Wuhan Coronavirus: Megathread - Got too big

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's very ironic that the state of free speech on the internet can be summed up with "First they came for the Nazis...". I think people really only started paying attention when they took out Alex Jones (or tried to) since he's a pretty big name and most people think he's just a harmless loon rather than someone like Andrew Anglin who made his website as cartoonishly offensive as possible.

It feels like yesterday the internet was still a free and open place, even if it was pretty obvious how things were going by 2015-16. You're always told how things are awful on the internet, and you know it to be true, but if you aren't affected directly (like being censored/banned for political views or "misinformation") you don't fully grasp how bad it really is. I think it was 2019 or 2020 when I pieced it all together and found myself awestruck at how far freedom on the internet has been eroded. It's like going by a construction site everyday, knowing exactly what they're building but just seeing it as an empty pile of material until one day it's basically finished and you realize what they were doing.
I really do miss the internet of the late 2000s and early 2010. It was a lot less corporate back then and felt a lot more like a public forum.
 
Coronavirus US vaccine mandate news update -- all challenges to the federal mandate will be consolidated and handled by the US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals (where the fuck is this?). Also, under the bonus section, more state-level challenges specific to health care employment.

Associated Press (Archive) -- Why the 6th Circuit and some background info.
It was a favorable outcome for Republicans. Eleven of the 16 full-time judges in the 6th Circuit were appointed by Republican presidents. Accounting for one of the Republican-appointed judges, Helene White, who often sides with judges appointed by Democrats and adding senior judges who are semi-retired but still hear cases, the split is 19-9 in favor of Republicans. Six of the full-time judges were appointed by former President Donald Trump.
Under federal law, cases challenging federal agency actions get consolidated upon the agency’s request if they are filed in multiple circuit courts. Each circuit where a challenge is filed within the first 10 days of the agency taking action has an equal chance of being selected.
Because it’s an unusual rule from the workplace safety agency, there is no consensus among lawyers on how the challenges will go. OSHA has issued just 10 emergency rules in the half century since it was formed. Of the six challenged in court, only one survived intact.
It had not yet been determined which judges from the 6th Circuit will be on a three-judge panel to hear the case or whether it will be considered by all the judges.

Gallatin News (Gallatin TN paper, within geographic region covered by the 6th Circuit) (Archive) -- A chance this circus could end up back in the 5th Circuit, which granted both the initial stay on enforcement, and recently reaffirmed it.

A nationwide stay of the mandate remains in effect after the Fifth Circuit in New Orleans twice ruled for plaintiffs, citing "grave" constitutional concerns.
"The mandate is a one-size-fits-all sledgehammer that makes hardly any attempt to account for differences in workplaces (and workers)," the Fifth Circuit said in its second ruling.
Daniel Suhr, managing attorney with the Liberty Justice Center, who with the Pelican Institute filed the Fifth Circuit case on the behalf of Louisiana businessman Brandon Trosclair, said he would file a motion seeking to move the consolidated cases to the New Orleans-based court.

"This case is going to be a battle royale," Suhr told The Center Square. "There is a lot at stake here, not just for our clients but for our country, our economy."

Bonus Content -- More lawsuits against the mandate specific to health care workers. (Archive)

The mandate is a “one-size-fits-all sledgehammer” that will force workers at facilities that receive payments from Medicare and Medicaid to choose between their jobs and “the jabs,” Louisiana, Montana, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia say in the Louisiana-based litigation.
“Vaccination requirements are matters that depend on local factors and conditions,” Texas’ complaint says. “Whatever might make sense in other States could be decidedly counterproductive and harmful in a large and diverse State such as Texas,” it says.
Causes of Action: Administrative Procedure Act, Social Security Act, Congressional Review Act, and the U.S. Constitution’s spending clause and 10th Amendment.

Relief: Declare health-care worker vaccine mandate unlawful, vacate rule, preliminarily and permanently bar CMS from enforcing rule, halt enforcement dates.

Attorneys: The Louisiana Department of Justice and the attorneys general of Montana, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, and West Virginia represent the states. The Texas Attorney General’s Office represents the state.
 
It stills feels like psyop. While noteworthy the number of cases was too low for it to be memed to death. And most of the memes weren't even funny.
Now what was definitely a psyop was the 5g tower attacks. Did anyone ever confess that the reason they did it was because of covid or it was just people who went "not in my backyard" and decided to fuck them up, but the media put a spin on it?

More like send them 1.2 billion "good morning" whatsapp messages so that their ISP crashes.
Good mourning how are you dear
 
Well, just had the "I talked to my parents and you're not welcome home at Christmas as long as they're here" phone call with my mom. And then she started getting teary and trying to guilt me with the whole "this may be the last Christmas they have" line. I told her I was willing to get tested daily while I'm out there and I was told that it would still not be good enough. Then she got mad at me when I said they were being irrational.
Well hey, what's having a heart attack at 30 weighed against making sure grandma doesn't suffer from a 0.5% chance to not live an extra 4 months
 
Well, just had the "I talked to my parents and you're not welcome home at Christmas as long as they're here" phone call with my mom. And then she started getting teary and trying to guilt me with the whole "this may be the last Christmas they have" line. I told her I was willing to get tested daily while I'm out there and I was told that it would still not be good enough. Then she got mad at me when I said they were being irrational.
0kMwKjdmMF.jpeg

I could say something but anon said it better.
 
Wearing a mask is never EVER fucking normal. Ever.
Eh, I thought it was neat when people in Asian countries wore them when they had a cold; lets others know you're ill & it would provide some protection for others if the mask-wearer is otherwise a scutter.

The majority of people I see wearing a mask nowadays (with no mandates in place) are either fat or old (often both). Not hard when this country is full of fatties though. On a related note, saw on the BBC an article (https://archive.md/mJdjb) about how 41% of Year 6 students (ages 10-11, last year of primary school) are overweight or obese, the increase from the last year blamed on the pandemic of course. Absolutely shocking the state of people's health nowadays, especially for children. What a disgrace.
 
I'm sorry, what? France banned voting for unvaccinated people, when did this happen? Can't you vote by mail?
Vote by mail was banned years ago because of election fraud.

But we're not banned from VOTING, you see. First, we're only banned from the polling places! That's totally different. Second, it's our CHOICE not to vote, by remaining unvaccinated. I don't see why this is so difficult to understand. /sarc

In other news, our fucking government announced yesterday that they are TOTALLY not planning to announce another lockdown. Which means that I expect to be under house arrest again within 2 weeks.

EDITED: I am not editing this to erase my initial response but to note that on further investigation, @HyperDupont was right and I was wrong. (Probably. I DISTINCTLY remember reading that voting-booth access would be denied, last summer when the passport sanitaire was initially announced, but when I search for that now, I can't confirm.) I was wrong on the Internet! This does not make me feel much better.
 
Last edited:
Eh, I thought it was neat when people in Asian countries wore them when they had a cold; lets others know you're ill & it would provide some protection for others if the mask-wearer is otherwise a scutter.

The majority of people I see wearing a mask nowadays (with no mandates in place) are either fat or old (often both). Not hard when this country is full of fatties though. On a related note, saw on the BBC an article (https://archive.md/mJdjb) about how 41% of Year 6 students (ages 10-11, last year of primary school) are overweight or obese, the increase from the last year blamed on the pandemic of course. Absolutely shocking the state of people's health nowadays, especially for children. What a disgrace.
People also wear masks because of the pollution. Been in Shanghai when you could barely see more than a few buildings away
You begin to cough like a chain smoker. Blow your nose and black shit comes out.

Not normal for me anyway.
 
No, actually the Constitutional Council said explicitly the exact opposite in its latest examination of the « public health emergency » law, so this should not happen comes next April (presidential election) and June (house of representatives).

But the way they justify the compliance of sanitary pass with the constitution is so BS that I would not be surprised if they manage to find a way by then. (Btw this institution is not filled with actual expert of the constitution, they are nominated. 5/9 of current members did not graduate from law school)

When I look at the French media at this point, I am seeing speculation that a passport will indeed be required but @HyperDupont I think you are right AND I WAS WRONG, at least according to the government's current website.

That said, I share the sentiments expressed in your second paragraph. As a person who was not born and raised here, I am naive enough to be shocked at how the constitutional council is basically a rubber stamp for whatever the government wants. Especially because I am looking at a Tweet with video from Dimanche en Politique dated October 3 where Gabriel Attal "assures" us that it will not be required. Based on all the shit I've seen since this started, I get VERY WORRIED whenever I hear this fucking government assuring us that it will not do something dictatorial, because generally they mean the opposite. But that is for sure my own speculation.

1637143483922.png
 
View attachment 2722829


If approved, the question in this case, is what use the mandates have beyond societal control. Is this pill going to cost an arm and a leg (like Merck's $700 pill), thus placing it out of the range of the lower social classes?
So, question for people who know more about FDA/drug law than I do. I thought, perhaps wrongly, that you could only have EUA in America if there wasn't a treatment available for whatever malady is vaccinated against/treated with the vaccine/medicine that is the subject of the EUA. I thought, perhaps wrongly, that this was one of the reasons that the entire pharmaceutical establishment was pooh-poohing Covid TREATMENTS--because if there was a treatment, then you couldn't have an EUA for the vaccines and they would have to go through the normal regulatory approval process.

If the above is correct (which it may not be), then what would be the legal effect of an EUA for a treatment that treats the same malady that is being treated by another substance that also has an EUA? Can you have dueling EUAs? Or is it that since one is a "vaccine"(*) and the other is a "treatment," you can have EUAs for both?

(*)But the establishment has all but conceded at this point that it's prophylactic and not a "vaccine" as we all understood that term prior to about 6 months ago, right?

This is confusing.
 
Vote by mail was banned years ago because of election fraud.
Woah, cool it with the racism and misinformation, voting by mail is totally safe and nobody has ever committed fraud in the history of ever using it. Only white supremacists think voting by mail leads to fraud!
So, question for people who know more about FDA/drug law than I do. I thought, perhaps wrongly, that you could only have EUA in America if there wasn't a treatment available for whatever malady is vaccinated against/treated with the vaccine/medicine that is the subject of the EUA. I thought, perhaps wrongly, that this was one of the reasons that the entire pharmaceutical establishment was pooh-poohing Covid TREATMENTS--because if there was a treatment, then you couldn't have an EUA for the vaccines and they would have to go through the normal regulatory approval process.

If the above is correct (which it may not be), then what would be the legal effect of an EUA for a treatment that treats the same malady that is being treated by another substance that also has an EUA? Can you have dueling EUAs? Or is it that since one is a "vaccine"(*) and the other is a "treatment," you can have EUAs for both?

(*)But the establishment has all but conceded at this point that it's prophylactic and not a "vaccine" as we all understood that term prior to about 6 months ago, right?

This is confusing.
Probably some bullshit in what you can get an EUA on during an "emergency situation". Pfizer's vaxx isn't under an EUA anymore, it's an approved vaccine (the fastest approved in history by a sizable margin IIRC). Presumably, a "vaccine" is different than whatever the pill is classified as, hence the obsessive demand for it to be classified as a vaccine.
 

Germany hits new infection high as fourth COVID wave rages​

Germany has reported the highest rate of coronavirus infections since the pandemic began. State premiers are set to meet to discuss measures to curb the spread.

Germany on Wednesday reported record levels of COVID-19 cases as the country faces a virulent fourth wave of the pandemic that has taken hold since late October.

The country's public health agency, the Robert Koch Institute, reported 52,826 new cases of coronavirus infection in the past 24 hours, the highest rate registered since the pandemic began in early 2020. That represents an increase of 13,150 cases compared with the same day a week ago.

The seven-day incidence rate measuring cases per 100,000 people also reached a record high of 319.5, up from 312.4 the day before. The death toll from COVID-related causes rose in 24 hours by 294 to 98,274.

Death toll could go up over winter​

Despite the high infection rate, the death toll still remains below that at the peak of the pandemic in December 2020 owing largely to the fact that around two-thirds of the population is vaccinated.

However, experts have warned from the beginning of the rollout that the number is not high enough to keep the virus under control. One of Germany's top virologists, Christian Drosten, predicted last week that the country could see 100,000 more COVID deaths over the winter if the vaccination rate did not increase and other measures were not taken to stem the spread.

Outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel called the current coronavirus situation in Germany is "dramatic." She was talking on Wednesday at an event for the Association of German Cities in Erfurt.

She also called on those in Germany who have not yet been vaccinated to get the vaccine, saying "it is not too late to opt for a first vaccine shot."

Experts say that infection numbers are likely to continue rising over the winter, partly owing to an increase in indoor gatherings as Christmas approaches.

Call for early boosters​

Premiers of Germany's 16 states are scheduled to meet on Thursday to discuss ways of combating the fourth wave. The steps could include stricter measures on mask-wearing and requirements for people to produce proof of vaccination or recovery from COVID-19 to be able to visit certain events or locations such as concerts, restaurants and bars.

The premiers are also likely to discuss ways of overcoming vaccination hesitancy among parts of the German population.

Ahead of the meeting, Health Minister Jens Spahn on Wednesday called in an interview for booster vaccinations to be offered to all people aged 18 and over even before the six months of high immunity provided by the first full vaccination has elapsed.

However, his proposal has met with criticism from doctors' associations and patient advocacy groups.

Ulrich Weigeldt, the head of one of Germany's largest doctors' associations, the Hausärzteverband, told papers from the Funke media group that such a move could be at the cost of more vulnerable people who have a greater need to boost their immunity.

He also called for better organization regarding the provision of booster doses, saying that doctors' offices would otherwise struggle to cope with demand.

Germany's Standing Committee on Vaccination (STIKO) has said it will discuss the issue on Wednesday and soon issue guidelines that could see booster shots recommended for people aged 18 and over. Currently, STIKO recommends the booster jab only for people working in care homes and health care, those with immune deficiencies and the over-70 age group.

Warning of economic damage​

Meanwhile, a leading think tank has warned that the rising infections are putting Germany's economic recovery at risk.

"The spread of infections is reducing economic activity in sectors of social consumption — gastronomy, travel, culture and events — because people are avoiding infection risks," the head of ifo, Clemens Fuest, told the daily Passauer Neue Presse.

"When the danger of infection is high, most people won't go to restaurants or events whether they are closed or not by state-imposed measures," Fuest said.

He called on the state premiers to tighten the country's so-called 2-G rules — requiring people to present proof that they are vaccinated ("geimpft" in German) or recovered ("genesen") — to prevent unnecessary restrictions on economic activity. He said measures were also needed to reduce the dangers of infections in schools.

Fuest also urged politicians to "up the pressure" on people who are still unvaccinated.

"If the pandemic is to be successfully conquered, it won't be possible to please everyone," he said, adding that those who refused to be vaccinated without good reason were endangering others as well.



No matter how old you are, two shots of Pfizer vaccine don’t last – study​

People’s ages had no effect on the vaccine’s waning, meaning that the vaccine waned for everyone and not just older people.​


People vaccinated with two shots of the Pfizer coronavirus vaccine in January and February had a 51% increased chance of contracting the virus in July compared to those who were vaccinated in March or April, a new Israeli study published in Nature Communications has shown.

The team of researchers from KI Institute worked with doctors from KSM Research and Innovation and used data provided by Maccabi Health Services to conduct a retrospective cohort study comparing the incidence rates of breakthrough infections and COVID-19-related hospitalizations between people vaccinated toward the beginning of the country’s campaign (January and February) and those vaccinated toward the later stages (March and April). The study included more than 1.3 million records.

As noted, the risk of infection was significantly higher for people the earlier they were vaccinated, with an additional trend for high risk of hospitalization. The results, the researchers said, are consistent with other studies on the subject that show a decline in antibody levels and immune system compounds after four to six months.

Moreover, people’s ages had no effect on the vaccine’s waning, meaning that the vaccine waned for everyone and not just older people.

"The vaccine's effectiveness wanes equally for everybody, according to the study," Dr. Barak Mizrahi, a researcher in computational health for KI Institute who led the study, said.

Israel set a policy to administer a third shot to all individuals over the age of 12, in contrast to many other countries and the recommendation of the World Health Organization only to give the third jab to people at the highest risk of contracting the virus or developing serious disease.

More than four million Israelis have taken a booster shot. The results were that the infection rate dropped significantly.

Mizrahi explained that the vaccine waned more the further one got away from the original second dose, meaning that people vaccinated in January were more at risk of contracting corona than people vaccinated in February and so forth.

The study was done as the Delta variant was burning across the country and many believed that the variant may be the cause of increased infection in Israel. Mizrahi said the study shows that the variant was likely less of a factor than assumed – though this is still not confirmed.

Will the third dose last longer?

Mizrahi said that it is difficult to tell at this stage. Very preliminary data has started to be collected in various studies that shows antibodies are waning after the third shot, too. However, he said that the level of antibodies is not the only factor when it comes to immunity. Officials will need to watch and see if infections start going up and then set vaccination policy accordingly, Mizrahi said.

“I don’t think it will take us that long to know,” he concluded.



Someone on 4chan wrote a 180 page guide

I Analyzed over 50 databases and over 800 scientific case studies on everything COVID 19. Don't worry I summarized it in the very beginning so you don't have to get lost in the weeds. The bottom line is I have scientific EVIDENCE we are being lied to and that this 'Pandemic' can end if we tried an evidence based approach.


 

Attachments

Last edited:
Woah, cool it with the racism and misinformation, voting by mail is totally safe and nobody has ever committed fraud in the history of ever using it. Only white supremacists think voting by mail leads to fraud!

Probably some bullshit in what you can get an EUA on during an "emergency situation". Pfizer's vaxx isn't under an EUA anymore, it's an approved vaccine (the fastest approved in history by a sizable margin IIRC). Presumably, a "vaccine" is different than whatever the pill is classified as, hence the obsessive demand for it to be classified as a vaccine.
Re election fraud: It was the Corsicans whut did it. Interesting academic-ish article (pulled off SSRN) attached.

I actually am kind of surprised that Macron's "party of me" (surely I'm not the only one who has noticed that the initials of his party are the same as his own?) didn't do some kind of "emergency" authorization during one of the lockdowns, but perhaps it's just as well for them, given the shellacking they got in the regional elections.

(Or maybe not: I'm a little unclear on who exactly is responsible for administering our elections and therefore would have the best opportunity to commit The Fraud. You go to the mayor to register, but you get a card that is national. It's local folks who check your name on the rolls and give you the ballot, so i guess it would be the locals who do the ballot stuffing and/or ballot losing? That probably wouldn't be good for the Parisian bobos.)
 

Attachments

Wearing a mask is never EVER fucking normal. Ever.
That reminds me of this blog post who got a good rant about this.
The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) accidentally leaked their plans to permanently muzzle society. CDC director Rochelle Walensky recently revealed the agency’s true plans during an HHS statement on YouTube. “Whether it’s an infection from the flu, coronavirus, or even just the common cold. In combination with other steps like vaccination, hand washing and keeping physical distance, wearing your mask is an important step you can take to keep us all healthy,” Walensky said.

Looping the common cold in with the coronavirus is a dangerous step toward endless tyranny. The CDC initially said that anyone who received the jab would not be required to wear masks, but now it appears that they are supporting the idea of wearing masks for the foreseeable future. As we have seen since the pandemic began, CDC suggestions can quickly become mandates. There is no evidence of mask mandates effectively protecting the public. In fact, some states with mask mandates have higher cases of COVID than those without requirements such as California v Florida. If we do not hold the line, the mandates and control over society will never end.
 
Not sure if this Australian model has been posted in the past weeks, but god damn.... it's stuff like this that makes me glad I've never considered that vax for a second.

This isn't the first time I've read about doctors being dismissive of troubling signs shortly after the vax. It's fucking insane.

model1.jpg
model2.jpg
 
More images from that 4chin (schizoidposting?) post- interesting regardless:

View attachment 2724084
View attachment 2724086
Schizo shit like this is what results from the government lying and forcing the issue without any transparency. The vaccine tests were rushed and poorly managed, the results were manipulated, and then everyone was fed a constant stream of propaganda about "safe and effective", all while mounting evidence of real problems emerged.

It ends with people making connections that don't exist, but that appear rational because they're faced with an irrational situation. They want it to be a deliberate action.

These covid vaccines mess with menstruation because they mess with everything. They cause massive, systemic inflammation wherever they end up settling in the body. I suspect, if they manage to get into the ovaries that they'll probably will cause autosterilisation, but the effects are too random and widespread for that to be the intended outcome. The reality is that these vaccines were never properly tested, so nobody was able to predict what outcomes there would be. They just yelled "safe and effective" until everyone gave up.

It feels like yesterday the internet was still a free and open place, even if it was pretty obvious how things were going by 2015-16. You're always told how things are awful on the internet, and you know it to be true, but if you aren't affected directly (like being censored/banned for political views or "misinformation") you don't fully grasp how bad it really is. I think it was 2019 or 2020 when I pieced it all together and found myself awestruck at how far freedom on the internet has been eroded. It's like going by a construction site everyday, knowing exactly what they're building but just seeing it as an empty pile of material until one day it's basically finished and you realize what they were doing.
About the same for me, though I also got to see Usenet being neutered in the mid 00s, after google bought one of the largest usenet archives and stuck it behind a crummy web interface that also let a bunch more septemberites have easy access. That was back when everyone still trusted them, but it was the first big sign of the end of the free internet, in retrospect.
 
1637152478151.png


1637152585838.png


1637152610657.png


90% of the eligible population vaccinated and 100% of the over 70's

1637152723046.png


OK so the vaccines are doing zero parts of fuck all to stop transmission of the bug, we all know that, but all boomers getting jabbed is preventing hospitalisation and deaths right?

1637152833915.png


Note that after the second wave of Alpha Covid in April the death rate had dropped to zero.

Ireland's mass vaccination program really got going in May 2021 when mortality had already fallen to nothing

1637153052999.png


Deaths started to be reported again in July.

The daily death rate is currently not far off the second wave of Alpha Covid.

Reminder Delta Covid is at least a standard deviation less virulent than Alpha.

This should not be happening.

Not only do the vaccines not work they're making people more susceptible to infection and increasing mortality.

Why is this happening?


So how is that we had a "surge" this summer and continue to see infections this fall?
It can't happen if there are no susceptible people.
But it is.
So there are susceptible people.
How did they become susceptible when they weren't before in any material size?
We jabbed them.
The CDC and hospitals do not count someone who gets Covid before 2 weeks after their last jab as "vaccinated." So if you have a cycle of 28 days from first to second from the first jab to a period of time six weeks later if you get Covid-19 you're considered "unvaccinated."
Every place where we've had very high vaccination uptake as the uptake occurred we have seen material spikes in infection contemporary with the jabs, even out of regular season with normal respiratory viral patterns.
Why?
The reasonable hypothesis is that the jabs are destroying pre-existing resistance that formerly was sufficient to prevent significant, seroconverting infections in about 8 out of 10 people, but post-jab that resistance is suppressed either temporarily or permanently and thus they are able to get significantly infected.
Karl is right. The massive outbreaks we saw in the summer of 2021 should not have happened. The seasonality of Covid was apparent in 2020 when it disappeared when the weather got warm. High Vitamin D, people spending more time outdoors, less clustering inside. It's basic epidemiology. But the UK, for example, suffered it's worst casedemic during June and July and it still hasn't peaked.

What will happen when the weather gets really cold in the northern hemisphere winter? When the vaccinated huddle together in poorly heated homes because of sky high energy prices?

We're witnessing a disaster unfold in real time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back