Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Player dying the field in Cincinnati
Comments
-
As stated in another post.... how does the argument ignore the fact COVID19 has shown to also increase heart inflammation and myocarditis? Unless you can establish that an athlete (1) had the Vaxx and (2) never had COVID19, these studies or data points are meaningless. Was it the vaxx? Was it prior exposure to COVID? Was it something else? I hate the pro and anti-vaxxers.... but these arguments lack logic.
-
Don't bring medical studies and peer reviewed papers into this. The libs don't deal in facts, only emotions.Dude61 said: -
We may never know because if this was vax related they aren't going to say shit about the vax. The NFL was forcing the vax and will cover that shit up.
Most players got vaxed. A small percentage refused and were correct in that decision IMO,
-
Actual science that @MelloDawg fucking stupid isn’t going to read, consume or process in any meaningful way.Dude61 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? -
It's as if the only variable introduced into the scientific experiment of the past several years are the mRNA vaccines themselves. An infectious disease that most have had by now could not possible play a role.LawDawg1 said:As stated in another post.... how does the argument ignore the fact COVID19 has shown to also increase heart inflammation and myocarditis? Unless you can establish that an athlete (1) had the Vaxx and (2) never had COVID19, these studies or data points are meaningless. Was it the vaxx? Was it prior exposure to COVID? Was it something else? I hate the pro and anti-vaxxers.... but these arguments lack logic.
-
Well there is pretty clear evidence all over the place that the mrna jabs have led to myocarditis for young male athletes. But you are right, it's a real mystery.YellowSnow said:
It's as if the only variable introduced into the scientific experiment of the past several years are the mRNA vaccines themselves. An infectious disease that most have had by now could not possible play a role.LawDawg1 said:As stated in another post.... how does the argument ignore the fact COVID19 has shown to also increase heart inflammation and myocarditis? Unless you can establish that an athlete (1) had the Vaxx and (2) never had COVID19, these studies or data points are meaningless. Was it the vaxx? Was it prior exposure to COVID? Was it something else? I hate the pro and anti-vaxxers.... but these arguments lack logic.
-
Trust me your gov’t, Pols and big pharma would never mislead or lie to you.
Masks don’t work.
Masks work.
Plexiglass works.
6’ distancing works. (even if it was made up)
Ivermectin IS horse paste.
Costco is safe.
Your local bakery isn’t.
You can’t get covid if you’re vaxxed.
The unvaxxed are a danger to you.
What constitutes a Vaccine needed to be redefined.
Natural immunity isn’t a thing with THIS virus.
Lockdowns are effective.
School children are not being effected.
A plastic tent outside a restaurant is safer than inside.
Funerals are too dangerous to attend.
Home Depot is safe.
They were only trying to keep you safe. Never forget that.
-
Lots of hot texts going around my league, championship game had Diggs and Allen on the same team. I'll keep everyone updated.
-
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.
-
Speaking of pressing. Plausible deniability by virtue of the Limited Scope Fallacy is one of my favorites.YellowSnow said:
It's as if the only variable introduced into the scientific experiment of the past several years are the mRNA vaccines themselves. An infectious disease that most have had by now could not possible play a role.LawDawg1 said:As stated in another post.... how does the argument ignore the fact COVID19 has shown to also increase heart inflammation and myocarditis? Unless you can establish that an athlete (1) had the Vaxx and (2) never had COVID19, these studies or data points are meaningless. Was it the vaxx? Was it prior exposure to COVID? Was it something else? I hate the pro and anti-vaxxers.... but these arguments lack logic.
-
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. -
You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.Sources said:
This is a little ironic coming from mr. group chatbackthepack said:
Ahhh, a low IQ with a dash of narcissism. That's always a special combination.RoadTrip said:
I have no idea what 8chan is. The text we received was from a young man at the university of Georgia. His father is an exec at ESPN. You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.ntxduck said:
A person with a >than room temperature iq would take this opportunity of being publicly humiliated to reflect internally and take a serious look at the unreliable sources of info they are being fed.RoadTrip said:Text we received had to be wrong. Hopefully the young man recovers soon. If he does, medical heros and technology will have saved his life.
I’m going to bet you’ll just dive deeper down the 8chan rabbit hole though.
-
Likely a copypasta, but we agree in that I’ll never be your equalbackthepack said:
You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.Sources said:
This is a little ironic coming from mr. group chatbackthepack said:
Ahhh, a low IQ with a dash of narcissism. That's always a special combination.RoadTrip said:
I have no idea what 8chan is. The text we received was from a young man at the university of Georgia. His father is an exec at ESPN. You need me to think I'm humiliated because you'll never be my equal and that bothers you.ntxduck said:
A person with a >than room temperature iq would take this opportunity of being publicly humiliated to reflect internally and take a serious look at the unreliable sources of info they are being fed.RoadTrip said:Text we received had to be wrong. Hopefully the young man recovers soon. If he does, medical heros and technology will have saved his life.
I’m going to bet you’ll just dive deeper down the 8chan rabbit hole though. -
That's the thing, the British study was in fact discussed here but largely dismissed because myocarditis rates and severity were much high higher through covid infection than they were through vaccination. It's like, yeah, we know that but it's better than the alternativeYellowSnow said:
It's as if the only variable introduced into the scientific experiment of the past several years are the mRNA vaccines themselves. An infectious disease that most have had by now could not possible play a role.LawDawg1 said:As stated in another post.... how does the argument ignore the fact COVID19 has shown to also increase heart inflammation and myocarditis? Unless you can establish that an athlete (1) had the Vaxx and (2) never had COVID19, these studies or data points are meaningless. Was it the vaxx? Was it prior exposure to COVID? Was it something else? I hate the pro and anti-vaxxers.... but these arguments lack logic.
-
I'm fine. Never tested never vaxxedwhatshouldicareabout 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? -
What I'm getting here is its still fine to blame the kitchen sink on covid but we need to be hyper careful about saying anything about the vac
A lot of you will never move off the thinking that crushed the economy for no reason
Good luck the rest of the way -
From your King County overlords. Regardless if this is vaccine related or not, pushing it on young people was fucking stupid. In theory, unlimited risk with no reward.
-
Grim
-
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.
