ADVERTISEMENT

Myocarditis Effect Confirmed by NBC

010_jpg-2604377.JPG
 
No, that's not what the article said. Is it an intelligence thing or an honesty thing that frequently leads to you misrepresenting things?

So, since you have a history of being wrong on virtually everything, are you going on record as saying there are no reasons for Pfizer and Moderna to recognize and track adverse health effects including myocarditis? Especially when the CDC was reporting on this as early as April 2021?


Oh, and by the way grammar cop, I'm interested to see why you reference a current article, in timing, content and presentation on nbcnews.com, as said instead of says...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 19MU88
So, since you have a history of being wrong on virtually everything, are you going on record as saying there are no reasons for Pfizer and Moderna to recognize and track adverse health effects including myocarditis? Especially when the CDC was reporting on this as early as April 2021?
That's not what I said, now is it? I pointed out that the drunk preacher once again posted a misleading headline.

Oh, and by the way grammar cop, I'm interested to see why you reference a current article, in timing, content and presentation on nbcnews.com, as said instead of says...

I knew this board's overall intelligence level would take a drastic hit with my departure, but I didn't expect it to go quite this low.

Why did I reference that particular article? Because it was the one the original poster posted and the one he based his subject of the thread on.

Was that really too difficult for you to understand? That's how this message board thing works: people post something and others respond to it.
 
That's not what I said, now is it? I pointed out that the drunk preacher once again posted a misleading headline.



I knew this board's overall intelligence level would take a drastic hit with my departure, but I didn't expect it to go quite this low.

Why did I reference that particular article? Because it was the one the original poster posted and the one he based his subject of the thread on.

Was that really too difficult for you to understand? That's how this message board thing works: people post something and others respond to it.
Well, what did it say?
 
Why did I reference that particular article? Because it was the one the original poster posted and the one he based his subject of the thread on.

Read my post again. That's not what I asked.

Oh, and by the way grammar cop, I'm interested to see why you reference a current article, in timing, content and presentation on nbcnews.com, as said instead of says...

Maybe you should focus more on reading comprehension and less on running spell check.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 19MU88
Read my post again. That's not what I asked.



Maybe you should focus more on reading comprehension and less on running spell check.

I read it multiple times. I had to in order to figure out what you were trying to communicate. As poorly as it is written, and as much as it doesn't make sense how it is written, the only reasonable way to interpret that jumble is that you're asking why I am referencing the article in this thread and not a more current one or one from another source.
 
I read it multiple times. I had to in order to figure out what you were trying to communicate. As poorly as it is written, and as much as it doesn't make sense how it is written, the only reasonable way to interpret that jumble is that you're asking why I am referencing the article in this thread and not a more current one or one from another source.

So, in other words you can't answer the question because you don't understand it? Not surprising...

By the way, speaking of jumbles do you realize the one sentence you just posted contains 50 words?

Here is some more grammar homework since you so desperately need it...

 
  • Haha
Reactions: 19MU88
So, in other words you can't answer the question because you don't understand it? Not surprising...

By the way, speaking of jumbles do you realize the one sentence you just posted contains 50 words?

Here is some more grammar homework since you so desperately need it...

He's not the brightest bulb in the chandelier
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 19MU88
So, in other words you can't answer the question because you don't understand it? Not surprising...

By the way, speaking of jumbles do you realize the one sentence you just posted contains 50 words?

Here is some more grammar homework since you so desperately need it...

Again, you're really bad at this. It isn't a run-on sentence at any level.

I suggest sticking to posting threads that nobody gives a shit about, then coming back and crying in those threads that nobody posts in them. That's what you did originally on this board, and it brought entertainment to us instead of the boring attempts at smack you now partake in.
 
So like a few hundred cases out of 350 million doses given?

In a world where every medicine ad on TV tells me death is a possible side effect, color me as not caring one bit. You gotta break some eggs to make an omelet.
A few hundred cases? Not everyone sought medical care for their vax-induced heart issues. A friend of mine got it after me begging him not to. He was playing a college sport at the time and they pressured him to get it.

He had nearly a year of irregular heartbeat after the vax. Heart tissue isn’t regenerative. This is permanent damage that will present in 5-10 years from now.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT