Sociopath Community

LiYang said: 

Here's their game. They know intramuscular vaccines(IM) do not prevent mucosal infection. Yet they give you a IM vaccine anyway. You get infected with weak IgA mucosal antibodies and the fittest virus mutations thrive. Perfect natural selection. You pass on a more fit virus to the next person. Same thing happens. This is "Directed Evolution" away from the vaccine and a need for a new variant vaccine. Infinite sales.

 

"but intranasal vaccination elicited a superior IgA antibody titer in the sera and in the respiratory mucosa. Bronchoalveolar lavage from intranasally immunized mice efficiently neutralized SARS-CoV-2, which has not been the case in intramuscularly immunized group."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eji.202249823

 

 

 you think they would do that for the sake of infinite sales? 

LiYang said: 

 Let's hear some truth. How many experimental vaccines did you get?

My personal experience has no bearing on statistical results beyond providing us with one additional sample size. We could, however, try to see how many people here took the vaccine and experienced major problems with it. But you're not interested in any of that.

Blanc said: 

LiYang said: 

Here's their game. They know intramuscular vaccines(IM) do not prevent mucosal infection. Yet they give you a IM vaccine anyway. You get infected with weak IgA mucosal antibodies and the fittest virus mutations thrive. Perfect natural selection. You pass on a more fit virus to the next person. Same thing happens. This is "Directed Evolution" away from the vaccine and a need for a new variant vaccine. Infinite sales.

 

"but intranasal vaccination elicited a superior IgA antibody titer in the sera and in the respiratory mucosa. Bronchoalveolar lavage from intranasally immunized mice efficiently neutralized SARS-CoV-2, which has not been the case in intramuscularly immunized group."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eji.202249823

 

 

 you think they would do that for the sake of infinite sales? 

 Yes. Biotech companies will pick profit over efficacy 100% of the time.

AppleGenius said: 

LiYang said: 

 Let's hear some truth. How many experimental vaccines did you get?

My personal experience has no bearing on statistical results beyond providing us with one additional sample size. We could, however, try to see how many people here took the vaccine and experienced major problems with it. But you're not interested in any of that.

Yeah, you should do a survey.

If you would read the threads you would already know the statistic on this site.

Why do scientist ignore the actual data from the Pfizer randomized clinical trials? Is it cognitive dissonance? You never been wrong before?

Blanc said: 

LiYang said: 

Here's their game. They know intramuscular vaccines(IM) do not prevent mucosal infection. Yet they give you a IM vaccine anyway. You get infected with weak IgA mucosal antibodies and the fittest virus mutations thrive. Perfect natural selection. You pass on a more fit virus to the next person. Same thing happens. This is "Directed Evolution" away from the vaccine and a need for a new variant vaccine. Infinite sales.

 

"but intranasal vaccination elicited a superior IgA antibody titer in the sera and in the respiratory mucosa. Bronchoalveolar lavage from intranasally immunized mice efficiently neutralized SARS-CoV-2, which has not been the case in intramuscularly immunized group."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/eji.202249823

 

 

 you think they would do that for the sake of infinite sales? 

Yes, These people are known criminals with very large fines for past criminal activity. Just think of it as organized crime.

LiYang said: 

Yeah, you should do a survey.

If you would read the threads you would already know the statistic on this site.

Yeah, you're right, I would. But my time is precious. Once someone proves to me that they're beyond reason, I lose any interest. For me, the final straw was here when you as a non-expert insisted you're right about a study where literally the authors of said study are telling anti-vaxxers, including you, to stop misrepresenting their study. You might even be right, but it doesn't matter. If someone credible parses through this garbage and tells me that there's something interesting to look at, I'll do it. Until then, I'm not going to waste my time.

AppleGenius said: 

LiYang said: 

Yeah, you should do a survey.

If you would read the threads you would already know the statistic on this site.

Yeah, you're right, I would. But my time is precious. Once someone proves to me that they're beyond reason, I lose any interest. For me, the final straw was here when you as a non-expert insisted you're right about a study where literally the authors of said study are telling anti-vaxxers, including you, to stop misrepresenting their study. You might even be right, but it doesn't matter. If someone credible parses through this garbage and tells me that there's something interesting to look at, I'll do it. Until then, I'm not going to waste my time.

You have no idea of my expertise.

and you say I might be right but then criticize me questioning the authors interpretation of their own data. You sound conflicted.

You think every paper writer interprets their own data correctly? If so, you're very naive.

Pharma paid off many paper writers.

LiYang said: 

You have no idea of my expertise.

Kay: Do you have medical expertise, or expertise in any relevant field to these studies?

and you say I might be right but then criticize me questioning the authors interpretation of their own data. You sound conflicted.

Well, 999 out of 1,000 times when someone says Einstein is wrong about SR and has their own interpretation of electromagnetic waves propagating on aether, with no relevant expertise in Physics, is because they don't understand the research. They might be right, but it's not very likely.

You think every paper writer interprets their own data correctly?

No. But the fact that not every paper writer interprets their own data correctly doesn't lend any credence to the 999 crackpots who disagree with Einstein's SR with no relevant physics background, even if Einstein could be wrong. This is hopeless. You need to demonstrate pretty fucking solid evidence, as a non-expert, that you're right if you want to say that a scientific paper that is being widely misquoted by anti-vaxxers, to the point that the authors have to come out and tell people to stop misrepresenting their paper, that you're right, after all, and that the authors do find evidence to support your anti-vax agenda.

Why don't you write to the authors and see what they say? Get their response and post it here. But you don't want to do that. You want to babble on to non-experts who have no idea what you're talking about instead of taking any real action, because you know you'd get schooled over your lack of knowledge if you contacted the authors. You want to talk to non-experts about your "scientific findings" because you know that they can't challenge you!

 Write to the authors.

Pharma paid off many paper writers.

This is why I say you don't understand the scientific method, because if you did, you would realize how utterly useless it would be for pharma to 'pay off paper writers'.

Science does not care about opinions. You think the way science works is that scientists shout off in different directions and the one with the loudest voice wins. That's not how the scientific method works.

Or do you think that if scientists were paid a lot of money, they could convince people that apples fall upwards instead of downwards? You realize that every idiot can reproduce scientific findings right? You would literally need a global conspiracy and George Orwell level mind control.

AppleGenius said: 

LiYang said: 

You have no idea of my expertise.

Kay: Do you have medical expertise, or expertise in any relevant field to these studies?

 

and you say I might be right but then criticize me questioning the authors interpretation of their own data. You sound conflicted.

Well, 999 out of 1,000 times when someone says Einstein is wrong about SR and has their own interpretation of electromagnetic waves propagating on aether, with no relevant expertise in Physics, is because they don't understand the research. They might be right, but it's not very likely.

 

You think every paper writer interprets their own data correctly?

No. But the fact that not every paper writer interprets their own data correctly doesn't lend any credence to the 999 crackpots who disagree with Einstein's SR with no relevant physics background, even if Einstein could be wrong. This is hopeless. You need to demonstrate pretty fucking solid evidence, as a non-expert, that you're right if you want to say that a scientific paper that is being widely misquoted by anti-vaxxers, to the point that the authors have to come out and tell people to stop misrepresenting their paper, that you're right, after all, and that the authors do find evidence to support your anti-vax agenda.

Why don't you write to the authors and see what they say? Get their response and post it here. But you don't want to do that. You want to babble on to non-experts who have no idea what you're talking about instead of taking any real action, because you know you'd get schooled over your lack of knowledge if you contacted the authors. You want to talk to non-experts about your "scientific findings" because you know that they can't challenge you!

 Write to the authors.

Pharma paid off many paper writers.

This is why I say you don't understand the scientific method, because if you did, you would realize how utterly useless it would be for pharma to 'pay off paper writers'.

Science does not care about opinions. You think the way science works is that scientists shout off in different directions and the one with the loudest voice wins. That's not how the scientific method works.

Or do you think that if scientists were paid a lot of money, they could convince people that apples fall upwards instead of downwards? You realize that every idiot can reproduce scientific findings right? You would literally need a global conspiracy and George Orwell level mind control.

 You're an idiot

liyang you're often unable to explain your theories beyond your initial source or post. i think this may be because parts of it don't even make sense to you and you're clinging to the idea that you know 'the truth' as a boost to your ego as opposed to giving a fuck about what the truth actually is