Pfizer - “We’re basically running on Covid money”

[fatman76]

Big pharm is evil, evil, evil

Pfizer Scientist: ‘Your Antibodies are Probably Better than the Vaccination’ | Project Veritas

Investigating and exposing corruption in both public and private institutions.

www.projectveritas.com

 

[SORT14]

I think it has been well established that antibodies are fairly effective but it is dependent upon the intensity of the disease:

"These findings strongly indicate that a robust hu-moral immune response occurs early during severe or moderateCOVID-19 infections"

Rapid Generation of Neutralizing Antibody Responses in COVID-19 Patients

SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is causing a devastating worldwide pandemic, and there is a pressing need to understand the developmen…

www.sciencedirect.com

Problem is.. you have to get COVID to get the antibodies. Other studies have found the combination of vaccination and antibodies may be the strongest defense.

 

[NavigatorII]

Big pharm is evil, evil, evil

Pfizer Scientist: ‘Your Antibodies are Probably Better than the Vaccination’ | Project Veritas

Investigating and exposing corruption in both public and private institutions.

www.projectveritas.com

Damn. I wonder if the ink has dried on their termination papers yet. 😂

 

[fatman76]

I think it has been well established that antibodies are fairly effective but it is dependent upon the intensity of the disease:

"These findings strongly indicate that a robust hu-moral immune response occurs early during severe or moderateCOVID-19 infections"

Rapid Generation of Neutralizing Antibody Responses in COVID-19 Patients

SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for COVID-19, is causing a devastating worldwide pandemic, and there is a pressing need to understand the developmen…

www.sciencedirect.com

Problem is.. you have to get COVID to get the antibodies. Other studies have found the combination of vaccination and antibodies may be the strongest defense.

Hopefully you watched the entire video before responding.

I’m thinking the scientists that engineered the breakthrough treatment probably understand quite a bit.

And we know that Covid isn’t very dangerous for large swaths of the population - like less than the flu for children. So “making the unvaccinated lives uncomfortable” and pushing for mandates to attend school is a pure money grab, they’re point blank admitting it.

The vaccines are vital for the susceptible- but the way they’re being pushed on every man woman and child is about money, power and influence…not Covid.

 

[fatman76]

Damn. I wonder if the ink has dried on their termination papers yet. 😂

I hope not…these people are unwitting Patriots!

 

[SORT14]

Hopefully you watched the entire video before responding.

I’m thinking the scientists that engineered the breakthrough treatment probably understand quite a bit.

And we know that Covid isn’t very dangerous for large swaths of the population - like less than the flu for children. So “making the unvaccinated lives uncomfortable” and pushing for mandates to attend school is a pure money grab, they’re point blank admitting it.

The vaccines are vital for the susceptible- but the way they’re being pushed on every man woman and child is about money, power and influence…not Covid.

I didn't watch it until afterwards, but that video is designed to influence rather than be neutral (just look at the selected edits and attempts to drive fear). Like I posted, the general consensus in the scientific community is that vaccines and antibodies are varyingly effective, just like the study I posted.

Did you look for any evidence to refute or clarify the statements in that video? A quick search found this:

"Project Veritas’ Nick Karl and Pfizer “exposed” video was one in a long series of deceptively edited, bad-faith efforts from the organization and its social media cheerleaders. Any efforts from Project Veritas were highly likely to be misleading. Moreover, global scientific consensus had already recognized that COVID-19 infections confer some degree of immunity — and they still overwhelmingly favored vaccination."

Source: https://www.truthorfiction.com/project-veritas-and-nick-karl-from-pfizer/

I'm not saying the rebuttal is correct and the video you posted is totally wrong, Not at all. Just that it is always a good idea to try to refute your own argument first to ensure you aren't being manipulated.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

In before the tattling starts.

 

[NavigatorII]

I didn't watch it until afterwards, but that video is designed to influence rather than be neutral (just look at the selected edits and attempts to drive fear). Like I posted, the general consensus in the scientific community is that vaccines and antibodies are varyingly effective, just like the study I posted.

Did you look for any evidence to refute or clarify the statements in that video? A quick search found this:

"Project Veritas’ Nick Karl and Pfizer “exposed” video was one in a long series of deceptively edited, bad-faith efforts from the organization and its social media cheerleaders. Any efforts from Project Veritas were highly likely to be misleading. Moreover, global scientific consensus had already recognized that COVID-19 infections confer some degree of immunity — and they still overwhelmingly favored vaccination."

Source: https://www.truthorfiction.com/project-veritas-and-nick-karl-from-pfizer/

I'm not saying the rebuttal is correct and the video you posted is totally wrong, Not at all. Just that it is always a good idea to try to refute your own argument first to ensure you aren't being manipulated.

Project Veritas has been around quite a while. They've exposed a ton of Democrat election fraud, no amount of editing clips could make those misleading. It's their job to ask and provoke honest answers from unsuspecting interviewees. Is it a confidence man game? Sure. Does it get to the truth? Yep. Undercover informants, they work.

 

[SORT14]

Project Veritas has been around quite a while. They've exposed a ton of Democrat election fraud, no amount of editing clips could make those misleading. It's their job to ask and provoke honest answers from unsuspecting interviewees. Is it a confidence man game? Sure. Does it get to the truth? Yep. Undercover informants, they work.

For sure. My point was to vet your own story to help defend yourself against manipulation. I was more addressing the logic rather than the content.
But absolutely need to have checks and balances in place.

 

[fatman76]

I didn't watch it until afterwards, but that video is designed to influence rather than be neutral (just look at the selected edits and attempts to drive fear). Like I posted, the general consensus in the scientific community is that vaccines and antibodies are varyingly effective, just like the study I posted.

Did you look for any evidence to refute or clarify the statements in that video? A quick search found this:

"Project Veritas’ Nick Karl and Pfizer “exposed” video was one in a long series of deceptively edited, bad-faith efforts from the organization and its social media cheerleaders. Any efforts from Project Veritas were highly likely to be misleading. Moreover, global scientific consensus had already recognized that COVID-19 infections confer some degree of immunity — and they still overwhelmingly favored vaccination."

Source: https://www.truthorfiction.com/project-veritas-and-nick-karl-from-pfizer/

I'm not saying the rebuttal is correct and the video you posted is totally wrong, Not at all. Just that it is always a good idea to try to refute your own argument first to ensure you aren't being manipulated.

Why doesn’t your liberal fact check cover the “we’re basically swimming in Covid money” quote?

Odd, don’t you think?

 

[SORT14]

Why doesn’t your liberal fact check cover the “we’re basically swimming in Covid money” quote?

Odd, don’t you think?

LOL.. that isn't my liberal fact check. Just a source I found with a quick search.
Again, investigative work to ensure those in power aren't cheating is a great thing. Just put the results out there in a complete and neutral manner so nobody can accuse you of bias.
But your source definitely engaged in some practices that are questionable, such as selective editing, appeal to emotion etc. These are all common tactics used in misinformation campaigns.
Point is, it is better to get neutral information that isn't intended to sway but let you make your own decision. Why wouldn't your source just post the entire dialogue, question and answer with no commentary or editing? That way nothing is hidden.

 

[NavigatorII]

LOL.. that isn't my liberal fact check. Just a source I found with a quick search.
Again, investigative work to ensure those in power aren't cheating is a great thing. Just put the results out there in a complete and neutral manner so nobody can accuse you of bias.
But your source definitely engaged in some practices that are questionable, such as selective editing, appeal to emotion etc. These are all common tactics used in misinformation campaigns.
Point is, it is better to get neutral information that isn't intended to sway but let you make your own decision. Why wouldn't your source just post the entire dialogue, question and answer with no commentary or editing? That way nothing is hidden.

Who are we to use? CNN?

 

[SORT14]

Who are we to use? CNN?

You can't now that they aren't in airports lol

 

[fatman76]

LOL.. that isn't my liberal fact check. Just a source I found with a quick search.
Again, investigative work to ensure those in power aren't cheating is a great thing. Just put the results out there in a complete and neutral manner so nobody can accuse you of bias.
But your source definitely engaged in some practices that are questionable, such as selective editing, appeal to emotion etc. These are all common tactics used in misinformation campaigns.
Point is, it is better to get neutral information that isn't intended to sway but let you make your own decision. Why wouldn't your source just post the entire dialogue, question and answer with no commentary or editing? That way nothing is hidden.

Editing for emphasis doesn’t explain away a majority of the quotes in that clip. And they let a lot of those conversations run for awhile (once you get past the splashy intro).

“swimming in Covid money”
“I feel like I work for an evil company”
“Natural response protects you in more ways than the vaccine”
“I’d wait”
“Make life for the unvaccinated so uncomfortable they just say fvck it” (after he explained the benefits of natural immunity)

Those are clear and concise admissions of medium to senior level employees at Pfizer. What they said should bother anyone who watches that clip - especially when you contrast what they’re saying with what’s happening with mandates right now.

Whats powerful is the candid nature of these clips. They aren’t controlling what they say for political correctness, PR or their jobs. These are people that are speaking freely and openly. I think that reduces the possibility of “misinformation”.

 

[SORT14]

Editing for emphasis doesn’t explain away a majority of the quotes in that clip. And they let a lot of those conversations run for awhile (once you get past the splashy intro).

“swimming in Covid money”
“I feel like I work for an evil company”
“Natural response protects you in more ways than the vaccine”
“I’d wait”
“Make life for the unvaccinated so uncomfortable they just say fvck it” (after he explained the benefits of natural immunity)

Those are clear and concise admissions of medium to senior level employees at Pfizer. What they said should bother anyone who watches that clip - especially when you contrast what they’re saying with what’s happening with mandates right now.

Definitely. Things like that warrant further investigation without a doubt. But it would help us all understand the total context and remove any doubt if the entire dialogue, questions and answers alike were available. That way there couldn't be any doubt.
That is simply the prudent way to handle truth-seeking. Hide nothing.