Take the vaccine, or lose your job - WTF?

[Mrbobmarly111]

Stop shifting and deflecting. If you haven't been vaccinated yet you are DUMB dumb dumb. Stop this stupid narrative where you post articles showing more dumb people. Just get vaccinated and youre good to go. It does give you more protection and it does keep others from getting sick. Not all the time but definitely more than when you dont have it. Stop being stupid. Get the shot

+1

Dumb dumb dumb like a Mormon!
https://gloria.tv/post/DADGumHLcheh3pXWf8eoYZabE

If you don’t get vax you are dumb, if you don’t wear a mask you are dumb, if you go to bed without pexi glass between you and your SO you are dumb, if you let your kids go to school and risk death you are dumb. If you travel to another country during a DEADLY PANDEMIC you are also dumb.

Lots of dumb dumbs in the world so glad we can freely point them all out. If only they were as SMRT as me!

This is what im talking about. How stupid talking about pexi glass to bed etc. Just get the vaccine you complete knob. Ps you dont have to worry about your kids going to school and wearing a mask etc if you just get the shot. Stop making dumb arguments. Dont compare it to other viruses. It is what it is. Get the shot and move on

[altiplano]

We are at a crossroads! There are so many side effects being caused by these vaccines that the government does not want you to know about (yet some have been publicly made.) You are forced to take a vaccine not fully understood, then you get sick, lose your medical and then your on your own. The history of vaccines has shown that they are tested for many years before being produced for the general public. In this case we are rushing not knowing the full extent of the damage caused. People will of course have different opinions. They can make there own decision's as adults. However, as adults WE have the right to choose and not a government or some smug executive worried about his bottom line.

Every vaccine is a human test subject in a trial.

The Nuremberg Code states, article 1: “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.”

The CMPA (Canadian Medical Protective Association) employs strong language in the matter of informed consent.

“For consent to treatment to be considered valid, it must be an “informed” consent. The patient must have been given an adequate explanation about the nature of the proposed investigation or treatment and its anticipated outcome as well as the significant risks involved and alternatives available. The information must be such as will allow the patient to reach an informed decision.”

The Health Care Consent Act of Ontario

Consent to Treatment

No treatment without consent

Elements of consent

11 (1) The following are the elements required for consent to treatment:

1. The consent must relate to the treatment.
2. The consent must be informed.
3. The consent must be given voluntarily.
4. The consent must not be obtained through misrepresentation or fraud. 1996, c. 2, Sched. A, s. 11 (1).

A) The Nuremberg Code is not in any way a legally binding treaty or document. It has never been adopted as a law by any nation, nor has it been adopted as an official ethics guideline by any medical association. It was written following the Nuremberg Trials in response to the inhumane and unethical human experiments that occurred in concentration camps; primarily against Jewish people, but also against other groups considered "undesirable" by the Nazi regime, including Jehova's Witnesses, homosexuals, political prisoners, the disabled, etc. Drawing the comparison between the government enforcing a mandatory vaccine for federally regulated workers and the barbaric practices that occurred in concentration camps during WWII is both disingenuous and revolting.

B) You assert that every individual who receives the COVID-19 vaccine is "a human test subject in a trial". This statement is false. All of the major vaccine manufacturers have conducted numerous, voluntary clinical trials. You can read up on Phase I, II, III, and IV clinical trials if you'd care to educate yourself on how clinical trials are conducted to verify the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Several nations have already given full authorization to the major Western vaccine manufacturers (Oxford–AstraZeneca, Pfizer–BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson), and in those countries that are still administering the vaccines under emergency use, it is expected that full authorization will occur in the coming months.

C) No one is forcing you to get vaccinated without your consent. If you decide not to get the vaccine, no one can legally compel you to do so. However, your employer is also allowed to set certain conditions in order for you to be employed there. They require you to maintain a valid Cat. 1 medical, RAIC, passport, type rating, etc. There is a historical and legal precedent for employers requiring their employees to be vaccinated against various pathogens, especially within the medical field, but also for children attending school, etc. This has been the case for decades and is not in any way new or controversial from a legal standpoint. Additionally, the federal government, through the regulatory body (in this case, Transport Canada), has the right to impose new regulations at will, such as vaccines being mandatory for aviation workers.

The bottom line is this: no one is forcing you to take the vaccine, but as a responsible adult, you must be prepared to accept the consequences of your choices, one of which may be that you no longer meet the conditions for employment as an airline pilot in this country.

Talk about disingenuous!

A)
Nuremberg Code was created after the USA v. Brandt trials. They were written to represent the precedent established under international law from the trial decisions.

Precedent in court is law.

B)
These vaccines are still not fully approved. Full stop.

On top of that, the way effectiveness was established in the ongoing trials, when you read the trials is bizarre. The loss of the placebo control groups in unprecedented. I would suggest the trust you place in big pharma is misplaced.

C)
Not forcing anyone?

Just threatening to wipe out their livelihoods?

Duress -

threats, violence, constraints, or other action brought to bear on someone to do something against their will or better judgment.
"confessions extracted under duress"

Coerce -

persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.
"they were coerced into silence"

obtain (something) by using force or threats.
"their confessions were allegedly coerced by torture"

These actions are by definition forcing to do things against their will.

RAIC, medical, passport, type rating, required when you get the job and by Federal legislation. Vaccine is not required by legislation.

Changing terms of employment is one sided and is not a fair position to take in employment law or with a unionised work force.

This is a vaccine that doesn't stop transmission, that's a fact. Vaccinated people are still catching and spreading this virus from and to other vacinated people. So why this push? Why do vaccinated people care what an otherwise healthy, low risk person chooses of their own will?

[montado]

Mrbobmarly is just anti science. I have seen a study how pexi glass stops covid from passing through it. He is just a covid denying anti science misinformation spreader. Everyone knows it's completely dumb to not protect yourself from covid. We should take all action possible and if you don't believe that you are anti science.

[metalbusdriver]

Stop shifting and deflecting. If you haven't been vaccinated yet you are DUMB dumb dumb. Stop this stupid narrative where you post articles showing more dumb people. Just get vaccinated and youre good to go. It does give you more protection and it does keep others from getting sick. Not all the time but definitely more than when you dont have it. Stop being stupid. Get the shot

+1

Dumb dumb dumb like a Mormon!
https://gloria.tv/post/DADGumHLcheh3pXWf8eoYZabE

If you don’t get vax you are dumb, if you don’t wear a mask you are dumb, if you go to bed without pexi glass between you and your SO you are dumb, if you let your kids go to school and risk death you are dumb. If you travel to another country during a DEADLY PANDEMIC you are also dumb.

Lots of dumb dumbs in the world so glad we can freely point them all out. If only they were as SMRT as me!

This is what im talking about. How stupid talking about pexi glass to bed etc. Just get the vaccine you complete knob. Ps you dont have to worry about your kids going to school and wearing a mask etc if you just get the shot. Stop making dumb arguments. Dont compare it to other viruses. It is what it is. Get the shot and move on

He is making fun of you by making absurd comments and you can't see it? People who don't get vaccinated put themselves at risk for the adverse effects. People with the vaccine spread the virus as much if not more then people without the vaccine due to the chances of them being asymptomatic more likely.

It is not really even a debated about whether people should be vaccinated or not, its a debate about the government forcing something on citizens without given them freedom. They are doing it in the interest of the people and the greater good lol just like they allowed and facilitated the round up of aboriginal children for residential schools, I mean they are only over 6,000 children bodies so far why wouldn't we trust them with giving this power.

I also don't understand if the vaccine protects you why everyone is afraid of the people without it.

[Cavalier44]

A)
Nuremberg Code was created after the USA v. Brandt trials. They were written to represent the precedent established under international law from the trial decisions.

Precedent in court is law.

This statement is pseudo-legal nonsense. Neither the Nuremberg Code, nor any part of it, constitute Canadian law. International law isn't applicable in the context of a Canadian employer requiring its employees to be vaccinated.

B)
These vaccines are still not fully approved. Full stop.

On top of that, the way effectiveness was established in the ongoing trials, when you read the trials is bizarre. The loss of the placebo control groups is unprecedented. I would suggest the trust you place in big pharma is misplaced.

You may be surprised to learn this, but all four major vaccines (Oxford–AstraZeneca, Pfizer–BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson) are approved by Health Canada under section 3 of the Interim Order Respecting the Importation, Sale and Advertising of Drugs for Use in Relation to COVID-19. They are legally approved for use in this country - full stop.

C)
Not forcing anyone?

Just threatening to wipe out their livelihoods?

Duress -

threats, violence, constraints, or other action brought to bear on someone to do something against their will or better judgment.
"confessions extracted under duress"

Coerce -

persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.
"they were coerced into silence"

obtain (something) by using force or threats.
"their confessions were allegedly coerced by torture"

These actions are by definition forcing to do things against their will.

RAIC, medical, passport, type rating, required when you get the job and by Federal legislation. Vaccine is not required by legislation.

Changing terms of employment is one sided and is not a fair position to take in employment law or with a unionised work force.

Again, you are confused with your definitions. Setting conditions for employment is not the same as duress or coercion. The question is, "does my employer have the legal right to set having received the COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of employment?" Precedent says yes, they do have that right, and if challenged in the courts, it will very likely be ruled to be a reasonable condition of employment.

You also point out that the vaccine is not required by legislation, but the reality is that new legislation does not need to be passed in order for this mandate to occur. Transport Canada, for example, can do this via several methods, such as Ministerial Order, Interim Order, Directive, etc., none of which need to pass a vote in the Houses of Parliament. See Interim Order Respecting Certain Requirements for Civil Aviation Due to COVID-19, No. 37. Even in a unionized workforce, neither ACPA nor any other union has the power to overrule such an order from the regulatory body.

This is a vaccine that doesn't stop transmission, that's a fact. Vaccinated people are still catching and spreading this virus from and to other vacinated people. So why this push? Why do vaccinated people care what an otherwise healthy, low risk person chooses of their own will?

First of all, we know that the vaccine doesn't stop transmission entirely, but we also know that people who fully are fully vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) are less likely than unvaccinated persons to acquire COVID-19 or to transmit it to others.

See: Science Brief: COVID-19 Vaccines and Vaccination

It is an indisputable fact that those who are vaccinated have a significantly lower chance of having a serious outcome from contracting COVID-19, such as becoming severely ill, being hospitalized, or dying. The reason that vaccinated people care if others have been vaccinated is that unvaccinated people get sicker, end up in the hospital more frequently, and tie up essential resources such as ICU beds and ventilators that could be used for other patients. It selfishly places a higher strain on the medical system and society as a whole.

[a220hereicome]

These actions are by definition forcing to do things against their will.

Totally agree with you. A lot of people will end up taking the vaccine against their will because of the threat of termination or an unpaid leave (if the Company even grants that leniency). Very tough choices ahead for some of our members.

RAIC, medical, passport, type rating, required when you get the job and by Federal legislation. Vaccine is not required by legislation.

Not yet, but the election is September 20 and Parliament resumes sitting that week. If the Liberals are elected, that legislation will be pushed through to meet the Transport Minister's target of October 31. So there's a real possibility that it will be required by federal legislation really soon, and those who refuse to get vaccinated hopefully understand the possible consequences of their choice.

Changing terms of employment is one sided and is not a fair position to take in employment law or with a unionised work force.

Agreed, it's not great and it's not fair. But it's not the first time this has happened in the last decade. In 2012 the federal law against mandatory retirement was struck down. Air Canada advised its unions that it was eliminating mandatory retirement (except age 65 for pilots because of international licensing restrictions). Huge outcry from active members about the stagnation on career advancement, but the employer had to comply with federal legislation. I see similarities here, although I would say the Company is jumping the gun by putting this mandate in place before the legislation has been passed.

I'm very surprised at how swiftly the flight ops department is moving on this, crews have to provide proof of the initial vaccination dose by September 8.

[altiplano]

A)
Nuremberg Code was created after the USA v. Brandt trials. They were written to represent the precedent established under international law from the trial decisions.

Precedent in court is law.

This statement is pseudo-legal nonsense. Neither the Nuremberg Code, nor any part of it, constitute Canadian law. International law isn't applicable in the context of a Canadian employer requiring its employees to be vaccinated.

B)
These vaccines are still not fully approved. Full stop.

On top of that, the way effectiveness was established in the ongoing trials, when you read the trials is bizarre. The loss of the placebo control groups is unprecedented. I would suggest the trust you place in big pharma is misplaced.

You may be surprised to learn this, but all four major vaccines (Oxford–AstraZeneca, Pfizer–BioNTech, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson) are approved by Health Canada under section 3 of the Interim Order Respecting the Importation, Sale and Advertising of Drugs for Use in Relation to COVID-19. They are legally approved for use in this country - full stop.

C)
Not forcing anyone?

Just threatening to wipe out their livelihoods?

Duress -

threats, violence, constraints, or other action brought to bear on someone to do something against their will or better judgment.
"confessions extracted under duress"

Coerce -

persuade (an unwilling person) to do something by using force or threats.
"they were coerced into silence"

obtain (something) by using force or threats.
"their confessions were allegedly coerced by torture"

These actions are by definition forcing to do things against their will.

RAIC, medical, passport, type rating, required when you get the job and by Federal legislation. Vaccine is not required by legislation.

Changing terms of employment is one sided and is not a fair position to take in employment law or with a unionised work force.

Again, you are confused with your definitions. Setting conditions for employment is not the same as duress or coercion. The question is, "does my employer have the legal right to set having received the COVID-19 vaccine as a condition of employment?" Precedent says yes, they do have that right, and if challenged in the courts, it will very likely be ruled to be a reasonable condition of employment.

You also point out that the vaccine is not required by legislation, but the reality is that new legislation does not need to be passed in order for this mandate to occur. Transport Canada, for example, can do this via several methods, such as Ministerial Order, Interim Order, Directive, etc., none of which need to pass a vote in the Houses of Parliament. See Interim Order Respecting Certain Requirements for Civil Aviation Due to COVID-19, No. 37. Even in a unionized workforce, neither ACPA nor any other union has the power to overrule such an order from the regulatory body.

This is a vaccine that doesn't stop transmission, that's a fact. Vaccinated people are still catching and spreading this virus from and to other vacinated people. So why this push? Why do vaccinated people care what an otherwise healthy, low risk person chooses of their own will?

First of all, we know that the vaccine doesn't stop transmission entirely, but we also know that people who fully are fully vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna) are less likely than unvaccinated persons to acquire COVID-19 or to transmit it to others.

See: Science Brief: COVID-19 Vaccines and Vaccination

It is an indisputable fact that those who are vaccinated have a significantly lower chance of having a serious outcome from contracting COVID-19, such as becoming severely ill, being hospitalized, or dying. The reason that vaccinated people care if others have been vaccinated is that unvaccinated people get sicker, end up in the hospital more frequently, and tie up essential resources such as ICU beds and ventilators that could be used for other patients. It selfishly places a higher strain on the medical system and society as a whole.

You are wrong on international law and precedent not being applicable in a Canadian court.

You lie about equating vaccine approval under a ministerial interim order as being fully approved.

You are wrong about changing terms of employment during the term of employment. By definition is frustration on the part of the party seeking to change terms.

I wasn't exhaustive in my term "legislation" and thought it obvious I meant it all encapsulating for processes available the government to pass a law or regulation or policy of which you named several - and none of them have occurred. The policy you speak of is only a phantom of political imagination at this point. It doesn't exist. There is nothing to overrule.

We also know at this point that we know very little and it's s moving field. Much of what we hear and read is there to calm public fear and not based on anything beyond supposition and hopes, it's a sales job of a perspective by parties with interests other than what's best for an individual.

There are lots of indisputable facts regarding health choices. It's an indisputable fact that smoking is one of the largest health crises and kills millions annually while consuming resources. It's an indisputable fact that being fat, eating poorly, and not exercising is one of the largest health crises and kills millions annually while consuming resources. But we tolerate it. People choose how they want to live. This is no different by your analogy.

Fact is, healthy and under 50 your risks of severe outcome are miniscule and very few of those people will consume any resources and almost all of those people won't even know the virus went through them.

[altiplano]

These actions are by definition forcing to do things against their will.

Totally agree with you. A lot of people will end up taking the vaccine against their will because of the threat of termination or an unpaid leave (if the Company even grants that leniency). Very tough choices ahead for some of our members.

And it's wrong on every level.

RAIC, medical, passport, type rating, required when you get the job and by Federal legislation. Vaccine is not required by legislation.

Not yet, but the election is September 20 and Parliament resumes sitting that week. If the Liberals are elected, that legislation will be pushed through to meet the Transport Minister's target of October 31. So there's a real possibility that it will be required by federal legislation really soon, and those who refuse to get vaccinated hopefully understand the possible consequences of their choice.

That's only a guess. It's not reality yet though.

Changing terms of employment is one sided and is not a fair position to take in employment law or with a unionised work force.

Agreed, it's not great and it's not fair. But it's not the first time this has happened in the last decade. In 2012 the federal law against mandatory retirement was struck down. Air Canada advised its unions that it was eliminating mandatory retirement (except age 65 for pilots because of international licensing restrictions). Huge outcry from active members about the stagnation on career advancement, but the employer had to comply with federal legislation. I see similarities here, although I would say the Company is jumping the gun by putting this mandate in place before the legislation has been passed.

Again that was legislation. That doesn't exist in this case. This isn't government policy, this is Company dictating terms.

I'm very surprised at how swiftly the flight ops department is moving on this, crews have to provide proof of the initial vaccination dose by September 8.

Re-read it. That's not the exact timeline for compliance/noncompliance. That only allows them to batch us out into our little groups.

But the reason they want to rush it is just like always, put pressure on us. Rush the vote, rush the MOA, rush the let...I don't rush at work and I refuse to be pressured and rushed without all the information available and an intentionally vague demand.

[Cavalier44]

You are wrong on international law and precedent not being applicable in a Canadian court.

Am I? When you're dismissed from your job and you sue your employer for wrongful dismissal, be sure to tell your lawyer that your employer violated your rights as stated under the Nuremberg Code. If that doesn't work, you could always try the Geneva Conventions? Or what's the one that the so-called sovereign citizens always cite - Admiralty Law? Since you're so fond of posting definitions, why don't you look up "frivolous" and "vexatious"?

You lie about equating vaccine approval under a ministerial interim order as being fully approved.

In a legal context, I suspect that the difference is irrelevant. Health Canada has approved their use. I am willing to wager that a court will not be concerned about by which mechanism the vaccines received their approval, whether via a ministerial interim order or under the Food and Drug Regulations.

You are wrong about changing terms of employment during the term of employment. By definition is frustration on the part of the party seeking to change terms.

The employer is changing the terms of employment during the term of employment because the government has made known its intentions to require the vaccine going forward. They're not coming up with the requirement out of thin air. Do you believe that any airline or pilot's union in this country has the power, or even the desire, to challenge such a mandate? Up until now, the answer is no, we will see going forward if that trend continues.

I wasn't exhaustive in my term "legislation" and thought it obvious I meant it all encapsulating for processes available the government to pass a law or regulation or policy of which you named several - and none of them have occurred. The policy you speak of is only a phantom of political imagination at this point. It doesn't exist. There is nothing to overrule.

It doesn't exist at this stage, however, they have announced their intention for this policy to come into effect no later than the end of October. Airlines are simply reacting to the government's announcement and obviously, discussions are going on behind the scenes as to how this will be implemented in practice. With the upcoming federal election, it's obvious that many things could change between now and then, but airlines can't make their decisions based on "what-if?"s.

[cdnavater]

Altiplano,
Will you fall on your sword?
The FA’s lawyers have stated they don’t recommend fighting this, even so far as saying it will drag on for a long time before likely being dismissed. I can’t see the ACPA lawyers coming up with a different opinion, except for the fact lawyers make money even when fighting a losing battle.
So, will you give up your Captain pay cheque on principal?

[47north]

Altiplano,
Will you fall on your sword?
The FA’s lawyers have stated they don’t recommend fighting this, even so far as saying it will drag on for a long time before likely being dismissed. I can’t see the ACPA lawyers coming up with a different opinion, except for the fact lawyers make money even when fighting a losing battle.
So, will you give up your Captain pay cheque on principal?

Of course not. The anti-vaxers on here will continue to spout their BS and pound their chests and then quietly get the jab.

In six months or a year when they realize that that was much to do about nothing they will move on to the next injustice that society is forcing on them.

[altiplano]

The FA’s lawyers have stated they don’t recommend fighting this, even so far as saying it will drag on for a long time before likely being dismissed.

That's one of the reasons they don't recommend fighting the government. The short timeline available if they indeed follow through with their political announcement.

But that opinion was related to fighting the government, not the company. And again, this order/legislation does not yet exist to fight.

[ikarus]

Altiplano,
Will you fall on your sword?
The FA’s lawyers have stated they don’t recommend fighting this, even so far as saying it will drag on for a long time before likely being dismissed. I can’t see the ACPA lawyers coming up with a different opinion, except for the fact lawyers make money even when fighting a losing battle.
So, will you give up your Captain pay cheque on principal?

Of course not. The anti-vaxers on here will continue to spout their BS and pound their chests and then quietly get the jab.

In six months or a year when they realize that that was much to do about nothing they will move on to the next injustice that society is forcing on them.

And if he, you or I get severely sick from this experimental gene therapy, that you all call "vaccine", who will cover the "bill" for his, yours or mine family? Will AC, Union or the Government? Very unlikely... And what if he, you or I die...? Who covers the loss for our families?

[47north]

Altiplano,
Will you fall on your sword?
The FA’s lawyers have stated they don’t recommend fighting this, even so far as saying it will drag on for a long time before likely being dismissed. I can’t see the ACPA lawyers coming up with a different opinion, except for the fact lawyers make money even when fighting a losing battle.
So, will you give up your Captain pay cheque on principal?

Of course not. The anti-vaxers on here will continue to spout their BS and pound their chests and then quietly get the jab.

In six months or a year when they realize that that was much to do about nothing they will move on to the next injustice that society is forcing on them.

And if he, you or I get severely sick from this experimental gene therapy, that you all call "vaccine", who will cover the "bill" for his, yours or mine family? Will AC, Union or the Government? Very unlikely... And what if he, you or I die...? Who covers the loss for our families?

Isn’t there a Facebook or Reddit group for you to pedal your BS on?

The level of stupidity on this forum is making me seriously question getting on an airplane In this country that I am not operating.

[ikarus]

The bs came from the following people:

1. Luc Montagnier is a French virologist and joint recipient, with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Harald zur Hausen, of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus.

2. Dr. Robert Wallace Malone is an American virologist and immunologist. His work has focused on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research

3. Dr. Peter A. McCullough - former vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, Texas and professor at Texas A&M University. He is editor-in-chief of the journals Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiorenal Medicine

4.Michael Yeadon is a British pharmacologist. Previously served as the chief scientist and vice-president of the allergy and respiratory research division of the drug company Pfizer!

Too bad you let the media fear porn get to you, instead of reading a few medical journals or pubs by these people.

[Inverted2]

Altiplano,
Will you fall on your sword?
The FA’s lawyers have stated they don’t recommend fighting this, even so far as saying it will drag on for a long time before likely being dismissed. I can’t see the ACPA lawyers coming up with a different opinion, except for the fact lawyers make money even when fighting a losing battle.
So, will you give up your Captain pay cheque on principal?

Of course not. The anti-vaxers on here will continue to spout their BS and pound their chests and then quietly get the jab.

In six months or a year when they realize that that was much to do about nothing they will move on to the next injustice that society is forcing on them.

And if he, you or I get severely sick from this experimental gene therapy, that you all call "vaccine", who will cover the "bill" for his, yours or mine family? Will AC, Union or the Government? Very unlikely... And what if he, you or I die...? Who covers the loss for our families?

Has anyone looked into their company health coverage fine print to see if you are covered if you get side effects from the vaccine and lose your medical?

[47north]

The bs came from the following people:

1. Luc Montagnier is a French virologist and joint recipient, with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Harald zur Hausen, of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus.

2. Dr. Robert Wallace Malone is an American virologist and immunologist. His work has focused on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research

3. Dr. Peter A. McCullough - former vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, Texas and professor at Texas A&M University. He is editor-in-chief of the journals Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiorenal Medicine

4.Michael Yeadon is a British pharmacologist. Previously served as the chief scientist and vice-president of the allergy and respiratory research division of the drug company Pfizer!

Too bad you let the media fear porn get to you, instead of reading a few medical journals or pubs by these people.

1. Luc Montagnier is a French virologist and joint recipient, with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Harald zur Hausen, of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus.

Yeah great source there:

https://www.newswise.com/factcheck/debu ... 9-variants


2. Dr. Robert Wallace Malone is an American virologist and immunologist. His work has focused on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research

You mean this guy?

https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL2N2O01XP

https://twitter.com/erictopol/status/14 ... 30?lang=en


3. Dr. Peter A. McCullough - former vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, Texas and professor at Texas A&M University. He is editor-in-chief of the journals Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiorenal Medicine

He sounds nice:

https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-re ... ives/93936

4.Michael Yeadon is a British pharmacologist. Previously served as the chief scientist and vice-president of the allergy and respiratory research division of the drug company Pfizer!

And the winner is!

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/sp ... s-skeptic/

Too bad you let the media fear porn get to you, instead of reading a few medical journals or pubs by these people.

Nice try pal. Take you BS somewhere else.

[ikarus]

Wow, you are trying to discredit the recepient of Nobel Prize award using twitter, Reuters?? I didn't give this guy an award, but the entire global community of brains way smarter then you and I... How old are you kid, twelve?

This forum is becoming worse then twitter... I give up, just keep tuning into your daily dose of cbc news at 11..

[QKZXKV]

Of course not. The anti-vaxers on here will continue to spout their BS and pound their chests and then quietly get the jab.

In six months or a year when they realize that that was much to do about nothing they will move on to the next injustice that society is forcing on them.

And if he, you or I get severely sick from this experimental gene therapy, that you all call "vaccine", who will cover the "bill" for his, yours or mine family? Will AC, Union or the Government? Very unlikely... And what if he, you or I die...? Who covers the loss for our families?

Has anyone looked into their company health coverage fine print to see if you are covered if you get side effects from the vaccine and lose your medical?

You're more likely to lose your medical due to long term side effects from the virus than you every would be from any of the vaccines. Source my CAME when I asked him.

Stop trying to shoehorn every narrative you can think of.

[hithere]

None of us here are scientists or doctors. How about we leave it up to them to keep us healthy and we stick to what we know ie flying planes

[47north]

Wow, you are trying to discredit the recepient of Nobel Prize award using twitter, Reuters?? I didn't give this guy an award, but the entire global community of brains way smarter then you and I... How old are you kid, twelve?

This forum is becoming worse then twitter... I give up, just keep tuning into your daily dose of cbc news at 11..

You got that right. I give up too. Done engaging with fucking idiots. Not enough time in life for this. Deleting my account here.

[Hot Wings]

Wow, you are trying to discredit the recepient of Nobel Prize award using twitter, Reuters?? I didn't give this guy an award, but the entire global community of brains way smarter then you and I... How old are you kid, twelve?

This forum is becoming worse then twitter... I give up, just keep tuning into your daily dose of cbc news at 11..

You got that right. I give up too. Done engaging with fucking idiots. Not enough time in life for this. Deleting my account here.

Wish you wouldn’t. 99% of the clamouring is from the intellectually challenged on these forums, the rest of us remain quiet and don’t engage, waiting for the day these forums return to a place of helpful information and dialogue about flying between pilots.

[altiplano]

The bs came from the following people:

1. Luc Montagnier is a French virologist and joint recipient, with Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Harald zur Hausen, of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of the human immunodeficiency virus.

2. Dr. Robert Wallace Malone is an American virologist and immunologist. His work has focused on mRNA technology, pharmaceuticals, and drug repurposing research

3. Dr. Peter A. McCullough - former vice chief of internal medicine at Baylor University Medical Center in Dallas, Texas and professor at Texas A&M University. He is editor-in-chief of the journals Reviews in Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiorenal Medicine

4.Michael Yeadon is a British pharmacologist. Previously served as the chief scientist and vice-president of the allergy and respiratory research division of the drug company Pfizer!

Too bad you let the media fear porn get to you, instead of reading a few medical journals or pubs by these people.

These guys only listen to and follow the dominant narrative as if it were gospel. Church of Covid. I'm speaking to some people that don't believe it will ever end, and we should live like this forever. More regulation. More lockdown. More technocrats

I'm super surprised people were so willing to just buy everything they were pedaled and not even consider alternatives

What we're seeing is an extension of cancel culture.

Covid cancel culture... don't comply with the narrative and lose your job, lose your freedom, lose what were once friends/family. I can't believe how I have watched some people speak and behave on this, the things that what were once civilized people will say about others and the fact that they embrace the ignorance, don't want to understand, and don't care, they just want to follow along as directed.

[altiplano]

Wow, you are trying to discredit the recepient of Nobel Prize award using twitter, Reuters?? I didn't give this guy an award, but the entire global community of brains way smarter then you and I... How old are you kid, twelve?

This forum is becoming worse then twitter... I give up, just keep tuning into your daily dose of cbc news at 11..

You got that right. I give up too. Done engaging with fucking idiots. Not enough time in life for this. Deleting my account here.

LOL... what happened to civilised discourse?

Why did we all have to be at each others throats over different values, different beliefs?

Can't you see how we've been divided? This is more than just about +/- 20% of people that don't want a vaccine.

[ikarus]

I wasn't throwing f*bombs at people and calling them f*ing idiots just because they didn't agree to disagree.

And I said somewhere here already, I don't care what you decide, but it should be a decision you make, and not someone's mandate or policy, forcing you out on the street along with your entire family.

Suddenly, over a course of 18 months, we went from masks to vaccinate if you want to protect yourself to you must do it regardless if you want to protect yourself or not or you're an outcast. And the whole 2 shots and you're done is now becoming a thing of a past as it will require boosters every season. And that is ok too if you choose so.