27 March 2021  /  Updated 17 July 2021
Reasoning behind ru...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Reasoning behind rules?

Page 1 / 2

MFvH
 MFvH
(@mfvh)
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 4
Topic starter  

Can anyone point me to the rational behind the following rules?
- 180 days immunity after Covid infection for the purpose of travel. What is the 180 days based on?
- why the day 2 and 8 testing if you ask people to quarantine anyway? And by the way I am still waiting for my day 8 test results now 12 days after taking the test.

If no one can come up with a scientific answer, can it be challenged?


Quote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439
 

The lies indicate their intentions. Why would they consistently deny the science? The vaccine is the goal and perpetual vaccinations, so, they have to minimise anything that counters this outcome whose necessity they are attempting to socially engineer. This is why they have withdrawn effective treatments and are criminally negligent. They are manipulative the social environment to ensure the outcomes they want.


ReplyQuote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439

ReplyQuote
StPiosCafe
(@stpioscafe)
Joined: 5 months ago
Posts: 265
 

Can anyone point me to the rational behind the following rules?
- 180 days immunity after Covid infection for the purpose of travel. What is the 180 days based on?

Well it can wear off after a bit, e.g. half a year which is 30*6.


ReplyQuote
StPiosCafe
(@stpioscafe)
Joined: 5 months ago
Posts: 265
 

The lies indicate their intentions.

Pleaee say which if any lies.
Why would they consistently deny the science?

Pleaee say which if any science.


ReplyQuote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439
 

I have written about the lies before and so I did not want to bore people through repetition. The key lies have been that there are no treatments and then the organised withdrawal of drugs that doctors use to treat it. This is a well-known strategy of pharmaceuticals companies, apparently, which have a history of withdrawing safe older treatments to drive the market for their new drugs, that indicates modus operandi, if nothing else. This has been linked to one of the most revealing aspects that this pandemic involves conflict within the elite in that senior doctors who are part of the US elite, like Simone Gold, have lost their jobs for recommending particular courses of drugs. We have also seen the criminalisation of drugs like HDQ, in Australia and certain US states, all, very revealing. Then there has been the use of scientifically authenticated representations to deny things like natural immunity. Many scientists and doctors believe that those who have had covid have robust, life-long, immunity. Clearly, this is a key problem if you are wanting to push mass, global, vaccination, and, even worse, perpetual vaccination under the idea of a continuous threat, and so, we can see why this phenomenon has been denied. The other key lie is that the variants are a real threat. These are all functional lies that indicate intention. You can discern the instrumental forms of rationality via the misconstrual of science to generate legitimated representations that serve the interests of the elite driving the pandemic.


ReplyQuote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439
 

"There is a global suppression on early treatment. I want people to understand how global this is...In Canada doctors are threatened for trying to treat covid patients as outpatients...the powers that are out there that want to suppress early treatment and cause as much fear, suffering and hospitalisation and death are not by happenstance, these are powerful forces...this is extraordinary…the suppression of early treatment…to make the problem worse than what it is. Many methods to make the case count look higher than what it is, make the mortality numbers look worse than what they are, many methods to create the reaction out of proportion to the reality, the lockdowns, fears, economic suffering, what have you, all of these things making the pandemic way worse than what it is, to have that occur, more fear, suffering, hospitalisation, death, loneliness, lockdown, in order to promote mass vaccination. These two are linked. Mass vaccination at all cost. The world must be mass vaccinated and human beings on earth ought to understand that what we are seeing is unprecedented. It became known that the virus was going to be amenable to a vaccine somewhere around April, May, from that point in time therapy was suppressed, nothing could be published, everything, the fake Lancet paper, squashed treatment, and then prepared the population for vaccination. Once the vaccines came out, they are short-tracked, there is all kinds of enthusiasm, “needles in all the arms” and then before we know it we are vaccinating pregnant women, why are we doing that, that can’t be safe, then we are vaccinating covid recovered patients, they have complete and robust permanent immunity, no one has ever challenged the immunity of a covid recovered patient, why are we vaccinating them? And then it keeps going and going, at first we vaccinated high risk people, I always thought about twenty million people, but the vaccine stakeholders didn’t seem satisfied who wanted everyone to be vaccinated without exception. No one will escaped the needle. We’ve actually never had this before." Dr Peter McCullough.


ReplyQuote
Splatt
(@splatt)
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 1618
 

Can anyone point me to the rational behind the following rules?
- 180 days immunity after Covid infection for the purpose of travel. What is the 180 days based on?

Based on the longest duration a study so far into the length of immunity has lasted.
You'd expect that rule to alter if and when more data becomes available.
- why the day 2 and 8 testing if you ask people to quarantine anyway?

Day 2 makes sense for sequencing purposes. Day 8 really doesn't make much sense at all. No idea why it exists with quarantine. I wonder how many that test negative on day 2 test positive on day 8?

Obviously green list is no quarantine so the Day 2 test makes a lot more sense there as the person is out and about.
And by the way I am still waiting for my day 8 test results now 12 days after taking the test.

Friend of mine has been waiting since March so you've got a way to go yet.


ReplyQuote
Freeman Exiled
(@freeman-exiled)
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Its based on their testing claiming they can only detect signifcant amounts of antibodies up to 6months. Yet Immunity lasts a lifetime. Their downplaying and deliberately ignoring therapeutics, pre-immunity acquired immunity and hyping up the experimental psuedo-vaccines.

https://scitechdaily.com/scientists-uncover-evidence-that-a-level-of-pre-existing-covid-19-sars-cov-2-immunity-is-present-in-the-general-population/
Singapore study shows that SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells are present in all recovered COVID-19 patients.
These T cells were also found in all subjects who recovered from SARS 17 years ago, and in over 50% of both SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 uninfected individuals tested, suggesting that a level of pre-existing SARS-CoV-2 immunity is present in the general population.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2008/08/researchers-find-long-lived-immunity-1918-pandemic-virus
"Aug 19, 2008 (CIDRAP News) – A study of the blood of older people who survived the 1918 influenza pandemic reveals that antibodies to the strain have lasted a lifetime.."

"The people recruited for the study were 2 to 12 years old in 1918 and many recalled sick family members in their households, which suggests they were directly exposed to the virus, the authors report. The group found that 100% of the subjects had serum-neutralizing activity against the 1918 virus and 94% showed serologic reactivity to the 1918 hemagglutinin."

"The B cells have been waiting for at least 60 years—if not 90 years—for that flu to come around again," he said. "That's amazing, because it's the longest memory anyone's ever demonstrated."

"From the B cells of three donors, the research group generated five monoclonal antibodies that not only strongly neutralized the 1918 virus, but also cross-reacted with proteins related to the 1930 swine flu virus. However, the antibodies did not react against more contemporary influenza strains."

"Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said recent studies have projected that immunity lasts several decades; the current study provides proof, the AP reported. "This is the mother of all immunological memory here," he told the AP"
Original study https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2848880/

Probably if you want to travel again, take a pseudo vax booster every 180 days to prove your allegiance to the New Medical Order.


ReplyQuote
StPiosCafe
(@stpioscafe)
Joined: 5 months ago
Posts: 265
 

Probably if you want to travel again, take a pseudo vax booster every 180 days to prove your allegiance to the New Medical Order.

Probably the best advice you have given today.


ReplyQuote
StPiosCafe
(@stpioscafe)
Joined: 5 months ago
Posts: 265
 

The lies indicate their intentions. Why would they consistently deny the science? The vaccine is the goal

Would you like to posit a guess, no matter how wild, as to why they are fixated on vaccine? What good would it do them since AZ vaccine is only $2 pop. Are they trying to get rich very, very slowly? Hell I could pay for the population of (say) Liverpool or half of Birmingham to be vaccinated from my own retirement pot! It's not exactly a get rich quick scheme, the Oxford AZ vaccine! They'd be better off investing in bitcoin FFS!


ReplyQuote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439
 

Who knows but the fact the vaccine is the goal is obvious. I have posted on this twice, the second time in response to you. I have explained my reasoning. We cannot know why the vaccine is the aim but it is perfectly that this has been the case. You are toxic and, if I were you, I would try to curb your toxicity. You are extremely narcissistic in the way you select fragments in order to demean others and derive narcissistic supply. As Yeadon says "it is not my crime". We cannot know why they are driving the vaccines but it is perfectly clear that the vaccines, and, in turn, the IDs have been the goal of this scam from the start. Pfizer were bankrupt before this, bankrupt by some of the largest liabilities pay outs in history. Moderna had no key money-making product. Pfizer tried to use vaccines as leverage against a military base in Argentina. Do you think big-pharma is a charitable enterprise? If it were, it would be a loop hole allowing them to increase their profits in the way Gates has. The underlying aim is to move us into a form of social organisation in which vaccination is part of our accession to personhood and rights of access to forms that require access to public space that is under threat of becoming conditional upon instrumentation under the possession of state agencies. A vaccine-led health strategy has collective social effects, of course, because the basis of collective forms have been annulled in order to produce the market that pharma, and whoever else is invested in all this, want. If they are not invested in this, why did they suppress therapeutics and not focus on treating sick people? Why, instead of focusing on the treatment of sick people did they switch attention to the behaviours of healthy people, effectively annulling civil society, except for the global elite whose lives have gone on unchanged beyond the careful maintenance of the charade this latest apparatus of mobilisation requires?


ReplyQuote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439
 

Bitcoin is an unreliable market anyway, you can easily lose a lot of money on a market like that. Gates said the returns on vaccines were twenty-to-one. The way you ensure returns is to control the market, this is what Pharma does via the WHO and other health agencies, they are criminal cartels with appalling histories. What else has their behaviour shown? They have a history of withdrawing safe and effective treatments in order to increase the market for new products. As one Pharma CEO put it:
The main problem is that we were selling drugs to sick people, what we should have done is sell drugs to healthy people that way we could have vastly expanded our markets and sold drugs like bubble gum. John Horan. Retired Merck (Big Pharma) CEO.
The way around this is to vaccinate healthy people under the guise of preventive forms. Dr Wolfgang Wodarg has interesting things to say on this here:

https://odysee.com/@Corona-Ausschuss:3/CA-40---Wodarg:f


ReplyQuote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439
 

“There are loads of people who’ve smelt the coffee and are investing in the vaccine industry, saying we are going to develop this now. Like Bill Gates who is putting all his money into it and saying vaccinate next year, and the year after. The reason the indstury is so lucrative is because it works with fear. People allow themselves to be vaccinated because they are afraid they might get ill. For that, one needs a device with which one can generate fear—and the PCR test is such a device. You need a device with which you can find something and you do find it in people who are very ill. Then people think it must be something really dangerous. That is the mechanism that is being used. And the vaccine industry rely on being able to successfully generate fear time and time again when people aren’t doing well, when they are in need, when they have cancer, or when they have other forms of chronic illness—they clutch at straws. They want to live, they want to be healthy, they would give anything for that. And that is being exploited. The fear of illness, the desperation, is being exploited by a really bad industry which says the higher the desperation, the higher we can make the prices, so the more worthwhile it is for you to invest. And they are now getting our data so they can see exactly where our real problems are. In other words a market is being developed here, a market that works with desperation and fear that sells us something preventively. The fantastic thing about this market is that if one does things preventatively, one only finds out many years later whether it has helped or not.” Dr Woolfgang Wodarg.
I posted his comments last week or the week before and it is getting very repetitive to answer your comments. I am not involved in any of this, so my views can only be delegated but a lot of prominent people who have been involved in this pandemic have drawn the conclusion, as McCullough says, and I posted the quote on Saturday, here it is:


ReplyQuote
Nobody
(@nobody)
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 439
 

"There is a global suppression on early treatment. I want people to understand how global this is...In Canada doctors are threatened for trying to treat covid patients as outpatients...the powers that are out there that want to suppress early treatment and cause as much fear, suffering and hospitalisation and death are not by happenstance, these are powerful forces...this is extraordinary…the suppression of early treatment…to make the problem worse than what it is. Many methods to make the case count look higher than what it is, make the mortality numbers look worse than what they are, many methods to create the reaction out of proportion to the reality, the lockdowns, fears, economic suffering, what have you, all of these things making the pandemic way worse than what it is, to have that occur, more fear, suffering, hospitalisation, death, loneliness, lockdown, in order to promote mass vaccination. These two are linked. Mass vaccination at all cost. The world must be mass vaccinated and human beings on earth ought to understand that what we are seeing is unprecedented. It became known that the virus was going to be amenable to a vaccine somewhere around April, May, from that point in time therapy was suppressed, nothing could be published, everything, the fake Lancet paper, squashed treatment, and then prepared the population for vaccination. Once the vaccines came out, they are short-tracked, there is all kinds of enthusiasm, “needles in all the arms” and then before we know it we are vaccinating pregnant women, why are we doing that, that can’t be safe, then we are vaccinating covid recovered patients, they have complete and robust permanent immunity, no one has ever challenged the immunity of a covid recovered patient, why are we vaccinating them? And then it keeps going and going, at first we vaccinated high risk people, I always thought about twenty million people, but the vaccine stakeholders didn’t seem satisfied who wanted everyone to be vaccinated without exception. No one will escape the needle. We’ve actually never had this before…


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2
Share: