using anti vax in my question was not originally intended as derogatory.
but given your reply, i'm not interested in further discussion with someone who denies the evidence--the facts-- all around us--a million plus dead from the virus in the u.s., 80-90 % of those currently in icu's in hospital are the unvaccinated, and the dramatic decline in deaths and serious cases among those vaccinated like myself who got covid, with the 2 shots and a booster, and like many others, experienced no worse than a moderately bad cold.
using quote marks around the word vaccine makes it seem you are anti-vax--are you ?
I'm anti propaganda, anti junk science, anti stupidity, and anti troll.
it was really just a simple straight forward question--
so is the fact that the covid vaxes have greatly reduced and protected against the risks of covid propaganda, junk science and simply a stupid claim ?
1 - It's not a fact, but a lie. That has already been amply documented.
2 - My position regarding the Big Pharma inoculations is amply stated in the body of my work. I invite you to read it.
3 - Arguing a lie is a fact is the epitome of junk science. Yes, it's a stupid claim.
If you want to have a RESPECTFUL discussion of the data, we can do that. But it will be civil and it will be grounded in data. That is non negotiable.
Hateful and derogatory labels such as "anti-vax" are not respectful, not necessary, and not acceptable.
That too is non negotiable.
using anti vax in my question was not originally intended as derogatory.
but given your reply, i'm not interested in further discussion with someone who denies the evidence--the facts-- all around us--a million plus dead from the virus in the u.s., 80-90 % of those currently in icu's in hospital are the unvaccinated, and the dramatic decline in deaths and serious cases among those vaccinated like myself who got covid, with the 2 shots and a booster, and like many others, experienced no worse than a moderately bad cold.
no need to reply.
Bye Felicia!