# Unrepentant Covid-19 Deniers and their medical Insurance



## Johnny b

There is an interesting article at today's USAToday news site.
It makes a good argument about not shaming deniers.

While statements like this are true, it's claimed they are unproductive.

* The vaccinated are angry. That's understandable but also unproductive, health experts say. *
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...nated-insults-masks-delta-variant/5434096001/



> "It's not a pandemic of ignorance," quipped the Santa Monica Daily Press in an editorial about Los Angeles County's spike in cases and hospitalizations. "This is a surge of straight stupidity."
> 
> High levels of infections in unvaccinated people increase the risk to everyone, and headline after headline has documented the ensuing rage of the vaccinated. Unvaccinated Americans have been called "arrogant," "selfish" "stupid," "idiots" and worse for refusing to get the jab.


If it were only a small group of individuals, the negative impact to society could be absorbed with minor deleterious effects.
But the resistance to medical solutions, the resistance to cautionary practices is so great, currently, 50% of the population ignores preventative measures.

So what should be done?
What could be done?

The USAToday doesn't address or suggest solutions.

There is a financial aspect to consider and I do not mean paying people to get vaccinated or having lotteries.
Because the issue is about a pandemic that can kill or disable large segments of a population, perhaps the should be a consideration of limiting insurance coverage? Those without a valid medical reason simply do not get insurance coverage unless it's specified in their policies. ie....deniers will pay higher rates of medical coverage.
Rather than 'name calling', treat them to a reality of their decisions.....a financial solution.
One that takes the the financial burden they generate and make them responsible for it.

The GOP has tried to reduce Social Security benefits.
They hated the Affordable Care Act.
Now's their chance to actually accomplish something.
( But don't hold your breath  )


----------



## Wino

As posted in another thread - "CV19 has gone from being a virus to being an IQ test!". Yes, the deniers should pay more for health insurance as should anyone not getting vaxed for whatever reason. Not much different than I having to pay more for my supplemental Medi-Gap because I'm getting older, or no car license if no auto insurance - both needed for self and others. I know that doesn't register with the righties.


----------



## Johnny b

Wino said:


> As posted in another thread - "CV19 has gone from being a virus to being an IQ test!". Yes, the deniers should pay more for health insurance as should anyone not getting vaxed for whatever reason. Not much different than I having to pay more for my supplemental Medi-Gap because I'm getting older, or no car license if no auto insurance - both needed for self and others. I know that doesn't register with the righties.





> I know that doesn't register with the righties.


hmmmm.
I'm especially looking forward to responses and rationale of Trump supporters.
The solution I've projected is actually a conservative position.
Personal responsibility in a practical and achievable manner.


----------



## Cookiegal

Can we vote in your pole if we're not in the U.S.?


----------



## Wino

Johnny b said:


> hmmmm.
> I'm especially looking forward to *responses and rationale of Trump supporters.*
> The solution I've projected is actually a conservative position.
> Personal responsibility in a practical and achievable manner.


I admire your optimism !


----------



## Johnny b

Cookiegal said:


> Can we vote in your pole if we're not in the U.S.?


It's open to all


----------



## Johnny b

Wino said:


> I admire your optimism !


Their silence would speak volumes LOL!

I'd like to hear how libertarians view it, also.....since removing government intrusion in their lives is a main point with them, and relying on personal responsibility as a means of social stability for the common good. Almost like anarchy.

Lots of contradictions in the philosophies of those 'camps'.

I'm not really expecting much from them, but it would be interesting to see how they rationalize their logic.


----------



## Wino

Well, you have two "NO" with no attempt to explain stance. I'm guessing too embarrassed to do it openly. You should have marked as poll that ID'd responders.


----------



## Johnny b

Wino said:


> Well, you have two "NO" with no attempt to explain stance. I'm guessing too embarrassed to do it openly. You should have marked as poll that ID'd responders.


Two points:
1. Some responders might vote, not wanting to have to defend their vote, either way.
2. Curiosity to see if any responders that chose 'No' would volunteer and explain their reasoning. I suspect many can't because it a political decision for them.

Joe Rogan has taken a stand.
He claims making people do something will lead to a dictatorship.
Perhaps he forgot that laws do that every day in many ways....... for public safety.
As simple as being forced to drive on a specific side of the highway, and belted in with seat belts.
Pass tests to get a license to drive a motor vehicle that had to be registered.
I think Joe is a Trumplican lol!


----------



## Wino

Trumplican for sure, and as typical, not too bright.


----------



## Cookiegal

Johnny b said:


> It's open to all


OK so I voted "Yes" but I would go one step further. First, I think the vaccine should be mandatory for everyone who is eligible (those who can't get it for legitimate medical reasons excluded). I know this won't be popular but I also think if they are unvaccinated by choice and get sick they should be denied medical care because they are taking those resources away from others who are having to wait for treatments or surgeries for other serious illnesses that will cause deterioration of their condition or even death.


----------



## Johnny b

Looks like the business community is going to address the issue of those that continue to reject Covid-19 vaccines.

*Coming Soon For The Unvaccinated: A $50 Monthly Paycheck Deduction From Your Employer *
https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucej...onthly-paycheck-deduction-from-your-employer/



> Employers are beginning to tack on a special surcharge of $20 to $50 a month to their unvaccinated workers, according to one of the nation's largest health benefits consultancies.
> 
> To date, employers have offered gift cards, a day off from work, cash and other financial incentives to convince their workers to get vaccinated against Covid-19.
> 
> But the carrot approach is about to be joined by a stick that could cost employees up to $50 a month, according to Mercer, the large employee benefits consultancy that works with thousands of employers around the world.


:up:


----------



## Johnny b

In addition:

* New Rule Raises Question: Who'll Pay for All the Covid Tests? *
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/31/upshot/unvaccinated-covid-tests.html



> Spurred by rising Covid cases and the Delta variant's spread, a wave of major employers announced the same rule for unvaccinated workers this week: They will need to submit to regular surveillance testing. The new requirement raises a thorny question: Who pays for those coronavirus tests?
> 
> Doctors typically charge about $50 to $100 for the tests, so the costs of weekly testing could add up quickly. Federal law requires insurers to fully cover the tests when ordered by a health care provider, but routine workplace tests are exempt from that provision.


----------



## Chawbacon

I voted "No" for you Johnny.

First - Receiving a shot for Covid19 should be an individual's choice, and I really do not care which choice and individual makes. An individual makes their own decisions and has to live with the consequences of said decisions (good or bad). Kind of a Liberty thing for me. 🎆

Second - Since by law, Insurance companies cannot charge more for pre-existing conditions, then how can you justify charging an individual more for a condition they have yet to develop? 😗
Pre-Existing Conditions | HHS.gov

Third - The Covid19 shot is not a vaccine and is similar to the Flu shot for the purpose of a successful inoculation discussion; regardless of how much the media and President Biden's government try to convince you of such nonsense. Use of the word vaccine carries a connotation that you would receive an immunity from the targeted illness by receiving said shot. Granted those shots are listed on your vaccination card for convenience; however, they are not true vaccines; because you will not be inoculated. 🧐


> Vaccines and immunization: What is vaccination? (who.int)
> Vaccines reduce risks of getting a disease by working with your body's natural defenses to build protection. When you get a vaccine, your immune system responds...
> 
> ... Our immune systems are designed to remember. Once exposed to one or more doses of a vaccine, we typically remain protected against a disease for years, decades or even a lifetime. This is what makes vaccines so effective. Rather than treating a disease after it occurs, vaccines prevent us in the first instance from getting sick.


The sad part is that after defining what a vaccine is, the WHO in the same article places Covid19 and Influenza in the category of diseases that we have vaccines for. Morons!


> Vaccines protect against many different diseases, including:
> 
> Cervical cancer
> Cholera
> COVID-19
> Diphtheria...


----------



## Johnny b

Chawbacon said:


> I voted "No" for you Johnny.
> ........................


Of course 
It's a poll designed for opinions.
And I expected your response because there is a political element to it.

But here's the catch and the contradiction.

Historically, liberals have wanted full insurance coverage with out exceptions and conservatives have presented an argument for adjustments for pre-existing health conditions.

Deniers that refuse vaccines, won't wear masks and have an immune deficiency or autoimmune condition, have pre-existing conditions that can subject them to expensive medical treatments .

And that class is of significant numbers.

As usual in life, there are exceptions to all 'rules'.
Since deniers tend to be followers of Trump Republicanism, the new 'conservatism' has had to flip flop and and become fiscal vampires on the medical front.
To make matters worse, this cult element even experiments with unproven 'medicines' that exacerbates a bad situation only making it worse, financially and medically.....all to the expected coverage of ....insurance.

I don't hear many complaints about Obamacare these days 

So....what's a real conservative to do?  lol.


----------



## Johnny b

Chawbacon said:


> ....................
> 
> Second - Since by law, Insurance companies cannot charge more for pre-existing conditions, then how can you justify charging an individual more for a condition they have yet to develop? 😗
> Pre-Existing Conditions | HHS.gov
> ......................


And you've become an advocate for Obamacare.....wow.
My, how things have changed.....LOL!

Now I fully understand the term RINO.


----------



## Johnny b

Chawbacon said:


> .....................
> 
> Third - The Covid19 shot is not a vaccine and is similar to the Flu shot for the purpose of a successful inoculation discussion
> 
> .....................


Thank you Dr. Chawbacon. 
You and Dr. Stella Immanuel add incredible context to medical science. 
The dark side 

Sure you wouldn't like to rethink and edit that? 

And why deny that Covid 19 shot is a vaccine and then post a link supporting it as a vaccine?



> they are not true vaccines; because you will not be inoculated.


I feel an element of sophistry has again entered one of your rants.
For entertainment's sake, please expand your reasoning.

I did like your link to the WHO.
https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/vaccines-and-immunization-what-is-vaccination

And further linkage posted there:
https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/covid-19-vaccines/explainers

Damn them, they represent the Covid 19 shot as a vaccine.


----------



## Johnny b

Chawbacon said:


> ..........................
> 
> The sad part is that after defining what a vaccine is, the WHO in the same article places Covid19 and Influenza in the category of diseases that we have vaccines for. Morons!


I think you are confused.


----------



## Johnny b

From deniers that claim vaccines aren't vaccines to doctor's that make incredulous claims full of misinformation..............
----> BS Receptivity rules and the tax payer winds up with not just added exposure to infection and death.....also the additional medical costs BSR brings at the same time.

I posted about one of Ohio's leading sources of misinformation elsewhere, but there's more to her 'story'. And now it's national news.

The list of news linkages is long.
Dr. Tenpenny.
https://news.google.com/search?q=dr. sherri tenpenny&hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en

..........................

* A prominent anti-vax doctor, who falsely claimed the COVID-19 vaccine could make people magnetic, had her medical license renewed, report says *
https://news.yahoo.com/prominent-anti-vax-doctor-falsely-100600620.html


> A prominent anti-vax doctor from Ohio, who pushed the false claim that COVID-19 vaccines could make people magnetic, has had her medical license renewed, according to the Ohio Capital Journal.
> ........
> Tenpenny attracted nationwide media attention in June after she falsely told Ohio House Health Committee that the coronavirus vaccine could potentially make people "magnetized," Insider reported previously.
> ........
> Tenpenny also falsely said that COVID-19 vaccines contain particles that connect a person to 5G mobile data networks.
> ...........
> 
> The Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH) named Tenpenny among 12 anti-vaxxers responsible for spreading 65% of false information about vaccines in March this year.


Following the link to the above 12 anti-vaxxers:
* Just 12 people are responsible for the majority of COVID-19 conspiracy theories online, study finds. JFK's anti-vaxxer nephew is one of the 'disinformation dozen.' *
https://www.businessinsider.com/12-...IR=T?utm_source=yahoo.com&utm_medium=referral

Too much to post but this stands out:


> 12 people are responsible for the majority of COVID-19 disinformation shared online, according to a CCDH study.
> The CCDH found that 65% of anti-vaccine posts on Facebook and Twitter could be attributed to the "disinformation dozen."


So, who is the the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH)?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Countering_Digital_Hate

And here is their website:
https://www.counterhate.com/


> READ our report on the pandemic profiteers; the dozen leading anti-vaxxers who have enriched themselves by spreading misinformation. The Anti-Vaxx industry boasts annual revenues of at least $36 million and is worth up to $1.1 billion to Big Tech with 62 million followers across their platforms.
> 
> Through government PPP loans, affiliate marketing schemes and social media empires, these anti-vaxx businesses have been able to generate profits by spreading misinformation.


And here is their report on anti-vaxxers:
https://252f2edd-1c8b-49f5-9bb2-cb5...d/f4d9b9_13cbbbef105e459285ff21e94ec34157.pdf

Anti-vaxxers spread misinformation in order to make a profit. 
Victims of their grift clog our hospitals, run up extraordinary medical bills and add to the death toll from Covid-19......while the taxpayer has to pick up the tab on damages created from their profiteering.

Excerpt from the CCDH pdf:


> 1. Analysis of the online anti-vaccine movement has identified a dozen leading anti-
> vaxxers who operate businesses or organisations with significant revenues.
> 2. These twelve are responsible for up to 70 percent of anti-vaccine content shared to
> Facebook. Three of these twelve - Joseph Mercola, Del Bigtree and Robert F. Kennedy
> Jr. - are so influential that they account for nearly half of this content.
> 3. Anti-vaxxers represent an industry with annual revenues of at least $36 million,
> based on a limited view of their finances based on self-reported filings and publicly
> available revenue estimates for 22 organisations belonging to twelve of the
> industry's biggest earners. This anti-vaxx industry employs at least 266 people.
> 4. Anti-vaxxers have received more than $1.5 million in federal loans through the
> Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) designed to help businesses through the Covid
> pandemic. The largest such beneficiary was the anti-vaxx entrepreneur Joseph
> Mercola, whose business received $617,000 in total.
> 5. Some leading anti-vaxxers are earning six-figure salaries for leading roles at anti-
> vaccine non-profits, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who earns $255,000 a year as
> Chairman of Children's Health Defense.
> 6. The anti-vaxx industry's total social media following of 62 million could be worth up
> to $1.1 billion to social media platforms based on publicly available figures for the
> amount of revenue social media platforms make per impression or per user where
> that information is not available.


Anti-vaxxers .......looks like they're killing us for profit.

But why would anyone believe an anti-vax doctor also pushing magnetism and 5G claims? 
BS Receptivity? That's a mental condition. 
And it's pre-existing


----------



## Wino

I've had two Pfizer shots and one booster - my refrigerator magnets will not stick to me. I'm so disappointed.


----------



## Johnny b

Chawbacon said:


> .................
> 
> Third - The Covid19 shot is not a vaccine ................


Well, here's some good news for those that got the J&J vaccine.
* New Johnson & Johnson data shows second shot boosts antibodies and protection against COVID-19 - but one dose is still strong against delta variant *
https://news.yahoo.com/johnson-johnson-data-shows-second-131218211.html



> The amount of neutralizing antibodies in a person - antibodies that defend a cell from the coronavirus - is an accurate measure of protection within the first several months after vaccination. Studies show that individuals who received a Johnson & Johnson or an mRNA vaccine continue to produce some level of antibodies for at least six months after vaccination. However, neutralizing antibody levels generally start to wane over time and some evidence suggests that immunity provided by the Pfizer mRNA vaccine does the same.
> 
> This may sound bad, but it isn't clear that lower antibody levels correlate with an increased risk of severe infection. The immune system's long-term surveillance is done by "memory" immune cells that will prevent or reduce disease severity if a person is exposed to the coronavirus at a later time.


Dr Chawbacon, what is your definition of 'vaccine'?

I read links like
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm
https://medlineplus.gov/vaccines.html

And I come away with the impression you don't know what you're talking about ( LOL! )
Where in the world did you hear or read that vaccines for Covid-19 and influenza weren't vaccines? Please, no political commentaries, just sources that present medical facts. 
Can do?
Or do we need to wait another couple months for another driveby


----------



## Chawbacon

Johnny b said:


> To make matters worse, this cult element even experiments with unproven 'medicines' that exacerbates a bad situation only making it worse, financially and medically.....all to the expected coverage of ....insurance.


So either we are in the midst of the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be trying medicine off label to find viable therapeutic treatments, or we are not in the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be proactively preventing doctors from proscribing medicine off label as treatments (as the Biden administration is doing) regardless of the vast success of off label medications used for Covid19 in other countries.

So which is it Johnny? You can't have it both ways?



Johnny b said:


> And you've become an advocate for Obamacare.....wow.
> My, how things have changed.....LOL!
> 
> Now I fully understand the term RINO.


Oh no my friend. I will never be an advocate for Obamacare. 
If we want to use your thought process about republicans correctly, you would have more success arguing that people with two or more co-morbidities (the people that tend to have severe cases of Covid19) should be charged more for their insurance coverage. Claiming that healthy people, who are extremely unlikely to contract a severe case of Covid19, should pay more for insurance because they do not want the Covid19 jab is just plain silly. 


Johnny b said:


> But why would anyone believe an anti-vax doctor also pushing magnetism and 5G claims?
> BS Receptivity? That's a mental condition.


Yeah! That guy is a definite nutter!


Johnny b said:


> Dr Chawbacon, what is your definition of 'vaccine'?





Johnny b said:


> And I come away with the impression you don't know what you're talking about ( LOL! )
> Where in the world did you hear or read that vaccines for Covid-19 and influenza weren't vaccines? Please, no political commentaries, just sources that present medical facts.


The answer to both of these quotes:

Oh, let's see... I take door number one.... And behind that door is the definition of VACCINE before the CDC modified it on September 1st, 2021 to meet a political narrative. All of the information here is pertinent and complimentary to define the general understanding. I have confidence that you can figure it out. 
P.S. I made it more colorful for those that may have reading comprehension issues.



> The CDC Suddenly Changes the Definition of 'Vaccine' and 'Vaccination' | Citizens Journal | Citizens Journal
> *Immunity: **Protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected.*
> 
> *Vaccine:** A product that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.* Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.
> 
> *Vaccination:* *The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.*
> 
> *Immunization: **A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation. *


----------



## Chawbacon

Wino said:


> I've had two Pfizer shots and one booster - my refrigerator magnets will not stick to me. I'm so disappointed.


I wish that I could give you two likes for that Wino. Laughed my butt off!


----------



## Johnny b

Chawbacon said:


> So either we are in the midst of the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be trying medicine off label to find viable therapeutic treatments, or we are not in the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be proactively preventing doctors from proscribing medicine off label as treatments (as the Biden administration is doing) regardless of the vast success of off label medications used for Covid19 in other countries.
> 
> So which is it Johnny? You can't have it both ways?
> 
> Oh no my friend. I will never be an advocate for Obamacare.
> If we want to use your thought process about republicans correctly, you would have more success arguing that people with two or more co-morbidities (the people that tend to have severe cases of Covid19) should be charged more for their insurance coverage. Claiming that healthy people, who are extremely unlikely to contract a severe case of Covid19, should pay more for insurance because they do not want the Covid19 jab is just plain silly.
> 
> Yeah! That guy is a definite nutter!
> 
> The answer to both of these quotes:
> 
> Oh, let's see... I take door number one.... And behind that door is the definition of VACCINE before the CDC modified it on September 1st, 2021 to meet a political narrative. All of the information here is pertinent and complimentary to define the general understanding. I have confidence that you can figure it out.
> P.S. I made it more colorful for those that may have reading comprehension issues.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I take door number one.... And behind that door is the definition of VACCINE before the CDC modified it on September 1st, 2021 to meet a political narrative. All of the information here is pertinent and complimentary to define the general understanding. I have confidence that you can figure it out.
Click to expand...




> So either we are in the midst of the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be trying medicine off label to find viable therapeutic treatments


And who do you propose be the 'who'? LOL!
We are in the midst of the worst pandemic in recent history, but your logic should only apply to laboratory settings with knowledgeable scientists running the experiments.
Currently, most of the 'experimenting' seems to proceed on the claims from rumors, often on political news sites or social media web sites and be heavy on speculation.



> or we are not in the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be proactively preventing doctors from proscribing medicine off label as treatments ...............


One of the elements of the Hippocratic Oath is do no harm.
Quackery seems to be in that realm of harm that should be discouraged.
Obviously you disagree.
So ....all those that die or are damaged in bizarre medical quests that the likes of Trump and the anti-vaxx cult promote.....that on your conscience when danger is embraced for reasons of politics and/or profit with out heed for results.
It's why the FDA was originally formed....to stop the quackery that harms the public.



> So which is it Johnny? You can't have it both ways?


Again, you are confused. 
I don't have to abide by your insane logic 



> I will never be an advocate for Obamacare.


And yet....you did post in favor of one of the big criticisms conservatives had over pre-existing medical coverage.
Using your own logic of 'either/or', you obviously fell into your own trap.
Sad how hypocrisy works.



> If we want to use your thought process about republicans correctly, you would have more success arguing that people with two or more co-morbidities (the people that tend to have severe cases of Covid19) should be charged more for their insurance coverage.


Not 'more' success.....just 'also' success.



> Claiming that healthy people, who are extremely unlikely to contract a severe case of Covid19, should pay more for insurance because they do not want the Covid19 jab is just plain silly.


You just made my point.
Healthy people are likely to get infected.
And there is an aspect no one seems to address, but it's there and an element of those with intact strong immune systems that are at risk. The stronger the immune system, the greater the damage.
It'd the cytokine issue that has been occurring especially in those experiencing lung damage.
It's that autoimmune issue.
An allergic response with histamine like reactions.

*Relevance of histamine in the cytokine network in allergic inflammation *
https://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(03)01881-5/fulltext

An immune system can improperly attack the host, the stronger that immune system, the stronger the attack against the body.
That's why antihistamines and steroids are being given to those suffering the worst of Covid 19....especially the ones on ventilators.

I fall into that class, myself.
I had a severe mold allergy problem 26 years ago that took an experimental therapy to control. And it worked. But it wasn't a cure. It was a reprogramming of T suppressor cells.
And if you bother to read about work being done on Covid-19, you'll come across T cell
discussions.

And many people never know they have that kind of issue.... until until an environmental incident triggers that kind of response. Or they get Covid 19.

*Connecting the Dots Between Allergies and Autoimmune Disease*

https://www.benaroyaresearch.org/blog/post/connecting-dots-between-allergies-and-autoimmune-disease

Point....preconditions exist with out the individual knowing it. Some more than others, in what appear to be perfectly health people.

...................



> I take door number one.... And behind that door is the definition of VACCINE before the CDC modified it on September 1st, 2021 to meet a political narrative. All of the information here is pertinent and complimentary to define the general understanding. I have confidence that you can figure it out.
> P.S. I made it more colorful for those that may have reading comprehension issues.


Dude....errr....I mean Dr Jack 
That was all sophistry and I've told you many times in the past, you don't do it well enough to get away with it. 

Your source:
https://www.citizensjournal.us/the-cdc-suddenly-changes-the-definition-of-vaccine-and-vaccination/


> Vaccine: A *product that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease,* protecting the person from that disease. Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but can also be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose.





> Vaccine: *A preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases.* Vaccines are usually administered through needle injections, but some can be administered by mouth or sprayed into the nose


There's no difference in context lol!

BTW. Your source has been discussed before and found to be...rather ....lacking in credibility.

Your link
https://www.citizensjournal.us/the-cdc-suddenly-changes-the-definition-of-vaccine-and-vaccination/


> Matt Margolis over at our sister site PJ Media has picked up on a very interesting change on the CDC website when it comes to the definitions for "vaccine" and "vaccination."


And PJ media?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PJ_Media
This kinda stands out.....like a bad joke.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PJ_Media#False_claims

You think I'd forget you using them as a source?



> P.S. I made it more colorful for those that may have reading comprehension issues.


LOL! 

Shame on you, Dr Jack


----------



## Johnny b

Chawbacon said:


> So either we are in the midst of the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be trying medicine off label to find viable therapeutic treatments, or we are not in the worst pandemic within mankind's recent memory and we should be proactively preventing doctors from proscribing medicine off label as treatments............ regardless of the vast success of off label medications used for Covid19 in other countries.
> 
> ...............................
> 
> .........................


As usual with so many of your anti-science pro Trump claims, a recent article of fact follows another of your loony claims ^^^

Rather than the public experimenting with unproven medicines for unrelated diseases, there exists in the field of medical science the concept of laboratory experimentation with antivirals that show promise.

You won't like this.

Merck has one that shows significant success as a cure of Covid-19.
Unfortunately for you and fellow Ludites, it's not available at local animal feed stores or pet shops.

It will be sold by prescription. 
Bummer for you lol.
Maybe you're insurance will cover it?

*Drug launched at Emory reduces virus that causes COVID-19 to undetectable levels *
https://news.emory.edu/stories/2021/03/coronavirus_DRIVE_molnupiravir/index.html



> You can't have it both ways?


Do you get those misleading ideas from Alex Jones? Or maybe Joe Imbriano?


----------



## Veedras

Johnny b said:


> There is an interesting article at today's USAToday news site.
> It makes a good argument about not shaming deniers.
> 
> While statements like this are true, it's claimed they are unproductive.
> 
> * The vaccinated are angry. That's understandable but also unproductive, health experts say. *
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...nated-insults-masks-delta-variant/5434096001/
> 
> If it were only a small group of individuals, the negative impact to society could be absorbed with minor deleterious effects.
> But the resistance to medical solutions, the resistance to cautionary practices is so great, currently, 50% of the population ignores preventative measures.
> 
> So what should be done?
> What could be done?
> 
> The USAToday doesn't address or suggest solutions.
> 
> There is a financial aspect to consider and I do not mean paying people to get vaccinated or having lotteries.
> Because the issue is about a pandemic that can kill or disable large segments of a population, perhaps the should be a consideration of limiting insurance coverage? Those without a valid medical reason simply do not get insurance coverage unless it's specified in their policies. ie....deniers will pay higher rates of medical coverage.
> Rather than 'name calling', treat them to a reality of their decisions.....a financial solution.
> One that takes the the financial burden they generate and make them responsible for it.
> 
> The GOP has tried to reduce Social Security benefits.
> They hated the Affordable Care Act.
> Now's their chance to actually accomplish something.
> ( But don't hold your breath  )


I can see that we are going to ignore any inconvenient facts, such as throughout the history of this tech, vaccines have* never* required everyone to be vaccinated, before protecting them that was vaccinated...nor have previous vaccines *ever *required multiple clotshots and boosters before protecting the vaccinated...nor has any previous vaccines had *both* the high failure rate as does the jab, and the high success rate at causing permanent injury or death:

https://www.openvaers.com/covid-data

https://www.technocracy.news/shock-european-union-reports-1-5-million-vaccine-injuries-15472-deaths/

https://www.covidvaccineinjuries.com/

https://vaccineimpact.com/2021/2176...of-adverse-drug-reactions-for-covid-19-shots/

We shall also no doubt continue to ignore all the lies the sheeple have been told from the very beginning, and how you all continue to bleat for ever more lies to soothe and cover the previous ones:

https://files.catbox.moe/mh4oj4.mp4

https://luis46pr.wordpress.com/2021...f-mask-mandates-for-all-are-vaccines-failing/

https://chemicalviolence.com/2022-0...eadlier-than-all-other-vaccines-combined.html

https://www.shtfplan.com/headline-n...fter-being-vaxxed-means-the-shot-is-effective

As the famous line in 'The X-Files' went "The _Truth Is Out There_...and It Hurts"....but ignorance is bliss! Stay ignorant.


----------



## valis

Are you familiar with mumpsimus? It is an unwavering belief in something that is easily proven incorrect. Sorta like flat earthers or moon landing non-believers.

IMO, and only my opinion, this falls into that category.


----------

