Coronavirus in Poland

Damn right. The bootlickers drove the final nail into their bootlicking coffin when they said "vaxxed or not, got to mask up".
Translation: Vaxxed or not, I am a spreader anyway. This means that my vaccine DOES not protect others - only me.

If that's the case, the feminist in me says, my vaccine, my body, my life, and my death. Fu*ck off.

Bottom line: Covid bootlickers, think before you say another stupid covid slogan. Idiots.

How can you even quantify that at this point? Unless you compare the very recent group of 'boosted' individuals to the larger and much longer existing group of those who received two shot.


I doubt any country will really escape this bulls*hit, especially in the EU, even in the Eastern Europe. There is probably a lot of pressure or straight-up bribery from the Brussels institutions. You see how in 27 EU member states, there is not a single European Ron Desantis or even Glenn Youngkin. In a whole continental union of 450 million people there is not a single leader with the balls to merely say: "Our 'state' is not getting involved in this, let people decide". The good news is that in many Eastern European countries the enforcement won't be as strong..

The best thing is that there are people like our president speaking out about this, even if he personally doesn't have the power to stop it. It means that the issue doesn't go away, and there is an incentive for parties to campaign against mandates. With a 3rd shot being on the table now, and 3 more being on the table "against Omicron", this isn't a one-time choice that people can make for life. It's going to recur again and again.

today's numbers

22.8 % percent of 104,369 (slowly falling after the peak)

hospitalized : +49 to 23,755

ICU: +34 to 2104

daily deaths: 486 (354 with co-morbidities)

7 day average deaths: +149 to 400

Communism alive and well.
Twitter will now ban users who repeatedly claim vaccinated people can spread Covid !
Why are they so afraid to tell the people the vaccination didn't do what they claimed it would ?
It is getting even worse on the local front.
The UK media is running reports citing "experts" insisting that "hardcore vaccine refuseniks" may need to be "deradicalized" like "terrorists," "punished" and subjected to vaccine mandates.

Forced experimental vaccinations with no recourse just isn't right.

@johnny reb
Your post is exactly what they want to stop. NO ONE EVER CLAIMED that you couldn't get covid after being vaccinated. NOT ONCE. the only claim was that it would reduce likelihood of hospitalization and death. Which it has done.

Communism? Or a capitalist business exercising its free choice.

today's numbers

26.1 % percent of 74,661 (higher percentage but fewer tests so... the fall is still on....)

hospitalized : -111 to 23,644

ICU: +38 to 2142

daily deaths: 65 (54 with co-morbidities)

7 day average deaths: -2 to 398

Remember that the vaccine received its emergency authorization when they claimed that the vaxx was 95% effective in preventing infections. Apparently there is no process to withdraw an authorization if the claims don't hold up. Their solution is administering more and more of the vaccine which doesn't really work as initially claimed.

Do you still have the naive hope, that the vaccine will end the pandemic? Maybe not after 70% are vaccinated, like they promised last year, but hopefully when 100% are triple vaxxed? The pandemic will end when the virus is endemic and ideally a less dangerous mutation is the dominant variant and the powers that be decide that it's over. What is your hope? That the billionaire class will be reigned in after things are "back to normal"? That Bezos will earn less money if the local shops are open again for everyone?

Or do you consider it normal that, when a football player, who during a journalistic interrogation "admitted" that he hasn't been vaccinated, several prime ministers, the chancellor and the federal president and countless other politicians voice their opinion about the vaccination status of that private citizen?

@Korvinus
Completely not true. The claim was to prevent death and hospitalization, and the claim was not 95% but in the 80 percentile, real life testing at the beginning of the pandemic gave a 90 percentile. All you people cant even read or you have that little reading comprehension skills that you have to make this up? And then you wonder why other people question all the antivax people's intelligence? You cant even use the truth to try to make your argument sound intelligent.

pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-conclude-phase-3-study-covid-19-vaccine

-Primary efficacy analysis demonstrates BNT162b2 to be 95% effective against COVID-19 beginning 28 days after the first dose;170 confirmed cases of COVID-19 were evaluated, with 162 observed in the placebo group versus 8 in the vaccine group

-Efficacy was consistent across age, gender, race and ethnicity demographics; observed efficacy in adults over 65 years of age was over 94%

NO ! YOUR posts are what we want to stop because they are the propaganda that they want the sheep to hear.
Damn PolAm, I took you for an intelligent person.
You got to quit listening to your nurse sister.
Go google the old articles when the vaccines first came out for yourself.
You will find hundreds of them that confirm what I say as the truth.
Try this one (one of hundreds) for an example that clearly states that the vaccine PREVENTS the virus !

cbc.ca/news/health/pfizer-says-early-data-indicates-covid-19-vaccine-is-effective-1.5794899

And then you wonder why antivaxxers' question all the jabbers people's intelligence ?

To not allow people to quote official reports by governmental and medical and pharmaceutical authorities.

In other words, twitter has abandoned the 'public utility' model they once claimed and is therefore a private publisher with legal responsibility for what appears there (which includes lots of illegal things that twitter is not bothered by....

As long as you agree with it, If they would publish something you don't like you would sing a different tune.

@johnny reb
First, my sister is an MD with a minor in infectious disease, highly educated. Me, I am also educated. The vaccine was never said to prevent the virus, please show me a quote containing prevent. 95% efficacy is against hospitalization and death, nothing more. The cbc report you put out says "may be 90%" and "data suggests", clearly interpretations of data change. Nowhere is there a claim of "definite" or "absolute".

The problem is that people do not really read and understand reporting. They form opinions based on what they think a report means and not on the actual facts contained in any report. This is human nature for people who want or dont want to see black and white statements. Nothing in that cbc article says anything more than what could be, and there are zero absolute statements in it.

This is where all the twisting and politicizing gets done. The same group twisting facts now was not so long ago praising trump for operation warp speed and demanding he get credit for the vaccine. Now its sleepy Joe's fault because it has limited side effects.

This whole discussion is colored by peoples emotions. When black and white facts and real numbers support vaccination to limit the possibility of hospitalization and death. Limit, not remove. Other than that there should be no discussion and everyone has their own choice to make. The discussion of choice over mandate should be a completely different thread as vaccination efficacy and choice or government over reach are completely different subjects.

Let me copy and paste what the cbc says which contradicts you saying:


There are many articles that you can google that says otherwise.
This is the one I posted and what it says:

Pfizer says an early peek at its vaccine data suggests the shots may be 90 per cent effective at preventing COVID-19, indicating the company is on track later this month to file an emergency use application with U.S. regulators.

And the point is, we have found that not to be even remotely true haven't we.

@johnny reb
"suggests" and "may be" are not statements of fact. And that is where reading comprehension comes in. The CBC is NOT CDC so it is a news outlet expressing their opinion. There is not any definitive statement from Pfizer.

And using your quote again, these CBC comments and opinions were made before the application for emergency use was even made. So once again new opinions formed on inconclusive and incomplete data. This CBC you quote is the CNN of Canada and we should consider this report reliable? I dont think so.

Private companies should never pretend to be public utilities, unless some Tory shitshow has contracted them as one.


Indeed, and much there that I dislike (and therefore choose not to follow from my account). Nevertheless it's a positive step that they're being responsible about vaccines.

Yet they were made to brainwash the public and yet again there are many sources that you can Google that suggest the vaccine could prevent getting the virus.

CBC is just an arbitrary source that I picked to make my well-made point that contradicts yours.

@johnny reb
Brainwashing is your opinion. People can not be brainwashed unless they want to and avail themselves to it. While I would agree the far left is nutty about masks and mandates, the far right antivaxers are simply just as full of $h!T and nutty.

CBC, CNN, FOX, MSNBC and the like are extremist vomit spewing idiots capitalizing on fear in both directions. They are manipulating the uneducated and the over educated pseudointellectuals.

Responsible people read the actual reports, and not news reports of the reports. The source of information and not the reporting of an interpretation of the actual report twisted to meet a network or agency needs. Facts, founded on science and reviews. Once you do that, feel free to voice an opinion and your emotional thoughts on things. But quoting news either left or right is about as wise as battling windmills.

what's responsible about banning the truth?

Anti-vax woo?

Not so, brainwashing is yours, I state the facts and I have yet to see any facts from you, only opinions.


Then don't claim nobody said that vaccines prevent the virus.
And no matter what sources I post, you call them bullshit and fake yet I have yet seen you post a source of any kind but simply saying "scientists".

Here is another of mine by my "scientists".

townhall.com/tipsheet/bethbaumann/2020/12/29/the-whos-top-scientist-casts-doubt-on-the-covid-vaccine-n2582283

Again PolAm, what we were being fed, by scientists, simply did not turn out to be true in all aspects about the vaccine.
In fact, your 'scientists even ADMITTED to lying to us, remember ?
One made by the 'scientists' was that if vaccinated you had a 90% chance of not getting Covid which just isn't true, is it.
You need to come down off your high fluent horse and take a 360 degree view of what we ALL were being fed by the scientists, the news media and the governments.

Tell me why did Scientists Lie About COVID Origins ? (They Were Scared To Lose Taxpayer Funding)
Tell me why our first responders, doctors, nurses and the like refuse the vaccine.
Tell my why the Amish who refused the vaccines have a similar death rate as those who have been fully vaccinated with the EXPERIMENTAL vaccine.

Tell me why the statistics on the deaths from covid have been manipulated by the scientists that they admitted to doing.
Tell me why the mask hoax was put in place by your scientists.
Tell me why the vast majority of people dying from Covid are fully vaccinated.

naturalnews.com/2021-07-01-report-majority-now-dying-with-covid-are-vaccinated.html

Screw the word 'scientists' and their "actual reports" that you use to confirm the truth because they have lied to us.
Here are ten lies that people still believe:

citizensjournal.us/top-10-biggest-lies-about-covid-19/

Wake up man.

Good point.
Another point: Networks, including Fox, like echo chamber guests. That's why I no longer watch Hannity.


...are numbers and graphs, not essays full of may, might, likely, and crap like this. Still waiting for the science of how the throwaway masks work by numbers.

Vaccine junkie? Are you going to take the recommended three shots for omicron?

If "science" and the "experts" say we should...Of course...

@Novichok
Exactly. Citing news reports of selected scientists is not the science. It is a scientists opinion of the science. So go read the published report and form your own opinion. If you are not intelligent enough to do that, then that's not my problem.

Lies are only lies if people believe them. I don't believe anyone but the facts I can verify myself. Everything else is opinion and noise.

I don't believe masks do anything to protect anyone based on the scientific reports saying that the virus gets through masks. I don't believe that getting vaccinated is a cure because science never said it was or would be.

People can interpret science and make their opinion of what to do or not to do based on what they think, and their thoughts are not perfect. Their thoughts, are just as often proven wrong as they are right. So, science. Blind science. Facts. Not opinion. Not emotional bullshit. Get the vaccine or not. Wear a mask or not. As long as your actions do not effect mine then let the bodies fall where they may.

Lies by omission are actually worse. It's hard to spot what you don't see. The most notorious - conflating "with" with "from" and the ages of the dead.

And their health conditions. And the vaccination status. Other than that, we should trust and obey the "experts" and the government parasites.

WTF is it supposed to mean?
You know, the biggest problem with "trust the science" I have, is that science and trust do not mix.
The science is based on scepticism.
In science you create a hypothesis, then go out looking for any way to disprove it. If, in spite your best efforts, you fail to find cracks in your hypothesis, you temporarily assume it may correctly describe reality. Until you, or anyone else, find a way to challenge it again.

Trust has nothing to do with science at all.

Yet I just showed you where it was quoted otherwise by scientists, governments and the news media that drubbed us day in and day out with that lie.

And that was the point I wanted to make which I did, thank you.


You could say that about the Holy Bible.


Only the sheep.
Baaaa Baaaaa Baaaaaa

@johnny reb
I would say that about the Bible. Religion is a man made thing. Faith is not made, you have it or not.

As for science, raw facts, results. Not opinions of people reading the results. You provided opinions of people who read information. Your opinion is formed based on theirs, and not actually reading the research yourself. There is a big difference. I don't care about some doctors opinion about the data, I care about the data, and what the data shows me, then I can form my opinion without interference and noise from people who have their own agenda. My agenda as you so often point out is me and my family, I trust no one else opinions where it may effect them or me.