LeBron James' son, Bronny, suffers 'cardiac arrest,' family spokesperson says

It is easy to see why contagion is intuited. But in cases of symptoms, especially simultaneous symptoms, people have always rushed to assume contagion when other explanations are plausible, such as effects of shared environment.

More damning for contagion theory, of 50+ transmission studies, many of which were far too aggressive to be allowed today, none showed transmission.

Perhaps the most interesting such study …

https://resetheus.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/rosenau-experiment-influenza-1918-min.pdf

 

Even in the event a given illness is caused by environmental hazards, it would still seem intuitive to get out of that area if at all possible. Do you believe that humans cannot get disease from animals and insects, for example? Or do you draw the line at any disease being transmitted from human to human? If so, I'm not sure why there would be a hard line there. I haven't read those studies, but we've discussed some of this before, and I think there would be ways to test these assertions. People who believe them might have to do so without government approval, but for example, they could meet the infected or sick in a separate location and live with them to prove the sick can't transmit any disease they have.

 

Or we could just disavow the stupendous theory that people are deadly disease vectors, that people can kill other people by breathing on them.

We’ve tried your suggestion of your last paragraph. We’ve in effect tried it over 50 times, but to no avail.

In my view, transmission studies alone are the death knell for virology.

 

Do you disagree that animals can transmit disease to other animals? That animals, fleas, or mosquitos can transmit disease to humans? I'm trying to figure out if you categorically reject any and all possibility of disease transmission from one living thing to another or if you think there's something biologically unique to humans which prevents transmission from human to human. Putting aside breathing on people, what about bacterial STDs, for example? Do you dispute that chlamydia, gonorrhoea, and syphilis are sexually transmissible between humans?

 

I believe the same principles apply to animals. Which is what makes practices like mass-culling so barbaric.

Of interest, there is or was a strong belief that rats made people sick during the Black Death. But it is my understanding that the rats weren’t getting sick.

I do not believe there are any viruses whatsoever. HIV transmission studies were a failure.

Interesting read ?

There’s No Such Thing as a Sexually-Transmitted Disease - What Really Makes You Ill

 

I understand that you don't believe viruses are real. That's a reason I asked specifically about bacterial STDs and named a few. Seems like it would be relatively easy to establish whether chlamydia, gonorrhoea, and syphilis transmission through sexual activity is real or fake.

 

The problem with bacteria studies is that presence is confused with cause.

Find a three day old road kill and you’ll find that it’s teaming with bacteria. Was bacteria the cause of death ?

I believe it is evident that bacteria function as the body’s garbage collectors. And there are estimates that there are ten times as many bacteria as there are cells in the human body.

We’re essentially bacteria. And yet a rogue bacteria is going to make us sick ?

 

You keep causing inflammation in your body if you wish. I hope those who chose to do so including yourself one day are able to sue the mess out of pfizer/moderna/government for the lies and harm caused.

 

The problem with the everyone needs to take a new drug regardless of risk is just plain anti medicine and anti science. But hey. If you want to cause inflammation in your body for a disease that is not a threat. By all means...

 

People manifesting age-old symptoms of healing like coughing, congestion, fever; all signs of healing, went to hospitals where they were made sick and died.

Others feared dying of ‘Covid’ more than they feared dying, stayed home and died of heart attacks and strokes.

Epic failure on the part of public health. Failure so spectacular that it was celebrated by TikTok dancing.

 

Not an answer to the question. Why wouldn't I wish to reduce my risk of hospitalization and death? All data, from every country, shows for all 12 and older, there is a significant reduction in hospitalization and death for those who get vaccinated. I gladly traded 48 hours of discomfort from the vaccine to lower my odds before. And I'd do it again. I will be soon with the Shingrix vaccine, which has similar side effects as the COVID vaccine, and I just hit minimum age.

It's a little pain/annoyance for a potential huge benefit. Seat belts are the same. Who thinks wearing a seat belt is comfortable? And just what are the odds you are going to be in a car accident the next time you get in a car? But wearing a seat belt could potentially save your life, and if you do get in an accident, you better hope you were wearing your seat belt.

So I ask again. Why the eff would I not want to lower my odds of hospitalization and death with the vaccine? The risks are minimal, and the rewards are potentially life saving.

 

That’s a whole different subject.

 

I do not know your situation. But the vast majority of people do not receive benefit that makes the risk of harm worth it.

You clearly do not understand how medicine works based on the fact you think a large group (vast majority) should take an experimental drug rushed to market for a disease that poses hardly any risk to them.

I just hope you have stopped putting this shot in your kids if they are normal and healthy. Seriously! As for you...discuss with your doctor. There are bad doctors out there. But the we know the data. People have stopped taking the shot for the most part.

 

I consider it part and parcel.

Bodies heal. Healthcare kills.

 

You want to diminish the idea that the covid shot is a problem. It is not a different subject at all. It is part of the problem. I assume you consider me antivax since I did not take the shot. I did not take the shot because the disease was of little to no risk to me and I saw the red flags of how it was rolled out. Red flags that showed the roll out is the antithesis of how medicine and science operates.

There is no excuse that we pushed these drugs onto young healthy people.

 

What do you call hardly a risk? Third leading cause of death is no risk at all? What about diabetes? Alzheimer's? COVID killed more in the past three years than these to combined.

So please explain how COVID is not a risk? And why does all the data show significant reduction in severe cases, hospitalizations, and deaths at all ages 12 and older, if the disease is not a risk?

Public health is not doing what is best for you. It's doing what is best for the most amount of people. And clearly, having everyone 12 and older take the vaccine and reduce their risk of severe COVID is a benefit. You clearly have no understanding of science, vaccines, medicine, and public health.

 

Healthcare arguably the leading cause of death.

 

Public health was a complete disaster for Covid. You nailed it they are suppose to advize the best for the whole. They ignored that fact!!!

There is a special place for these idiots who pushed a one size fits all approach to this with the known data we had. They knew that young healthy people were are little to no risk from the beginning. Yet they pushed a narrative (the propaganda you are still controlled by) that we need everyone to take an experimental drug. It is sad you are not able to see this yet. But propaganda is extremely powerful.

I really hope you stop putting this shot in your kids. They don't know any better. You do!!!

 

Qsearch

 

Admittedly, I don't know a whole lot about bacteria or the different kinds of it. I know that we're mostly made of water and yet can still get sick or die if we drink too much water. Today is the first I've ever heard that there are people who don't think STDs of any kind are real. I did look at the site though.