Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Player dying the field in Cincinnati
Comments
-
Last night I recorded the Gutfeld show - went to watch it this morning and it was Special Report of the guy that had a heart attack on national TV. Full time coverage of an athlete that had a heart attack.
was it the HA or was it the fact that an NFL game got canceled that was the big news?
I stopped after fast FWDing thru 30 minutes. What a fucking joke FOX is -
How is it so fucking hard to understand that the omicron variant was different than the original virus
The intentional obtuseness is tiresome
Yet entirely expected -
Who the fuck are you?BearsWiin said:How is it so fucking hard to understand that the omicron variant was different than the original virus
The intentional obtuseness is tiresome
Yet entirely expected -
Wife already has him scheduled for his 8th booster.BearsWiin said:How is it so fucking hard to understand that the omicron variant was different than the original virus
The intentional obtuseness is tiresome
Yet entirely expected
-
The mRNA technology was first developed in the 60’s. Not a single therapy using mRMA was approved and brought to market until the COVID flu shots.
Yes, they’re not vaccines. Sorry.
Big Pharma is all about money. I guess it’s a good thing COVID came along so we could see the wonders of this technology.
Look how it stopped COVID in its tracks.
-
What the fuck are you talking about?BearsWiin said:How is it so fucking hard to understand that the omicron variant was different than the original virus
The intentional obtuseness is tiresome
Yet entirely expected
-
What were the chances of a 14 y/o dying from omicron?Bob_C said:
What the fuck are you talking about?BearsWiin said:How is it so fucking hard to understand that the omicron variant was different than the original virus
The intentional obtuseness is tiresome
Yet entirely expected
I’ll wait right here. -
It’s nice to see that BW crawled out from under his ironing board to take a look around.
-
It won't. The masses need to believe because they are sheep. They are cowards who feel more comfortable being told how and what to think.pawz said:
Great questions. Were any asked of the CV jab trials?whatshouldicareabout said:
Is it peer reviewed? It's listed as "letter to editor".EsophagealFeces said:
Don't bring medical studies and peer reviewed papers into this. The libs don't deal in facts, only emotions.Dude61 said:
Letter uses absolute values instead of rates. How many athletes were in sports in 1966-2004 versus 2020-2022?
What was the source of statistics for those years? Are they comparable in how they were taken? How reliable are those statistics? Where is the data for 2005-2019?
What types of sports had the highest rate of cardiac injury? What about race?
No need to answer.
The fact that Pfizer asked a federal judge to withhold answers for 75 years says it all.
In this case, the author Dr Peter McCullough is the top cardiologist in the country. With over 600 peer-reviewed, published papers on his resume he is head and shoulders above the field. I think it's fair to say he's earned a bit of discretion if those questions aren't perfectly addressed (but likely are given his track record).
I really hope this helps. -
Agreed. Good thing there was one of those, though I get that “a real investigation” means “provide me the confirmation bias I need.”WestlinnDuck said:
Like looking into election fraud, some people don't want to ask and don't want to know. Statistical anomalies can be just that. They can also direct an intellectually curious person into further investigation. When the first party strongly resists that investigation, that is further evidence that there should be an investigation - a real investigation.pawz said:
Great questions. Were any asked of the CV jab trials?whatshouldicareabout said:
Is it peer reviewed? It's listed as "letter to editor".EsophagealFeces said:
Don't bring medical studies and peer reviewed papers into this. The libs don't deal in facts, only emotions.Dude61 said:
Letter uses absolute values instead of rates. How many athletes were in sports in 1966-2004 versus 2020-2022?
What was the source of statistics for those years? Are they comparable in how they were taken? How reliable are those statistics? Where is the data for 2005-2019?
What types of sports had the highest rate of cardiac injury? What about race?
No need to answer.
The fact that Pfizer asked a federal judge to withhold answers for 75 years says it all.
In this case, the author Dr Peter McCullough, is the top cardiologist in the country. With over 600 peer-reviewed, published papers on his resume he is head and shoulders above the field. I think it's fair to say he's earned a bit of discretion if those questions aren't perfectly addressed (but likely are given his track record).
I really hope this helps.
