31
posted ago by MrPussyWhiskers ago by MrPussyWhiskers +31 / -0

The vaccine experiment has failed like some experts predicted it would. There is a reason vaccines take 5+ years to develop.

Comments (49)
sorted by:
10
canusa65 10 points ago +10 / -0

Omnicron would not exist in Canada without a vaccinated person bringing it here.

-9
tuchodi -9 points ago +1 / -10

Omnicron would not exist in Canada without a vaccinated person bringing it here.

You seem perpetually surprised that a vaccinated person could catch covid. Most people understand that by now. The benefit of the vaccines is that they reduce the severity of the infection if you catch the virus. This means there are more hospital and ICU beds available for people with regular medical problems.

8
ChazzleDazzle 8 points ago +8 / -0

Ok buddy we went from

You're not gonna catch covid if your vaccinated to

Breakthrough is rare to

Well you're protected if you catch it to

Well you're not gonna be hospitalized if you catch it to

Your latest lie which is unraveling by the day

8
Scrodimite 8 points ago +8 / -0

Just waiting for the :

It doesn't change your DNA

to

It might a little

to

Ok but here's how that's a good thing!

2
BritPedeMEGA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Anyone else recall only, what was it...back in april 2021 Pfizer shot was 95% effective, and then the Russians boasted theirs was 98%, and the entire jab industry went into some wild willy waving contest. JNJ with their "one and done".

I could find some clips on video of the dinosaur media crowing about it, but I posit we can all vividly remember how cock a hoop they were. Now what is it, 4th shot (5th I heard somewhere) of the exact same liquid as the first one?

Then there was that English gov lab rep fella (bald fat dude) who was on the BBC sitting by his lab desk saying that each shot reduces your native immunity a bit more and that you will need additional injections to compensate.

Wonderful.

1
ChazzleDazzle 1 point ago +1 / -0

I think they're all one shot vaccines Statistically there's no difference between someone with one shot vs three. IMO it's been stretched out for maximum profit.

Personally if the data turned against the unvaccinated legitimately I wouldn't be against taking one shot. It's dose two, three etc. Where the problems start.

That being said I don't think these vaccines will have a u-turn in their downward spiral of efficacy.

-7
tuchodi -7 points ago +1 / -8

You're not gonna catch covid if your vaccinated

You're gonna need a source for that.

It's an evolving situation: Omicron in 2022 is not the original covid from 2019. You need to work on getting your head around that..

An unvaccinated person's chances of winding up in the hospital or ICU is many times greater than that of a vaccinated person. https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2022-01-08-Current-COVID-19-Risk-in-Ontario-by-Vaccination-Status-Separate-Charts-1024x322.png

2
canusa65 2 points ago +2 / -0

Science table is run by the Dalla Lane school of public health. In turn funded by:

DLSPH has strong existing relationships with international organization like the World Bank, World Health Organization and Pan American Health Organization. A DLSPH focus on Canada’s role in global health will help position it as a strategic partner with major global donors and multi-lateral organizations. Joint partnerships will enhance opportunities for collaborative research, graduate learning education, professional development and training, student practicums and visiting scholars Basically propaganda for the WHO. The WHO who famously covered up the lab leak from Wuhan of Covid-19 and lost their funding from the US gov for it. Currently Peter Dazack and Fauchi are running scared of being charged for leaking this to the public by funding Gain of Function research.

So more cover up agencies funded by the tax payers to maintain the lies they told.

How can anyone trust these groups when the whole pandemic was built on a lie that it was from Bats in a wet market by the WHO?

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

Another unsupported opinion.

Hitchens - "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

1
canusa65 1 point ago +1 / -0

What's unsupported? It's well known the WHO was defunded for lying about the source of covid.

Even the CDC is starting to run cover before the courts get involved.

https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/10/media-cdc-quietly-admit-3-covid-truths-after-2-years-of-lies-did-they-think-we-wouldnt-notice/

The communists running the WhO are liars and they will leave those who follow them to the wolves once the truth comes out.

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

It's well known the WHO was defunded for lying about the source of covid.

Hitchen's razor - "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Even the CDC is starting to run cover before the courts get involved. https://thefederalist.com/2022/01/10/media-cdc-quietly-admit-3-covid-truths-after-2-years-of-lies-did-they-think-we-wouldnt-notice/

I think they used to call this Yellow Journalism.

  1. The ‘Vaccine’ Doesn’t Prevent Transmission

This is not news. The CDC has regularly mentioned the fact that the vaccines do not completely prevent transmission. Even Pfizer in November 2020 did not claim 100% success during their initial trials. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-conclude-phase-3-study-covid-19-vaccine

The CDC did not "quietly admit" transmission. It's been reporting it as a regular metric since the beginning. For example: "The immunity provided by vaccine and prior infection are both high but not complete" https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/vaccine-induced-immunity.html

  1. COVID Disproportionately Affects the Vulnerable

Duh. "CDC quietly admits the vulnerable are more at risk". What a stupid thing to imply. Who hasn't known that from the beginning?

  1. Deaths from and with COVID Aren’t the Same Thing

Deaths with covid go - or used to go, prior to Omicon, since we can't count all the cases any more - in the "contact tracing" column. Deaths from covid go in the "would have lived but they had covid" column.

Creating confusion over the two seems to be a favourite tactic of you and your friends. As if it mattered anyway, with a million more deaths than expected in the US and only 800,000 of them officially attributed to covid. https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid#estimated-excess-mortality-from-the-economist

The communists running the WhO

Hitchen's razor - "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

2
LockThemUp 2 points ago +2 / -0

Joe biden literally said word for word: "...They're okay! Y-Y--you're not gonna get covid if you've had these vaccinations!"

You that stupid? Or just don't want to admit you've been duped? Get on the right side of history man. Fucks sake. I feel sorry for you

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

Show me where he said that.

5
canusa65 5 points ago +5 / -0

What is the percentage of severity -- based on what measure? is it .5% of total pop or comparatively?

if .5% of pop gets cov and ends up in hospital, does it reduce it to .45%? Sounds like what you are actually telling me is hospitals are overstaffed right now anyway if the concern is we are reaching 65% of available beds..

-3
tuchodi -3 points ago +1 / -4

Are you sure you're replying to the right thread? No idea what those numbers are about.

Anyway, if hospitals were overstaffed they wouldn't be cancelling elective surgeries.

2
canusa65 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sure they would. They love to tiktok dance instead

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

Of course.

3
ipproductions 3 points ago +3 / -0

are you really coming to win to shill for big pharma? lol

-3
tuchodi -3 points ago +1 / -4

Some of the posters here seem to think so, but I'm just looking at the numbers and seeing that there would be less pressure on the hospitals if more unvaccinated people would change their minds. https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/2022-01-09-Current-COVID-19-Risk-in-Ontario-by-Vaccination-Status-Separate-Charts-1024x322.png

Maybe some of those people waiting for hip replacements and non-critical cancer surgery could get in and be taken care of.

-1
Jamerooo -1 points ago +2 / -3

Interesting

6
canusa65 6 points ago +6 / -0

Omnicron would not exist in Canada without a vaccinated person bringing it here.

2
BritPedeMEGA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well we are at spitting distance ("good way to spread the deadleeeee megatron reeeee") of the country being 90% jabbied.

pop is 38m. 90% of that is 34.2m. We are at about 3.5m or so taking out the very young - and, surely one wouldn't advoate or condone jabbing newborns and toddlers with an experimental rushed to market, injectble liquid with no long term safety studies or full approval - would you?

...and take out the very elderly - whom one could argue ...look they are so frail, lets just let them live out their short years in peace hey?

3.5m sprinkled at say, a rate commensurate with pop density accross the country.

Is anyone seriously arguing that the vast majority of these folks are clogging up the hospitals in record numbers?

Lets say, yes they are. Ok. Simple way to see with your own eyes just who the heck is in the hospitals is to go and look. Occams razor says it's older folks with co-morbidities. There's probably data somewhere. BC CDC's data in 2021 showed it was mostly elderly.

Older folks tend to be retired. That means they aren't in employment. Another common sense extrapolation: if this 'pandemic of the unjabbed' was affecting folks of all working ages at random, in hospital clogging numbers, surely one would hear of people you know and failing that, people you know of people they know, that "oh bill got taken in to hospital with the Xi Disease" , and everyday logistics would be a clusterphuq.

IE, random folks that werent jabbed between prime working age, 16-50 in hospitals in record numbers, meaning postmen, couriers, truckers, warehouse workers, power plant workers, cops, medics, cart pushers, checkout girls, road repair crews, snow ploughers. Basically random folks that keep civilisation running, would be affected so much that you see an effect on the streets.

But we don't.

Weird eh?

-5
2
BritPedeMEGA 2 points ago +2 / -0

Thank you for the media articles.

It appears the writers may have short memories. In Canada much, if not most of the business difficulties were caused by government, not a pathogen.

Mr. Trudeau elected to put thousands on the CERB dole, with many of them finding that the CERB paid better than being in employment, so effectively paying people with printed money to sit on their posteriors, despite 'hiring' signs popping up everywhere.

Biden and his trillions of printed money handed out as covid 'relief' also helped people sitting on their bums instead of going back to work. Legions of teachers in the USA and Canada are milking this to the max, and still being paid (by us!) instead of getting their lazy asses back to work.

Nurses and docs and assorted staff being fired or 'encouraged' to quit or take the jabby.

Same with truckers in Canada and the USA. The mainstream had articles on truckers being told jabby or go. Plain as day, our Canadian goods entering the states via truck, driver doesnt have or want the jabby? 1 less trucker. Id imagine its the same the other way.

Trudeau said all who enter from the USA must be jabbied. So that includes truckers carrying vegetables from California and US originating goods. No truckers? No goods, no supply, no goods on the shelves at Loblaws.

Seeing as the vast majority of those dying from covid are retired (death numbers affect the elderly the most) the labour force is mostly being affected by various gov interfercences in the free market, and the abiity of people to trade with one another without gov poking their nose in.

The jabby papers for restaurants is an illustration. Also many restaurants and hotels, resorts are saying to workers get the jabby or quit. I know this from personal experience. I travelled to BC lately for a break and some golf. I booked some time and a room at a golf resort in the BC interior. On arrival I found I had to show 'papers' to gain entry to the course, and even my hotel/golf resort room. All their workers had to have the jabby too. How many of them quit?

I could not, and would not. They were good enough to refund my money and i went elsewhere.

All (or certainly most) of this supply hoo ha is caused by government spiteful contantly changing array of 'regulations', rules, curfews and the like.

One would think that our gov doesnt actually want small businesses to survive. It's okay for Messers Trudy and co. They still get paid even if we don't.

-3
tuchodi -3 points ago +1 / -4

Sounds like you think Trudeau invented the response. Here's the playbook from 2006: https://publications.gc.ca/site/eng/9.688957/publication.html

1
BritPedeMEGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Harper doesn't get off scott free either. He doesn't have a perfect record. Saying that, making a 'plan' and implementing it are 2 different things. Mr. Trudeau did not have to activate said plan, not cimpletely and beyond.

Now my company cannot send our salesmen to the US to see their clients. We cant get new people a lot of the time because the college leavers arent coming in for interviews, they get paid with printed money I guess.

Sure a lot of it we can do over the phone or video call, but it isnt the same. Logistics have also gone down the pan. Our logistics fuel costs are crippling. We can't get stuff over the border each way because our carriers truckers are either quitting (jabby mandates) or parking rigs because diesel is crippling.

At the moment, our HQ in the states is currently cut off from our HQ in Canada. We have had plenty staff take 1 or 2 jabs. Some have had a 3rd. Some had it by chance caught naturally and some declined. Theres enough of them that havent had 3 or nat immunity in each HQ or those that dont want it to affect our profitability because we cant move or trade freely.

Very, very frustrating. Many US staff can't come to us, and many Canadian staff can't travel south, because Biden wants jabby or no entry, and Trudeau wants jabby or no entry. Absolute deadlock.

We couldnt have a staff christmas party in AB or BC this year because of the jabby papers. We can't have conferences or business meetings in different cities because good luck a hotel renting you a ballroom. We have to meet clients or have stealth conferences with large groups in hotel lobbies, smaller groups in coffee shops, minivans, even using our homes! Oh but Bonnie Henry and Kenney says we cant have people over that we dont know in our own damn houses. Absurd we have to sneak rent a big hotel room that opens thru to another, bringing lots of chairs and a projector. Our staff in Quebec can't even walk around in peace after dark or carry on business between clients without hassle from the authorities. Absolutely ridiculous the hoops we have to go through just to carry on a business!!

We have had to raise raw material prices 3 times in the last year alone.

I could go on but omegacanada probably gets the drift.

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

Global pandemics are hard.

Better to listen to infectious disease and public health experts than people whose contribution is "But my business!?"

1
BritPedeMEGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Certainly a good idea to review a wide variety of medical opinion and data out there.

We listened to these people. And now Canada is 90% jabbed, the program has been a success as far as rollout completion. Say we reach 95%.

We cant jab more than 100% complete. We cant get any more complete than complete innoculation. Mission is accomplished. What now?

-3
tuchodi -3 points ago +1 / -4

What now?

We wait for elective surgeries to be resumed. I wonder how long that will take.

-6
tuchodi -6 points ago +1 / -7

Nope. Ask OP how they support that fable.

As of December 17, 2021

" average weekly rates indicate that unvaccinated people were significantly more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared to fully vaccinated people.

Among youth and adults aged 12 to 59 years, unvaccinated people were 31 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than fully vaccinated people.

Among older adults aged 60 years or older, unvaccinated people were 15 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 than fully vaccinated people."

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-health/news/2021/12/statement-from-the-chief-public-health-officer-of-canada-on-december-17-2021.html#:~:text=Among%20youth%20and%20adults%20aged,than%20fully%20vaccinated%20people.

3
DoggyDawg 3 points ago +3 / -0

Look at the current ontario stats: https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data

0.13% of unvaccinated Ontarians are currently in hospital with Covid.

0.012% of vaccinated Ontarians are currently in hospital with Covid.

That’s about 10.8 times more likely for unvaccinated to currently be in hospital.

Considering that the overall likelihood for unvaccinated to end up in hospital since covid began was historically higher, the gap is now closing. This is trending in the wrong direction and, so, MrPussyWhiskers may be onto something.

-5
tuchodi -5 points ago +1 / -6

Those numbers would mean something if there was an ICU bed for every resident of Ontario.

But given there are almost 15 million people in Ontario and only 2343 ICU beds (https://data.ontario.ca/dataset/availability-of-adult-icu-beds-and-occupancy-for-covid-related-critical-illness-crci/resource/c7f2590f-362a-498f-a06c-da127ec41a33) that means there is only about 0.00016 of an ICU bed per person, and that's a pretty tiny fraction of 0.13 or 0.012.

And a bunch of the real beds are taken up by people with other medical problems. There were, in fact, only 540 ICU beds available on January 6. https://www.durhamradionews.com/archives/149379

How about considering the record so far? Look at https://health-infobase.canada.ca/src/data/covidLive/Epidemiological-summary-of-COVID-19-cases-in-Canada-Canada.ca.pdf, which tells us that, in Table 2. "Characteristics and severe outcomes associated unvaccinated, partially vaccinated and fully vaccinated confirmed cases reported to PHAC, as of December 18, 2021"

Deaths:

75.6% Unvaccinated (no vax)

7.2% Cases not yet protected (1 vax but dies within 14 days)

7.0% Partially vaccinated (14 days past the first, but not 14 days past the 2nd)

10.2% Fully vaccinated (more than 14 days past the 2nd shot)

That includes the period before the vaccines were available, but as of today the unvaccinated are still heavily over-represented in the hospitals and ICUs. Despite being only 12% of the eligible population they are taking up 44% of the covid cases in ICU and 24% of the other covid cases in hospital.

Being vaccinated means you have a better chance of staying out of the hospital.

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

Perhaps you're missing the point. MrPussyWhiskers is proposing that authorities might not want a control group of unvaccinated, as it's much more difficult to hide the fact the vaccines are not as effective as promised and protection keeps waning as time passes.

It used to be 30 times less likely for unvaccinated to be in the hospital vs 10 times less likely now vs who knows how much less, if anything at all, in the future. Without a control group, the vaccine performs however good anybody says it does, without a way for anybody to verify the efficacy claims.

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

authorities might not want a control group of unvaccinated

I don't see them rounding up vulnerable people who are on immune system suppressants for arthritis, lupus, inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, type 1 diabetes, psoriasis, etc., or people on dialysis, chemotherapy, etc. and pushing over a cliff so they don't have a control group.

So I guess they have one anyway, and buddy is just listening to the voices in his head. I notice he didn't provide any other sources to back up his notion.

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

Sources? Geez. There’s a line between satire and being serious. You will never get it.

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

There’s a line between satire and being serious.

"What's everyone upset about? We wuz only jokin'???"

Fixed that for you.

2
DoggyDawg 2 points ago +2 / -0

You didn't need to fix anything for me.

1
BritPedeMEGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks for the data.

Some highlights folks of this data set- https://health-infobase.canada.ca/src/data/covidLive/Epidemiological-summary-of-COVID-19-cases-in-Canada-Canada.ca.pdf

The big Q everyone wants to know is, ok, but.... is it gonna kill yo ass?

Page 24- and one can assume Canada gov figures mean, total so far. 96.3% of those dying of alleged corona or complications thereof, in the hosp are 50> of age. 91.8% are 60> years of age. No data i could find on comorbidities.

However, as of 7th of Jan this year, the CDC dir Dr. Rochelle Walensky stated on 'Good Morning America' that: "...the overwhelming number of death [sic] over 75% occurred in people who had at least 4 comorbidities, so really these are people who were unwell to begin with..." ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hVPz-A8auw )

One could reasonably extrapolate that since the US and Canadian populations are similar in diet, health, genetics, demographics etc that it also applies here.

Okay, so statistically, if you are 50 or under, or even slightly over 50 and perfect BMI and in rude health, the Xi special receipie probably wont kill yo ass.

Of those 'infected' - whats the chance it will again, kill yo unlucky ass? That is, how many people per 100 have died from X?

Page 5- The worst for alleged deaths from the covid is QC at 121,621 out of an alleged 696,182 "Cases" = 1.7% IFR (infection fatality rate), survival rate of 98.2% that didn't die after contracting said alleged covid. This data set we are going with the mainstream accepted narrative that a "positive" test means one is "infected".

Canada as a total: 2,437,822 million folks tested "positive". Of which 30,584 alleged covid deaths - 1.25% IFR, 98.75% survival rate, of the rest that did not die.

Tellingly, this is mostly covid patients or people who had no pre hospital admission treatment, owing to the (in Canada) bizarre nigh on ban on Ivermectin, Budesinide, HCQ, Periactin, Benedryl etc - as Dr. Peter McCullough has illustrated in countless interviews on mainstream, imagine how much lower the small death rate would be if pre admission treatment would be given as a first line, jabbed or not.

Just for shits, let's do the USA & Canada with a different data set Our World In Data: 1.4% of people allegedly died (from? With?) the covid per 100. ( https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/covid-19-cumulative-confirmed-cases-vs-confirmed-deaths?xScale=linear&zoomToSelection=true&country=CAN~USA )

Canada 1.2%

Some interesting juxtaposition to bugs way, way more dangerous - shows that SARS-nCov-2 (The "covid") is a cake walk compared to:

SARS-nCov-1 - The FIRST one. 11%. Eleven percent!

Botulism 10% or less. TREATED! For food poisoning! Yes folks FOOD POISONING has a higher death rate than covid.

Ebola 25% CFR at best. (https://web.archive.org/web/20141214011751/https://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs103/en/ )

1918 Spanish Flu >2.5% CFR (CFR meaning % of those who were obviously ill, had the spanish flu & either died or survived, instead of IFR which includes "cases" of those a test alleges you have X but felt fine throughout, as well as those who got worse & died)

Legionnaires diesease 15% CFR

Yellow fever 20%

Bubonic plague 60%

-4
tuchodi -4 points ago +1 / -5

Omicron has changed things in several ways, with its dozens of mutations and the speed of its spread. It's too soon to tell what all of the outcomes will be.

There are indications that having a booster shot of an mRNA vaccine provides some protection against being infected by Omicron, but otherwise it spreads through both the non-boosted vaccinated and unvaccinated populations at about the same rate. Having only two doses of an mRNA vaccine is no advantage there so far but, as stated, if you've received a Moderna or Pfizer booster there are indications you are better protected against Omicron. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2022/01/no-omicron-immunity-without-booster-study-finds/

As of today there are 4,686,745 people from Ontario who are boosted but since case counting is no longer accurate it's impossible to see this effect. It would show up if they started classifying people who are boosted separately instead of lumping them in with the fully vaccinated.

So there are still a lot of unanswered questions around Omicron but the major one is "Will it flood the hospitals and continue to prevent people from getting care for "normal" illnesses?"

SARS-nCov-1 is a cake walk compared to: SARS-nCov-1

Not sure what the 2002 SARS epidemic has to do with anything today.

1
BritPedeMEGA 1 point ago +1 / -0

SARS-nCov-1 was a typo. I fixed it to 2.

Hmmm yes Omicron is an interesting development. Apparently there is also already another 'edition' HVU (HMU?) or somesuch.

Wether taking another (identical) shot to the first 3 will stave off omicron, depends on if it's even worth bothering with, that is, what data is there on the virulence and of that, resulting in a high IFR/CFR of omicron?

It's already been stated in the mainstream that omicron appears to have very low pathogenicity - referring to the proportion of alleged infected people - determined apparently by the PCR test or other methods being "positive" - who then develop clinical symptoms of the disease, of whatever severity.

Because a "positive" test apparently now is a "Case" irrespectivley as to if that person even 'feels' ill or not.

We are already in the 1.25% IFR rate, (Derived from data from previous versions, the Indian/Delta one being allegedly more virulent) and mostly elderly with comorbidities die with it, so if anyone who proposes the jab method, I posit we should be offering jabs to the alleged most vulnerable- that is, persons above 70/75.

And if they refuse it, let it be.

If it turns out that the virulence of omicron is even lower, to get us a lower IFR than 1.25% then that is surely good news, no? So far, it appears that omicron has very low virulence, that is, persons with clinical disease who become severely ill or die, as a sole cause, with no comorbidities.

I could not find any obvious internet search references to anyone worldwide dying entirely from omicron, however 1 person in the UK has died with it. (as of As of 13th dec 2021) I could not on superficial digging find the age & comorbidities of that person. If anyone has any data on deaths purely of people dying from omicron as the only cause with zero comorbidities, <70, worldwide, that would be great.

Now that you mentioned SARS1, that raises the Q about why a vaccine never came to market for that one, odd considering its 11% CFR. I do recall in the media at the time a big fuss was made about SARS1 at the time. But yet, one was developed for it's cousin, SARS2, even though the pathogenicity of the virus is a fraction of 1.

Ultimately, Canada is nearing 90% jabbed, higher if we exclude those who have already got natural innoculation & immunity by previously getting & recovering from the China variant/Alpha, the Oxford/Beta, Indian/delta, or South African/Omicron etc, under 10yrs, persons away from Canada for long streches, citizens who are ex pats etc).

The situation is as good as it's going to get.

0
Jamerooo 0 points ago +2 / -2

Much information

0
Jamerooo 0 points ago +2 / -2

Very interesting

-7
tuchodi -7 points ago +1 / -8

The unvaccinated are far more likely to wind up in the hospital and the ICU. https://covid19-sciencetable.ca/ontario-dashboard/

6
ipproductions 6 points ago +6 / -0

when they consider unbooted and less 14 day vaksd as unvak, yeah, sure...

just data lies

-3
tuchodi -3 points ago +1 / -4

just data lies

Right. 'Cause you know stuff.

-2
Jamerooo -2 points ago +2 / -4

Interesting