Unvaccinated woman denied organ transplant proves natural immunity in bid for life-saving procedure

[eyeball]

22 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Parents? She's 57.  Did you respond to the right thread?

Yes I did. Why are you pretending to be stupid again?

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Aww muffin - are you reduced to ad hominems again? That's the best you've got?

He cries out, immediately after posting:

On 4/30/2023 at 1:28 PM, CdnFox said:

You are quickly progressing from 'i made a mistake' to "i'm an unmitigated retard who's such a desperate loser i can't even admit i made a mistake in an online discussion".  Pathetic.

That's just too good. I don't think we could get a better example of oblivious posting. 

I'm thoroughly entertained.  ?

 

 

Edited May 1, 2023 by Moonbox

[CdnFox]

38 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yes I did. Why are you pretending to be stupid again?

why would her parents be involved in the decision when she's 57? Why are  you ACTUALLY being stupid again?

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

why would her parents be involved in the decision when she's 57?

So you're actually NOT pretending to be stupid?

Okay, have it your way.

[CdnFox]

41 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

He cries out, immediately after posting:

That's just too good. I don't think we could get a better example of oblivious posting. 

ROFLMAO  so let me get this straight - you're actually so retarded you can't tell the difference bteween an ad hominem and an observation of someone's character ?

AND  - you posted THAT as being 'obvlivious' --  HAAAAHAHAAHAHA - God kid - just when i think you can't get any more stupid   Clearly i underestimated your abilities

You're obviously confused as to what an ad hominem argument is Which is hilarious - man this thread is just one big screw up after another for you isn't it

Go read what an ad hominem is. You'll get why everyone's laughing at you right now    It's like correcting someone's spelling with a spelling mistake

Well - sound like you've given up trying to make any kind of actual argument.  Not surprising after you posted a chart which very clearly supported my position.

So once again - as YOUR CHART SHOWS - and as medical experts testified- there is no medical reason to deny her. This is political. And that's wrong.

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

why would her parents be involved in the decision when she's 57? Why are  you ACTUALLY being stupid again?

What if she was only five years old? How long are you going to pretend you didn't see that part of the question?  

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

So you're actually NOT pretending to be stupid?

Okay, have it your way.

of course not. I just seem stupid to stupid people. Stupid people often find intelligent things hard to comprehend. So of COURSE it's going to seem like i'm trying to be stupid to YOU - but intelligent people realize that it's just your stupidity confusing you.

Hope that was simple enough. I can get a crayon if it'll help.

So - still no reason why you said you hoped the parents wouldn't be involved  in a 57 year old woman's case? Or are you did you actually make a mistake and now you're just trying to deflect so as to not look as stupid?  Because its making you look stupid

[Moonbox]

28 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What if she was only five years old? How long are you going to pretend you didn't see that part of the question?  

Not worth the effort bud.  This guy is a clown.  

[eyeball]

20 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So - still no reason why you said you hoped the parents wouldn't be involved  in a 57 year old woman's case?

What if the woman was only 5 years old.

23 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Or are you did

I realize this is just a typo but do you think you deserve a break for that?

Why?

[eyeball]

4 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Not worth the effort bud.  This guy is a clown.  

He must be trying to be set some kind of record.

Maybe what's really stymied him was the question about whether the authorities should overrule the parents decision to not vaccinate a 5 year old child in a similar position.

Edited May 1, 2023 by eyeball

[Moonbox]

22 minutes ago, eyeball said:

He must be trying to be set some kind of record.

For what? Only he knows.  

[Aristides]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

No, everyone except you it seems is quite capable of seeing that the condition she's in is the only relevant factor. I'm quite certain if she was only 5 years old and her parents were refusing to have her vaccinated the same factor would prevail.

Although I would hope that authorities would take that decision out of the parents hands. Wouldn't you?

I think that would come under the same thing as JW parents refusing blood transfusions for a child.

[Moonbox]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

ROFLMAO  so let me get this straight - you're actually so retarded you can't tell the difference bteween an ad hominem and an observation of someone's character ?

AND  - you posted THAT as being 'obvlivious' --  HAAAAHAHAAHAHA - God kid - just when i think you can't get any more stupid   Clearly i underestimated your abilities

You're obviously confused as to what an ad hominem argument is Which is hilarious - man this thread is just one big screw up after another for you isn't it

Go read what an ad hominem is. You'll get why everyone's laughing at you right now    It's like correcting someone's spelling with a spelling mistake

Well - sound like you've given up trying to make any kind of actual argument.  Not surprising after you posted a chart which very clearly supported my position.

So once again - as YOUR CHART SHOWS - and as medical experts testified- there is no medical reason to deny her. This is political. And that's wrong.

That you pounded this out on your keyboard and thought to yourself, "Yes, this is a reasonable and well-thought out response. This will show him!" is too perfect.  I rest my case.  ??

Edited May 1, 2023 by Moonbox

[WestCanMan]

49 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

why would her parents be involved in the decision when she's 57? Why are  you ACTUALLY being stupid again?

He's using the word "vaccine" to mean two different things:

1) the traditional vaccines we give to children, which have been so successful in the real world that they eradicated lethal diseases like smallpox, TB and polio wherever they were widely administered, and 

2) the covid pseudovax, which provides so little protection (if any) that deaths went up by 30% after we vaxed 85% of our country, with almost 90% of those deaths being among the multi-vaxed.

I guess we could say that the covid vaccine is like other vaccines in the exact same way that exacerbated means the same thing as eradicated. 

[eyeball]

2 minutes ago, Aristides said:

I think that would come under the same thing as JW parents refusing blood transfusions for a child.

Which I suspect CdnFox has argued defensively on the child's behalf when that topic came up.

In this case however he's too focused on extracting the admission of whatever mistake he needs to get his ya yas out. 

So...he's in his pretend mode and displaying a degree of pigheaded stubbornness that's almost a marvel to behold.

[Goddess]

1 hour ago, Aristides said:

I think that would come under the same thing as JW parents refusing blood transfusions for a child.

You would have to argue that the injection is a "benefit" to the child.

These injections have the worst cost/benefit ratio for for children of any medical intervention that exists.

It's why so many countries have stopped injecting children.

[eyeball]

27 minutes ago, Goddess said:

You would have to argue that the injection is a "benefit" to the child.

Which is exactly what the vast VAST majority of medical experts around the world do argue.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

What if the woman was only 5 years old.

She isn't. She's 57.  Are you on crack or what?

Some other case would be some other case and we'd have to look at that but the woman in question here is an adult.  And there's no medical reason to deny her

Edited May 1, 2023 by CdnFox

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, Moonbox said:

Not worth the effort bud.  This guy is a clown.  

Says a loser who posted the wrong graph and is now all pissy about it.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

He must be trying to be set some kind of record.

 

I think it's great that you two losers have found a mutual support group

[Goddess]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Which is exactly what the vast VAST majority of medical experts around the world do argue.

No they don't. 

It's why so many countries stopped injecting children.

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Which is exactly what the vast VAST majority of medical experts around the world do argue.

They don't "argue" that children should be covid-jabbed at all. They just make the unsubstantiated claim because there is absolutely no science or solid logic behind it.

1) Only a few children died of covid in the first two years, and none of them were "healthy" so healthy children absolutely don't need the protection of a vaccine. The number of children dying of covid actually went up drastically after the shot was made available to them. 

2) 9/10 people who die of covid are multi-vaxed, so the jab obviously isn't preventing the spread.

If kids don't need the jab, and the jab doesn't prevent infection/slow the spread, what is the reason for vaxing the children?

Tell me in your own words why you feel like children need to be vaccinated...

Dec 10 2021, that's a month after the first children were vaccinated in Canada.

Dec 2021 is almost two full years into the pandemic. If you sy that people saterd dying in real numbers in March 2020 then that's ten months of 2020 and 11 months of 2022 = 21 months. 

In 21 months there were 11 kids under 12 that died of covid.

From Dec 10 2021 to Nov 7 2022 is 11 months. 30 more kids under 12 died in those 11 months.

They went from 11 deaths in 21 months, basically one death every two months pre-"vax", to 30 deaths in 11 months with the vax. Almost 3 deaths/month.

Pre-jab, 1/2 a death per month, then when kids were getting the jab there were 3/month. That's 6x as many.

A bit less than 6x tbh, because it's slightly over 1/2 and slightly under 3. But you get the picture. It appears as if the change that they made resulted in the opposite of what they hoped for. 

To be exact, covid deaths among kids 12 and under were at 520% of what they previously were, ie they were up by 420%. Keep in mind, that's a year-long sample size across an entire country, and a 420% increase in deaths. The case of the covid jab absolutely cannot be made using death stats. 

 

I know that you don't look at stats, and you'll basically ignore the facts and just keep on spewing the same dumb crap that you were before I wrote this post, but the information is still here for other people who are interested in more than just opinions. 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

She isn't. She's 57.  Are you on crack or what?

No, but I'm sure onto you aren't I? ?

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

No they don't. 

It's why so many countries stopped injecting children.

In islamic countries there are a lot of people who are opposed to vaccinations for their children just because they don't trust the sources of the vaccines. 

Anyone who lives in a country that's usually on America's ?-list, and is aware of the Tuskegee experiment, would do well say "no thank you" to a vax from 'Murica, just like we'd all be hesitant to take an Iranian vax.  

Vax-hesitancy is real, and it's not always just the result of paranoia. Sometimes "they" are trying to kill you.

Which begs the question: "Why do so many other countries see risks inherent with vaxing children but our country pretends there isn't any real risk at all? Or why do they pretend that the actual deaths of actual children from the vax is "still better than risking covid", when risking covid for 2 years didn't kill any healthy kids?"

All the people who lied about Trump and who lied about collusion and who lied about Sandman, Smollett, M. Brown, Rayshard, mostly peaceful protests, etc, etc, and then lied about covid and lied about its origins and lied about the likelihood of P2P transmission and lied about everything else covid-related are telling us to vax our kids. 

Is it vax-hesitancy to not trust those people at this point, or is it just common sense?

Honestly, the best case that I can make for vaxing is that the people who push the vax know that all of their sheeple have it and far fewer conservatives have it. If Pelosi and the Dems and Trudeau and the Libs are as evil as I suspect, maybe they have something to release which the vax actually will provide protection from. 

[CdnFox]

37 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No, but I'm sure onto you aren't I? ?

I hope not. I'd never be rid of the smell....