[marketerinland]

[flagged]

[dang]

> This is what happens when NPCs try to become scientific experts based on random podcasts.

Attacking others will get you banned here, regardless of how right you are or feel you are.

It's also in your interest to edit swipes out of your comments here, quite apart from not getting banned on HN, because they discredit your position in the eye of the fair-minded reader (see https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... for lots of past explanations of that, if you care).

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

[jibe]

a basic revision of the scientific literature will show

Freudian slip?

[dang]

"Revision" means "review" in parts of the English-speaking world, so probably not.

[georgeburdell]

I had to sign a waiver absolving the government and vaccine makers of liability to get the vaccine that was required to keep my job. The vaccine I chose ended up getting pulled from the market due to the risk of blood clots. We now have the benefit of hindsight, but the authoritarian bent many governments gained during Covid should not be forgotten.

[pachorizons]

If you read all the papers then why is this not sourced?

[cempaka]

I think my favorite trick here was categorizing people less than four weeks out from their second dose, or anyone who didn't get a second dose (likely as a result of a nasty reaction to the first shot, itself a good indicator of high susceptibility to COVID spike pathology), or anyone whose vaccine status was "unknown," as "unvaccinated."

[cempaka]

[flagged]

[dang]

Please edit swipes out of your HN posts, as the guidelines request: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

Your comment would be fine without that first sentence.