4 ms·
>I can tell you that you are unequivocally wrong if you think that NK is anything like CA. It's a fun narrative of the uninformed. If you think that they are e
by ComradePhil 5y ago
>I can tell you that you are unequivocally wrong if you think that NK is anything like CA. It's a fun narrative of the uninformed.
If you think that they are even a tiny bit different, you are brainwashed into thinking that. There is no other explanation.
>Yes this is a fringe position that the science does not support.
"Science" supports whatever most scientists are paid to support. Lots of scientists supported the use of tobacco for a very long time.
- arcticbull 5y agoYou know in most countries like Canada, where healthcare is actually a public cost centre, the financial incentive is the opposite of what you state. The public health systems would be incentivized to discover that this is in fact a "sham" and stop administering the vaccines to better allocate their budgets. All this has been incredibly expensive. However, they have found the opposite of your claims - all over the world - in billions of instances. Consider in the areas of Canada with the lowest vaccination rates and with the lowest compliance (Alberta, I'm looking at you) ICUs are full, and they're having to send patients to high-vaccination/high-compliance provinces like Ontario. Once again burdening those who comply with the selfish, capricious actions of those who do not. [1] These are fringe views that most Canadians simply do not subscribe to. I know it's tough to hear. For those of us living in reality, though, these actions are unpleasant but necessary. [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/covid-alberta-deena-hinshaw-verna-yiu-1.6178262 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/covid-alberta-deena-...
- ComradePhil 5y ago> You know in most countries like Canada, where healthcare is actually a public cost centre, Good point... except that the policy makers aren't paying out of their pocket. It's public money either way. They'll take whatever option helps them in the short run because if they don't, someone else is willing to take that money and bring them down in the next faux election. You might want to look up what people who are actually putting money in it think. Hint: "pfizer stock price".
- arcticbull 5y agoYou didn't refute the actual concrete evidence I provided in any way, though. I can tell it doesn't fit with your preconceived narratives.
- ComradePhil 5y agoI did but I can see why it would completely go over your head.