What's new
By:

Coronavirus

Red said:
Correcting this for you, since it has nothing to do with Ars Technica….

But this does….

www.thefactual.com

The Factual

Unbiased news on trending topics. Daily.
www.thefactual.com www.thefactual.com

Click to expand...
What's your opinion on this Tabloid? I even used your source... They are making billions off of idiots. But hey, it's great that these vaccinates aren't helping the spread.

Sheep... Baaaaah baaaaah.

Pfizer, Moderna seen reaping billions from COVID-19 vaccine booster market​


Going forward, analysts have forecast revenue of over $6.6 billion for the Pfizer/BioNTech shot and $7.6 billion for Moderna in 2023, mostly from booster sales. They eventually see the annual market settling at around $5 billion or higher, with additional drugmakers competing for those sales


www.reuters.com

Focus: Pfizer, Moderna seen reaping billions from COVID-19 vaccine booster market

Drugmakers Pfizer Inc, BioNTech and Moderna Inc are expected to reap billions of dollars from COVID-19 booster shots in a market that could rival the $6 billion in annual sales for flu vaccines for years to come, analysts and healthcare investors say.
www.reuters.com www.reuters.com

@infection you said this was distorted...
 
Last edited:
Part of me thinks it's funny but it's actually scary how stupid Covid Nazis are. No.. you cannot see my papers.

Critics are using hashtags such as "#superspreader" and "#ObamaVariant" after the Daily Mail reported that at least 74 people have tested positive for the virus since Obama’s elite party last Saturday, which is more than any week since April.
 
@leftyjace what were your symptoms? Did you have a blood oxygen monitor? How’s your smell and taste? I had covid last November and my smell and taste didn’t go away until about one week in. It’s still recovering as we speak.
 
Hax0rs said:
You know how we know you're DAF? 85% of Israeli adults have been vaccinated, 95% of current Israeli hospitalizations are vaccinated.

Bitch, I could be the dean of the UofU medical school and you wouldn't know better
Click to expand...

Ha! Yes, let’s not look at the United States and its success rate. Let’s look at a different country 5,000 miles away. Brilliant!!!!

So far as why it’s not been effective there, I can’t say. Maybe the vaccines aren’t being stored properly. Maybe Pfizer is littered with anti-Semites. The possibilities are endless. Do me a favor. Look into it. Do your deep dive and report back. But be sure to go to Israel so it’s first-hand info. That is, if you haven’t been added to any FAA watchlists.
 
JazzyFresh said:
It's...a... technical... website.. lol ffs
Click to expand...
I don’t know why you insist on continuing to make a fool out of yourself like this. What does it possibly gain you? You were woefully wrong about Ars Technica as a highly respected outlet for science news. I even provided you the names of some of their staff, and contributors, and their qualifications in the biological sciences. You made a mistake. I called you on it. Just get over it.

You drew a Big Fail hand, of your own free will, because in your excitement and eagerness to post a “gotcha”, you never bothered to read their article on the rejection of germ theory by some. You never bothered, in this instance, to check the algorithm and standards The Factual went with in identifying good sources for information on the coronavirus. Somehow, they are not qualified to do this in your estimation? I’m not sure I have ever seen you actually address any information, and rebut it with your own information. All you do is cry “tabloid”, with no thoughtful rebuttals whatsoever. That’s just never going to cut it. I mean, Ars Technica is right up there with MIT’s journal, and other quality outlets and organizations. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Well, yeah, you are a troll, at least at times, so there’s that, and maybe there is only that. I’d like to think better of you than that, you seem to get along with some other members here, but whatever. The Factual’s list of outlets with reliable and factual coronavirus info was created early in the pandemic, but not much has changed in that regard. Ars Technica is still highly regarded on the subject. And they are well known for the depth of their analysis of scientific subjects. Nothing you say is going to alter that fact.

Edit: @JazzyFresh, I put you on ignore. First time I’ve used that feature. Since you’re seldom quoted by others here, that will at least minimize exposure to your toxic grievances.
 
Last edited:
Red said:
I don’t know why you insist on continuing to make a fool out of yourself like this. What does it possibly gain you? You were woefully wrong about Ars Technica as a highly respected outlet for science news. I even provided you the names of some of their staff, and contributors, and their qualifications in the biological sciences. You made a mistake. I called you on it. Just get over it.

You drew a Big Fail hand, of your own free will, because in your excitement and eagerness to post a “gotcha”, you never bothered to read their article on the rejection of germ theory by some. You never bothered, in this instance, to check the algorithm and standards The Factual went with in identifying good sources for information on the coronavirus. Somehow, they are not qualified to do this in your estimation? I’m not sure I have ever seen you actually address any information, and rebut it with your own information. All you do is cry “tabloid”, with no thoughtful rebuttals whatsoever. That’s just never going to cut it. I mean, Ars Technica is right up their with MIT’s journal, and other quality outlets and organizations. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Well, yeah, you are a troll, at least at times, so there’s that, and maybe there is only that. I’d like to think better of you than that, you seem to get along with some other members here, but whatever. The Factual’s list of outlets with reliable and factual coronavirus info was created early in the pandemic, but not much has changed in that regard. Ars Technica is still highly regarded on the subject. And they are well known for the depth of their analysis of scientific subjects. Nothing you say is going to alter that fact.

Edit: @JazzyFresh, I put you on ignore. First time I’ve used that feature. Since you’re seldom quoted by others here, that will at least minimize exposure to your toxic grievances.
Click to expand...
Well done.
 
The Thriller said:
@leftyjace what were your symptoms? Did you have a blood oxygen monitor? How’s your smell and taste? I had covid last November and my smell and taste didn’t go away until about one week in. It’s still recovering as we speak.
Click to expand...
Lol immune and vaccinated. What a genius.
Red said:
I don’t know why you insist on continuing to make a fool out of yourself like this. What does it possibly gain you? You were woefully wrong about Ars Technica as a highly respected outlet for science news. I even provided you the names of some of their staff, and contributors, and their qualifications in the biological sciences. You made a mistake. I called you on it. Just get over it.

You drew a Big Fail hand, of your own free will, because in your excitement and eagerness to post a “gotcha”, you never bothered to read their article on the rejection of germ theory by some. You never bothered, in this instance, to check the algorithm and standards The Factual went with in identifying good sources for information on the coronavirus. Somehow, they are not qualified to do this in your estimation? I’m not sure I have ever seen you actually address any information, and rebut it with your own information. All you do is cry “tabloid”, with no thoughtful rebuttals whatsoever. That’s just never going to cut it. I mean, Ars Technica is right up there with MIT’s journal, and other quality outlets and organizations. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Well, yeah, you are a troll, at least at times, so there’s that, and maybe there is only that. I’d like to think better of you than that, you seem to get along with some other members here, but whatever. The Factual’s list of outlets with reliable and factual coronavirus info was created early in the pandemic, but not much has changed in that regard. Ars Technica is still highly regarded on the subject. And they are well known for the depth of their analysis of scientific subjects. Nothing you say is going to alter that fact.

Edit: @JazzyFresh, I put you on ignore. First time I’ve used that feature. Since you’re seldom quoted by others here, that will at least minimize exposure to your toxic grievances.
Click to expand...
Red said:
I don’t know why you insist on continuing to make a fool out of yourself like this. What does it possibly gain you? You were woefully wrong about Ars Technica as a highly respected outlet for science news. I even provided you the names of some of their staff, and contributors, and their qualifications in the biological sciences. You made a mistake. I called you on it. Just get over it.

You drew a Big Fail hand, of your own free will, because in your excitement and eagerness to post a “gotcha”, you never bothered to read their article on the rejection of germ theory by some. You never bothered, in this instance, to check the algorithm and standards The Factual went with in identifying good sources for information on the coronavirus. Somehow, they are not qualified to do this in your estimation? I’m not sure I have ever seen you actually address any information, and rebut it with your own information. All you do is cry “tabloid”, with no thoughtful rebuttals whatsoever. That’s just never going to cut it. I mean, Ars Technica is right up there with MIT’s journal, and other quality outlets and organizations. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Well, yeah, you are a troll, at least at times, so there’s that, and maybe there is only that. I’d like to think better of you than that, you seem to get along with some other members here, but whatever. The Factual’s list of outlets with reliable and factual coronavirus info was created early in the pandemic, but not much has changed in that regard. Ars Technica is still highly regarded on the subject. And they are well known for the depth of their analysis of scientific subjects. Nothing you say is going to alter that fact.

Edit: @JazzyFresh, I put you on ignore. First time I’ve used that feature. Since you’re seldom quoted by others here, that will at least minimize exposure to your toxic grievances.
Click to expand...
Why do you babies always have to tell me you ignored me then don't? Just do it you instead of the old "give me attention" self righteous childness. Right fish? How many times you told me you ignored me? Thriller the same but he just doesn't quote me yet always knows what I'm saying abd responds. I love it.

See ya soon..
 
I mean I went back 78 pages and not one person responded intelligently to Red, not one.... Lol Me? I even got Fish to formulate a well thought out paragraph which is mind boggling though he lied straight faced about his coworker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top