John Stockton Claims He Had Proof of 1000 Athletes Dying of Vaccine

[SteakNEggs]

I DID NOT SAY IT WAS FAKE

You damn clown

SNE on my ever growing ignore list. I should probably just stop coming to jazzfanz

So we agree, it's not fake?

And you just prove my point at your response that it's you dudes who get so bent out of shape and start threatening to ignore. That seems like the inability to actually have a conversation and an excuse to not back yourself up to me. There's no reason to get all butt hurt and put me on ignore lol. Well, I admit I did start pushing buttons but thats after you guys started coming after me but that's besideds the point. You guys started with the emotions and keep pushing me, and I responded in kind.

 

[SteakNEggs]

Saying something "could possibly be true" is pretty close to saying nothing about it.


What is the admission? You think there is an actual chance of three legs?


Right. It's "would be" and "would take", not 'is' and 'did take'. He's engaging in far-reaching hypotheticals. Hypothetically, India could launch a nuclear assault on the US; I don't spend all day in a bomb shelter based on that hypothetical.


Not one US person was forced to get a vaccine, there is no "forced vax crowd".

Basically, you are saying you are scared of shadows, and that this fear is legitimate. I not going to live my life in fear of shadows.

No, I'm afraid that the vaccine as admitted by one of the main guys that helped create it can have severe side effects. This has been a worry since it first came out and now having one of the main guys that helped with the vaccine admit that there could be side effects puts some vindication on what we were common sensically worried about.

As far as you constantly trying to play my words as something they are not? That's you just looking to argue. It's actually really stupid. The word "admit" has more than one meaning. When I say admit I'm using it as "to make acknowledgment" not admit as fact. Stop creating something out of nothing... I'll start using "acknowledge" though you'll still find a way to start an argument. I've never claimed what he said was factual (though I personally think he's spot on) I've said he said what he said. He admitted (acknowledged) that there could be severe side effects. He didn't say it's factual he said it's a possibility. To me that is a huge "acknowledgement" for someone on his position.

Definition of ADMIT

to allow scope for : permit; to concede as true or valid; to allow entry (as to a place, fellowship, or privilege)… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

 

[One Brow]

No, I'm afraid that the vaccine as admitted by one of the main guys that helped create it can have severe side effects.

All medications have side effects. The side effects for the Pfizer vaccine are standard, and rarely severe. Unless you are allergic to its contents, you are better off getting the vaccine than catching covid while unvaccinated.

This has been a worry since it first came out and now having one of the main guys that helped with the vaccine admit that there could be side effects puts some vindication on what we were common sensically worried about.

The actual side effects have always been publicly acknowledged.

When I say admit I'm using it as "to make acknowledgment" not admit as fact. Stop creating something out of nothing...

How do you "make acknowledgement" of a hypothetical? Your turning a hypothetical into a concern is creating something out of nothing.

I'll start using "acknowledge" though you'll still find a way to start an argument.

You can only "acknowledge" something that is true. Your use of it would be every bit as deceitful as "admit".

I've never claimed what he said was factual (though I personally think he's spot on) I've said he said what he said.

Which part do you think factual, as opposed to hypothetical, and why?

He admitted (acknowledged) that there could be severe side effects. He didn't say it's factual he said it's a possibility. To me that is a huge "acknowledgement" for someone on his position.

The possibility of side effects has always been communicated. There's an ongoing system to track side effects. Until actual side effects show up, there are only possibilities. It's possible that, the next time you go out to eat, the waiter/server will poison you with ricin. I doubt that will stop you from ever eating out.

 

[SteakNEggs]

I think it came from a lab
I think there are more side effects than admitted
I think Pfizer is using COVID as a "cash cow" thus upping the pricing hundreds of percents
I think mutating a virus to make it "more potent" is obvious gain of function by definition
It's already known to have effects on the menstrual cycle
I think him saying government officials are keen to letting things slide because pharma has lobbied a lot of money and in return they get leniency.


I think him saying "don't tell anyone" countless times or "I'll take pfizer off of my resume", or "could you imagine the scandal" proves that he damn well knows what he's saying is extremely troublesome and could be bad. I mean duh.... You don't say "don't tell anyone" if it's not meant to be hidden.

 

[One Brow]

I think it came from a lab
I think there are more side effects than admitted
I think Pfizer is using COVID as a "cash cow" thus upping the pricing hundreds of percents
I think mutating a virus to make it "more potent" is obvious gain of function by definition
It's already known to have effects on the menstrual cycle
I think him saying government officials are keen to letting things slide because pharma has lobbied a lot of money and in return they get leniency.


I think him saying "don't tell anyone" countless times or "I'll take pfizer off of my resume", or "could you imagine the scandal" proves that he damn well knows what he's saying is extremely troublesome. I mean duh.... You don't say "don't tell anyone" if it's not meant to be hidden.

There's no evidence it came from a lab, and every reason to think it is a wild virus.
There's no evidence of these side effects.
I agree Pfizer is making money off the vaccine, but I have not heard of egregious pricing.
It's only gain of function if the virus is also equally or more infectious. Less infectious, more potent viruses would actually be a loss of function.
It's only know that some studies have reported an increase of less than a day, which is easily explained by stress.
I agree that under the EUA, Pfizer has limited responsibility (and after approval, even less, as injuries would be on the NVIC schedule). That doesn't make the vaccine dangerous.
It was not "I'll", but "I'd", indicating a hypothetical.

I agree that what he said was meant to be hidden, because bad faith actors would twist his words into a pretense that something was wrong.

 

[SteakNEggs]

There's no evidence it came from a lab, and every reason to think it is a wild virus.
There's no evidence of these side effects.
I agree Pfizer is making money off the vaccine, but I have not heard of egregious pricing.
It's only gain of function if the virus is also equally or more infectious. Less infectious, more potent viruses would actually be a loss of function.
It's only know that some studies have reported an increase of less than a day, which is easily explained by stress.
I agree that under the EUA, Pfizer has limited responsibility (and after approval, even less, as injuries would be on the NVIC schedule). That doesn't make the vaccine dangerous.
It was not "I'll", but "I'd", indicating a hypothetical.

I agree that what he said was meant to be hidden, because bad faith actors would twist his words into a pretense that something was wrong.

The only one hiding what was said is you guys. You are even claiming he's fake. I'm generalizing all of you.

Mutating a virus to make it more potent is gain if function.... Even the video @Red posted admitted it depended on what definition you use. 7:00 mark..


I'm not sure how him saying he thinks it came from a lab is twisting anything. Those are his words. I have quoted him word for word.

And to think that a virus randomly popped up literally thousands of feet from an institute studying mice(correction bat not mice) to human COVID transmission is coincidence is laughable imo. Wheres this animal? Wheres the other animals that had COVID? It... doesn't...exist... There's a reason we can't trace the origin and that China was so secretive.

 

[SteakNEggs]

From the US state Department

The U.S. government does not know exactly where, when, or how the COVID-19 virus—known as SARS-CoV-2—was transmitted initially to humans. We have not determined whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan, China.

The virus could have emerged naturally from human contact with infected animals, spreading in a pattern consistent with a natural epidemic. Alternatively, a laboratory accident could resemble a natural outbreak if the initial exposure included only a few individuals and was compounded by asymptomatic infection. Scientists in China have researched animal-derived coronaviruses under conditions that increased the risk for accidental and potentially unwitting exposure.

Fact Sheet: Activity at the Wuhan Institute of Virology - United States Department of State

For more than a year, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has systematically prevented a transparent and thorough investigation of the COVID-19 pandemic’s origin, choosing instead to devote enormous resources to deceit and disinformation. Nearly two million people have died. Their families deserve...

2017-2021.state.gov

 

[One Brow]

I'll ignore the parts that respond to claims I didn't make.

Mutating a virus to make it more potent is gain if function.... Even the video @Red posted admitted it depended on what definition you use. 7:00 mark..

I'll settle for "not more dangerous". Since Pfizer R&D is not funded by NIH, the particular definition of "gain of function" doesn't matter as much as the lack of danger if there is a breach.

And to think that a virus randomly popped up literally thousands of feet from an institute studying mice(correction bat not mice) to human COVID transmission is coincidence is laughable imo.

Not when the lab is located in the general region where wild viruses of this type are known to evolve.

Wheres this animal? Wheres the other animals that had COVID? It... doesn't...exist...

There are dozens of known, wild corona viruses in the area, and almost certainly more that we have not uncovered.

There's a reason we can't trace the origin and that China was so secretive.

It took 7 years to trace the origin of the 2009 swine flu, and china is secretive about pretty much everything.

Nothing in the material you quoted offered any evidence of a lab origin, and the virus lacks features usually indicating genetic engineering.

 

[FalseFlagg K]

Good grief. There’s more and more evidence Covid had nothing to do with originating in a wet market and every indication it leaked from the Wuhan lab. And anyone still professing that mRNA vaccine side effect are “rare” is either wilfully blind, cannot read or cannot put two and two together. This is nothing like a normal vaccine. And you are only better off having a vaccine compared to unvaccinated if you ARE IN A MORE VULNERABLE GROUP OF THE POPULATION, You cannot reasonably make a sweeping statement for the population as a whole.

Bye

 

[SteakNEggs]

I'll ignore the parts that respond to claims I didn't make.

I'll settle for "not more dangerous". Since Pfizer R&D is not funded by NIH, the particular definition of "gain of function" doesn't matter as much as the lack of danger if there is a breach.


Not when the lab is located in the general region where wild viruses of this type are known to evolve.


There are dozens of known, wild corona viruses in the area, and almost certainly more that we have not uncovered.


It took 7 years to trace the origin of the 2009 swine flu, and china is secretive about pretty much everything.

Nothing in the material you quoted offered any evidence of a lab origin, and the virus lacks features usually indicating genetic engineering.

You're more than welcome to prove your own self right and add your own insight rather than just tell me I'm wrong by adding absolutely little. Let's hear your opinions for once instead of these 2 liners that just basically say "nope". I appreciate the time you take but this is not proper conversation to me. This is me speak my mind and you just judge it. I'm honestly not trying to be rude but this one sentence back and fourth is tiresome. I mean that with respect not trying to pick a fight.

 

[gandalfe]

Not when the lab is located in the general region where wild viruses of this type are known to evolve.


There are dozens of known, wild corona viruses in the area, and almost certainly more that we have not uncovered.

That is precisely why the lab was located there, because of all the known viruses that could easily become zoonotic.

 

[One Brow]

Good grief. There’s more and more evidence Covid had nothing to do with originating in a wet market and every indication it leaked from the Wuhan lab.

I'm not sure what you mean by "originating", since this virus is related to viruses we've known about for decades. If you mean the first known cases, do you know of cases before the wet market outbreak?

Do you have evidence it leaked from a lab, or just nebulous indications that most epidemiologists disagree with.

And anyone still professing that mRNA vaccine side effect are “rare” is either wilfully blind, cannot read or cannot put two and two together.

Last I heard, less than 0.1% for recipients of the Pfizer vaccine. That's not rare? What's the standard for rare?

This is nothing like a normal vaccine. And you are only better off having a vaccine compared to unvaccinated if you ARE IN A MORE VULNERABLE GROUP OF THE POPULATION,

So, you've done the risk ratios and have some data to report?

Bye

See ya 'round.