their life for me. That's entirely f'ing stupid. The number of harms was not small, and the harms included deaths and intolerable suffering and misery. Why has that information been kept from you? Look how many people died between these two dates, in each "death by vax-status" category, and then determine for yourself what percentage of the covid deaths in Canada occurred among the multi-vaxed. Between Aug 09 2022 and 25 Aug 2022, unvaxed deaths (the total number from Dec 14 2020 until until that date, so close to 2 years) went up from 10,645 - 10,800. That's an additional 155 deaths among the unvaxed. 2 doses went from 3,699 - 3,821. 122 deaths. 3 doses went from 4,727 - 5,209. 482 deaths. 4 doses went from 708 - 1,031. 323 deaths. The total is 155 + 122 + 482 + 323 deaths. 1,082 deaths. 155 deaths/1,082 deaths = 14.3% 14.3% of the covid deaths in Canada between those dates were among the unvaxed. 85.7% of the covid deaths in Canada between those dates were among the multi-vaxed. Those stats are taken from Health Canada's infobase site, by Statista. Here is the original Health Canada data for the last date: The bottom-right chart in the pic above is where Statista gets their data from. That is from the Health Canada "infobase" page. Health Canada stopped giving out that data after Sept 25th, 2022. In short, 85.7% of covid deaths in Canada were among the multi-vaxed. That's in a year when deaths were up by more than 30% from the year prior. That's how well vaccines "worked" in Canada. Success? Not by my standards, but in a back room somehwere, it was determined that it was, using Case fatality Rate data. So apprently the unvaxxed just get infected at a massively higher rate to end up dying at the same rate as the unvaxed. Yay??? Remember, we have no idea what the vax rates are among the "elderly WITH serious underlying health issues" cohort. I.e., the "get covid = sure to die" cohort. We just know the vax rates among the "elderly" group, which in itself is not a huge risk category once you factor out the high number of "with underlying risks" people from their ranks.

I would argue that medical journals work for Big Pharma, not just with them, and definitely not for you and me or the medical community in general. I think their main goal, though unstated, is to rep for Big Pharma. And I think we would agree that average Americans and Canadians don't buy ads in those magazines, we don't exert any pressure on them to say this or that, and we don't put a lot of time and energy into planting people on the boards or in editorial roles there who put our needs first. Big Pharma really really cares what is said in those mags. A positive review for a big pharma drug in one of those mags is like a license to print money. I'd bet that the average person working in a prominent position in any one of those magazines has either made a lot of money from big pharma or they're going to. That's just my own opinion from what I've seen and heard, so take that for what it's worth. I think that the FDA would actually be held to a higher standard of integrity than medical journals, because they are funded by the public's dime, but you can find articles like this everywhere. Thousands of people have written about this: https://thewhiterabbitreport.substack.com/p/how-big-pharma-controls-the-fda-lobbying

OK, so I said that I'd provide proof of all that covid stuff again, and it wasn't as easy as I thought it would be because I haven't gone to that folder for a long time now. I don't know if I will get to it all yet, but here's at least some of it.... HOSPITALIZATIONS: Part of the reason the vax was pushed as being "necessary" for everyone to take was to reduce hospitalizations. The justification for forcing people who didn't need it, to take it, was to keep hospitalizations down, because theoretically, covid hospitalizations were overwhelming our medical community. Did the jabs succeed in keeping hospitalizations down? User, get a friend to show you where 2022 is on that graph, and ask them if hospitalizations were lower, similar, or higher. If, by some miracle, you have a friend who isn't ret4rded, and isn't a liar, they will tell you that hospitalizations in 2022 DWARFED hospitalizations in 2020 and 2021. Actually, I'm not gonna do hospitalizations, deaths, deaths by vax status and all the other stats at the same time. I'm gonna go 1 by 1 and grind your idjit nose into them, User. Tell me, can you admit that in 2022, after we "vaccinated" 85% of the population, did hospitalizations go down, like they were supposed to once we got enough people vaxed? Do you think all of those hospitalizations were among the unvaxed? Just tell me what you think you know about the vaccines' effectiveness against hospitalizations, and then tell me if you think that the MSM gave you the impression that hospitalizations were up or down. Tell me how you can look at that graph, from Health Canada, and interpret it as a vaccine success story, and not a failure. Tell me how you think that 2020 and 2021 looked overwhelming, but 2022 didn't. Let's drill down here and finish this one part of the topic, then we will move on to deaths.

You're raging and m0r0nic now. You don't know whether or not vaccines cause autism, User. You simply do not, and you are relying 100% on the people who profit from vaccines to give you that information. STFU, donkey. This is a layered, nuanced topic and vax safety and efficacy of different "vaccines" is all over the map now. Some things that we call "vaccines" are dangerous garbage. The covid 'vax' is completely unnecessary, dangerous, and useless. As for the traditional vaccines, at least their efficacy and the value that they provide actually offsets the danger of taking them. Does that make sense to you, you f'ing tool? If you're taking an actual, effective vaccine, which works extremely well at preventing a disease that has a good chance of killing or seriously harming you, then some risk level is worth it. Does that make sense to you? Because I guarantee that even eyeball and ex-flyer would understand that part. Probably herbie is the only person who would go against that. Do I think that traditional "vaccines" are causing autism? Yes I do. I've now crossed over into the category of "people who believe that traditional vaccines play a major role in the autism epidemic." I'm also in the group of people that say "It's ridiculous to hide behind a wall of confirmation bias and completely ignore this topic, because there is too much evidence available to us now." Just don't hang you immature, stupid, meaningless label on me because my positions are far too complex for you to understand.

If the search feature on this site wasn't disabled I could find it for you in ten seconds.

Yes, that absolutely is your line in the sand. Any talk of vaccine-induced injuries is off the table for you. People who talk about vax-injuries are nutjobs. If that's not the case, then why can't you acknowledge the injuries discussed in this thread? Why is the bar for declaring someone "died of covid" so low, that any mention of a sniffle or a sneeze in the past two weeks makes it a fait accompli, but proving a vax-induced death requires the sworn testimony of a rabbi, a priest, an imam and a nun, plus a certificate of "I don't know how the F you got this signed" from the Pfizer lab itself? VAERS is like a black hole of vaccine injury info.

Lol. There is an entire 50-page thread about the stats and the methodology, but you are too dumb to make sense of the parts that require a basic understanding of math. I will post that shit here later today. Im too busy right now.

Your confirmation bias is just as bad as eyeball's Iron Dome of Dumb, and your whole point is based on a false dichotomy logical fallacy... FTI there are more options that just: All vaccines are 100% perfect and anyone who questions any aspect of their safety and efficacy is an anti-science nutjob All vaccines are garbage that is just meant to kill people or make them ret4rded By stating that you believe that crap you're admitting to being a cultist m0r0n.

How popular a person is among the left4rd MSM is directly proportional to the percentage of their alleged affairs and rapes that get media coverage. The Hollywood 'casting couch' was the world's best-known dirty little secret for generations, and then suddenly Harvey Weinstein was left holding the bag for some reason. Do you think he was the first/only one? Do you think he was the worst offender? Gimme a break. He pissed someone off, and now he's "the only one" 😂 The last thing I'm gonna do is judge rich and powerful men by how many tarts they allegedly stuck their junk in, because almost every one of them did it, and the ones that didn't still covered for the others, which is still the same indiscretion. If the Rock cheats on his wife ten times a day, and has sex with underage hookers, no one's gonna talk about it right now, just like they didn't talk about Weinstein, Diddy or Epstein when they were part of the "in" crowd. I really doubt the Rock is guilty of that, and I have no grounds for suspicion whatsoever, so I shouldn't have used his name, but I think you get the point. If he was guilty, no one would be talking about it and anyone who said a peep would get cancelled. (How long did Arnie have a kid that looked exactly like him and when did that story get out? When he was 15 or something like that?) I bet that the Rock could rape a 15-yr-old in front of Whoopi Goldberg and Hillary Clinton and at least one of them wouldn't say a word about it. I guess that the true history of the monarchy would shock the shit outta you.

There's also the fact that people were banned from social media for posting about the Wuhan lab while Fauci was pimping the BS pangolin narrative. then about 2 years into covid we found out that Fauci actually funded GoF on the bat coronavirus in the Wuhan lab. He was 100% lying about the most likely origin of covid the whole time and our MSM somehow 'missed' that story, but they sure didn't miss the chance to call Joe Rogan a liar while he was telling the truth about ivermectin. In the end conspiracy theorists won 50-0, the MSM was exposed, again. The "kooky allegations" all turned out to be true, and the MSM went ofer during covid.

Medical journals, including NEJoM and The Lancet, quickly posted fake studies about the failure of HCQ which they had to retract, they trumpeted all of the vaccine overestimations about safety and efficacy like they were "scientific facts carved in stone", and they refused to print anything showing the success of ivermectin. I dunno if you saw it, but I posted an article right from the NiH talking about "the success of ivermectin in clinical trials at the early stages of covid". Why did they downplay the positive results of dirt-cheap, off-patent medication while railroading everyone towards a highly expensive and improperly vetted mRNA jab? What part of 'science' says that "forcing pregnant women to get a hastily/improperly tested mRNA jab was the right thing to do"?

STFU, dummy. You're running away from STATS here. Health Canada's own STATS. And for what reason? So that I can go look at another one of your ret4rded posts in a different thread? Anyone looking that this thread just sees you ignoring all the basic signs of vax-efficacy and safety. Deaths, hospitalizations and infections all went WAY UP in Canada after the pseudovax campaign, and almost 90% of our deaths were among the multi-vaxed. Those are all facts. You can't spin that as proof that the jabs worked. The jabs failed by every worthwhile metric aside from "lab reports from tests done in the secrecy of Pfizer's basement".

Buddy, adults are saying: "I'm running out of reasons to not believe that vaccines are causing autism. Let's get to the bottom of it, and if that's actually the case then let's see if there's some way to get children the necessary protection without the risk of autism." But for some reason cultist dipshits are saying: "Anyone who says 'vaccines might be causing autism' is just a dummy-dumdum. Everyone should just ignore any alleged evidence that suggests such a thing. They are anti-vax kooks and they wanna get their own children killed by easily preventable diseases. HAAAAHAHAHAAA!!! HAHAHA!!!!" How is what you're saying not childish and stupid? How long can you just ignore thousands of people with first-hand knowledge? What do those people have to gain from lying?

True. They have saved millions of lives, and what's the point of medicine if not that? And as hard as it is to say it, a hundred or even ten thousands cases of autism is a small price to pay to save 1M lives. BUT, that doesn't mean that it's ridiculous to say that "the vaccines are doing doing enough harm that we need to look into making them safer." Why are you pretending to know that vaccines have never caused autism? How the hell can you possibly know that? What purpose does it serve to just call everyone who is concerned with the possibility of vaccine-induced autism "AN ANTI-VAXXER!!!! 😭" There are thousands of people who claim to know for certain that they do induce autism, why should you ignore their plight? What purpose does that serve? Just be an adult, and even say something like "Geez, maybe they do cause autism in a lot of cases. It's worth getting to the bottom of, this because kids' lives matter. Still, at the end of the day, the simple math says that saving 1M lives outweighs the suffering of x-number of autism cases per 1,000 shots." Should we quantify that though? What is "x-number"? 1 in 100? 1 in 1,000? 1 in 10,000? 35/1,000? Why keep that a secret.

So you can't answer any of those questions.... Thanks. Before Fauci ever said "pangolin" he already knew what virus was infecting people - The Fauci & Wuhan virus Before Fauci and the CDC, etc ever said "HCQ DOESN'T WORK AND YOU'RE A DUMDUM IF YOU THINK IT DOES!!!!" they knew that was an important message to send out, regardless of its actual effectiveness, because they were railroading you towards the jabs. Before Fauci and the CDC, etc ever said "IVERMECTIN IS JUST HORSE-DEWORMER, IT DOESN'T WORK AND YOU'RE A DUMDUM IF YOU THINK IT DOES!!!! HAHAHAAAAA!!! HAHAHAAAA!!!! HAHAHAAAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!!" they knew that was an important message to send out, regardless of its effectiveness, because they were railroading you towards the jabs. Like it or not, CBC and TNI lied to you about Russian collusion. CBC and TNI lied to you about the laptop. CBC and TNI lied to you about the Wuhan lab. CBC lied to you about the Canadian gov't for the last 20 f'n years, dude. They don't work for you, they work for the LPOC, and that little voice in your head that questions who the F the CBC actually works for is your tiny spark of intelligence. Not everyone is "in on the conspiracy". Some of them are just easily manipulated CBC-cultists, like you. Look in the mirror, bro. Why are you trying so hard to avoid answering simple questions, like "Why did covid deaths soar in 2022 if 85% of our population had safe and effective vaccines? Why did so many multi-vaxed die in 2022? Why did the CBC ignore all the vaxed deaths, and the increase in overall deaths in 2022? Why did the covid story suddenly die when Canadians were dying faster than ever before?" "Why/how did the CBC get every single thing wrong, and never question anything that whole time??????" "How is Fauci funding the creation of the virus not a HUGE f'ing story?"

Why are you afraid to say it? It makes no sense. Copy and paste it if you want. IDGAF.

The term anti-vax is kind of like a cross that big pharma uses to ward off oversight. It's a false dichotomy, where you're supposed to choose between "saving millions of children from dying of diseases that were preventable" or "being a mouth-breathing dolt who puts their own children at risk because they don't believe in measles, mumps, polio, chicken pox, etc". Even if it's true that vaccinations against the traditional diseases cause autism, autism is still better than death, and the cumulative effect of 95% vax coverage is better than a bunch of cases of autism. But we should still try to find out if the vaccines cause autism, and if so, try to prevent the autism. Yeah, a third option. Crazy, right?

Buddy, there is no "anti-vax". We vaccinated all of our children. That doesn't mean that I should never question whether or not the vaccines are safe enough.

Point them out. What was false. Man up and make a specific claim, or go to your bedroom and sulk.

3 simple yes or no questions: Did Fauci fund research on the bat coronavirus, in the Wuhan lab, that made it more transmissible among human cells? Did the covid virus mostly likely come from the Wuhan lab? Did Fauci know that he probably had a hand in creating the covid virus when he blamed a pangolin? That right there just proves how stupid you are. Do you honestly not know the difference between: the profit margins on an off-patent drug vs the profit margins on a newly patented wonder-drug that was created to save the world from a deadly pandemic? Dammit, Beave, it's like the profit margin for a young Pamela Anderson as a hooker vs a fat old homeless woman with rotten teeth. FYI it's not just a few big pharma companies that can make ivermectin. Any pharma company on the planet can belch out piles of it without paying a single cent in royalties to anyone. The profit margin on a dose of ivermectin would be like the profit margin on a plastic straw. The profit margin on a dose of patent-protected "save the world juice" is off the charts. "Take this or die!!!!! Don't allow your children into your home if they don't take this stuff, or their infection might kill you!!!" (people literally did that - prevent their adult children from visiting if they weren't jabbed) You're free to say things that don't get in the way of the LPOC or Big Pharma profits.

False. Not everyone with a post-secondary education is dumb enough to still think that Fauci, the guy who is 99% certain to have helped create covid, was always acting in all of our best interests. It stands to reason that he had more pressing concerns (FYI that was a deliberate understatement - he absolutely did have more pressing concerns). It's one thing for me to already see through his deception before the time of that revelation, and quite another for you to still be oblivious all these years later. Grow up, Beave. You're not part of the "big-boy class", history has actually exposed you as a rube. That's carved in stone, it's not an accusation. Members of congress and the senate can still invest in drugs that are up for approval the the FDA. Drs in Canada and the US can still advise you to take prescription medicine, for which they receive "perks" from its makers, without disclosing their ulterior motive the gov't of China just spent decades reducing the number of children born there, and they were facing a severe overpopulation problem, especially among the older, non-contributing generations. To some, covid was more of a solution than a problem 😉. Every single lie, mistake, omission, cancellation, attack on free speech (especially the truth), was in favour of two things: panic, and the jabs. Every single one. Now we're finding out from the NiH that ivermectin was already showing signs of success during the early stages of covid. And why were people kicked off of social media for talking about the BSL4 lab in Wuhan? The people who policed social media (FB, Twitter, Goggle, YouTube) are part of the same alliance as CBC, BBC, AP, Reuters, WashPo, NYT, etc. I.e.: all the biggest liars are part of TNI. They theoretically formed their alliance to combat election disinformation (kicked NYPost off of Twitter for telling the truth), then they announced that they would jointly combat covid disinformation (aka control the covid narrative), and they were in lock step with every lie and bit of disinformation. what stat do you have to say that the covid jabs worked in Canada, aside from some "lab studies" by profiteers? I can cite the massive increase in infections in 2022 as a failure, the massive increase in hospitalizations in 2022 as a failure, the massive increase in hospitalizations in 2022 as a failure, the massive increase in ICU visits in 2022 as a failure, the massive increase in covid deaths in 2022 as a failure, and the fact that 85.7% of covid deaths in summer 2022 were among the multi-vaxed as a failure. Can you tell me why the MSM basically stopped talking about covid deaths in 2022 when they were up by 30%? That's kind of alarming, considering we supposedly had a vaccine at that point. That's all for now, cultist child. Go back to your ad hominem attacks and appeal to authority drivel if you'd like, but the writing is right there, on the wall.

Touché. I think there's a lot of anti-Trump/America sentiment simmering behind these arguments in favour of the Grippen. It's like when someone is no longer enamoured with their partner and all they see is that person's flaws. I guess I coulda just said it's confirmation bias, now that I think about it: "NYAH NYAH, TWUMPIE!"

America's industrial capacity dwarfs Sweden's, and until the planes actually arrive in Canada, all we're talking about is "What fighter planes will they be able to give us in 3-8 years?" If anything major happens within that time frame, it's not unlikely that Sweden or the US would say "These aren't available for sale abroad right now because we need them ourselves." (I'm pretty sure that we reneged on a deal to give the Saudis some armoured vehicles at one point recently) America's larger standing air force and greater capacity means that they might be able to spare at least a few aircraft or increase production more dramatically than Sweden can. Also, 1) America's planes are more battle-tested, and real-world effectiveness is light years past theoretical effectiveness, plus 2) any new systems that are built by American contractors like Raytheon, etc, to upgrade fighter planes' capabilities, will be designed so that the first iteration of that system fits the F-35. It will probably require some re-sizing or tinkering to implement that same system on other NATO fighters. It seems like an afterthought right now, but the F-18s that we currently have were upgraded many times over their decades of service, and no doubt the next batch of fighters we get will have to last us 40 more years. The easier, cheaper and quicker it is to update them, the better. A last addition to that thought, any shortcomings that develop over the next few years with the F-35's capabilities, as adversarial aircraft, weapons systems, detection systems, etc grow stronger, will probably be brought to light sooner because they will be in action more than the Grippens - America's nose is always in something, Sweden's, not so much. If Grippens don't see a lot of battle, it could take them longer to find out which ways they're lacking, so upgrading them might lag by a generation. It only takes one chink in the armour to bring down a plane, or squadron, and we can't afford that.

Idjit

They aren't "claims". They are "Health Canada's stats". 15,000 dead in 2020. 14,000 in 2021. 19,000 in 2022. I also showed you Health Canada's own stats that show you that 85.7% of the covid deaths were among the multi-vaxed, right when Health Canada just stopped giving us that info. Those are all the very real, pertinent facts. Not "my facts" or "Dr somebody's facts", they are the only actual facts that matter in determining the effectiveness of the vax campaign, they are 100% accurate, in black and white, and you have never even challenged them. You just call me names and pretend that I ran from ONE BS that post that you made in the now 5-yr covid saga. Remember: the goals for the vax were simple: lower the death count dramatically stop the spread not harm or kill people itself Then: lower the death count by a lot stop the spread unburden overwhelmed hospitals not harm or kill people itself Then: lower the death count somewhat stop the spread unburden overwhelmed hospitals not harm or kill people itself At that point they were still pretending that forcing young people to vax was somehow necessary, despite the fact that we already knew that vaxed people were dying of covid. You tell me, are people who are sick enough with covid to die from it spreading the virus? And if jabbed people are still spreading it, then why force people who don't need it to take it, when you know that it is killing and grievously injuring people? Then the vax promise was downgraded to: lower the death count a little bit slow the spread unburden overwhelmed hospitals only harm or kill a few people But, in 2022, after the full forced-vaccination campaign: DEATHS WENT UP. WAY UP INFECTIONS WENT WAY UP. HOSPITALIZATIONS WENT UP BY A MASSIVE AMOUNT A lot of people who didn't want or need the vax were killed or badly harmed by it. Instead of making a snotty remark, just tell me which part of that you think is false, or tell me why you think that informtion doesn't matter, and we should just rely on Pfizer's lab studies to judge the success of the campaign. If you wanna continue to cling to "Pfizer's lab studies show that the vax was 97% efficient 😭" as your mantra, or whatever BS they pulled outta their ass for little you, that's just your problem. I can't understand this topic for you, all I can do is present the information to you, and then you get to decide whether or not you wanna keep your head up your ass. If you think that Health Canada has some other death totals for 2020,2021 and 2022 then why have you never posted a link? I did that, multiple times. I posted the "covid deaths by vax status" data from Health Canada multiple times. You've never tried. Even eyeball dug it up once, just to flatly misinterpret it.