Bill Gates spending 150 million + to keep the price of COVID Vaccine around 3$

[Paul_Thomson]

@FloridaYankee

@Paul_Thomson

And I am ok with letting anyone take it who trusts it and wants his litigation-waived vaccine. But I won’t be trusting it or taking it willingly. I think I should be free to make that decision, but I suspect Bill will insist that I must take it.

All vaccines have lit

I know.

[FloridaYankee]

@Paul_Thomson

@FloridaYankee

@Paul_Thomson

And I am ok with letting anyone take it who trusts it and wants his litigation-waived vaccine. But I won’t be trusting it or taking it willingly. I think I should be free to make that decision, but I suspect Bill will insist that I must take it.

All vaccines have lit

I know.

It’s a positive, not sure why you paint it as a negative.

[Paul_Thomson]

Why is it a positive?

[FloridaYankee]

@Paul_Thomson

Why is it a positive?

Because companies would not produce vaccines (at least not affordable ones) that have saved hundreds of millions of lives otherwise.

[Paul_Thomson]

@FloridaYankee

Because companies would not produce vaccines (at least not affordable ones) that have saved hundreds of millions of lives otherwise.

Big pharma make billions of dollars a year. If their vaccines were safe, they would still make millions. If they wouldn’t be producing them without lawsuit immunity, that would be because they know they are unsafe.

[Jezcoe]

@Paul_Thomson

@FloridaYankee

Because companies would not produce vaccines (at least not affordable ones) that have saved hundreds of millions of lives otherwise.

Big pharma make billions of dollars a year. If their vaccines were safe, they would still make millions. If they wouldn’t be producing them without lawsuit immunity, that would be because they know they are unsafe.

Nope.

They wouldn’t.

[FloridaYankee]

@Paul_Thomson

@FloridaYankee

Because companies would not produce vaccines (at least not affordable ones) that have saved hundreds of millions of lives otherwise.

Big pharma make billions of dollars a year. If their vaccines were safe, they would still make millions. They wouldn’t be producing them, that would be because they know they are unsafe.

No, it’s because an infinitesimally small minority will have an adverse reaction and perhaps even die. The vaccines are produced in good faith with extreme safety measures practiced. The pharma companies straight up told the government they would require said protections or no deal.

[Jezcoe]

@FloridaYankee

@Paul_Thomson

@FloridaYankee

Because companies would not produce vaccines (at least not affordable ones) that have saved hundreds of millions of lives otherwise.

Big pharma make billions of dollars a year. If their vaccines were safe, they would still make millions. They wouldn’t be producing them, that would be because they know they are unsafe.

No, it’s because an infinitesimally small minority will have an adverse reaction and perhaps even die. The vaccines are produced in good faith with extreme safety measures practiced. The pharma companies straight up told the government they would require said protections or no deal.

It was because the DTP vaccine had slim profit margins and increasing liability insurance costs.

[FloridaYankee]

@Jezcoe

@FloridaYankee

@Paul_Thomson

@FloridaYankee

Because companies would not produce vaccines (at least not affordable ones) that have saved hundreds of millions of lives otherwise.

Big pharma make billions of dollars a year. If their vaccines were safe, they would still make millions. They wouldn’t be producing them, that would be because they know they are unsafe.

No, it’s because an infinitesimally small minority will have an adverse reaction and perhaps even die. The vaccines are produced in good faith with extreme safety measures practiced. The pharma companies straight up told the government they would require said protections or no deal.

It was because the DTP vaccine had slim profit margins and increasing liability insurance costs.

That I’m not familiar with, but either way, it was litigation protection or no deal.

[Paul_Thomson]

Then say,
“No deal.”
Call their bluff.

There seems to be some hypocrisy here. In the case of Covid19, liberals are saying we cannot sacrifice anyone in a run for herd immunity; but with the Covid19 vaccine, it’s ok to sacrifice any number of people who would have survived Covid19, in order to achieve temporary immunity for an unknown percentage of vaccine-takers.

[altair1013]

@Paul_Thomson

Nano-particles designed to detect diseases and transmit reports of their presence or absence to scanners. Nothing like nano-particles introduced into the body transmitting personal data to data-farmers?

No worries. The FDA has not approved nano particles for Covid. Nor will they.

[FloridaYankee]

@Paul_Thomson

Then say,
“No deal.”
Call their bluff.

There seems to be some hypocrisy here. In the case of Covid19, liberals are saying we cannot sacrifice anyone in a run for herd immunity; but with the Covid19 vaccine, it’s ok to sacrifice any number of people who would have survived Covid19, in order to achieve temporary immunity for an unknown percentage of vaccine-takers.

If an ineffective or dangerous vaccine is foisted upon us, far more could and probably would die. Think there’s a lot of anti vaxxers now? HERHAW!

[FloridaYankee]

@altair1013

@Paul_Thomson

Nano-particles designed to detect diseases and transmit reports of their presence or absence to scanners. Nothing like nano-particles introduced into the body transmitting personal data to data-farmers?

No worries. The FDA has not approved nano particles for Covid. Nor will they.

They may however, prove to be the greatest thing ever injected into the human body if some of the research pans out.

[altair1013]

@FloridaYankee

@altair1013

No worries. The FDA has not approved nano particles for Covid. Nor will they.

They may however, prove to be the greatest thing ever injected into the human body if some of the research pans out.

Possibly. But you will know if you’re getting it. It won’t be a conspiracy that depends on 5 thousand people keeping their mouths shut.

[markdido]

And the crazy continues…

Bill Gates: 'Shutting down' economy not nearly enough to stem climate change...

"Billionaire Microsoft founder and climate activist Bill Gates said Monday that large-scale economic shutdowns are “nowhere near sufficient” to curtail climate change. Rather, we need “to get rid of emissions from all the different sectors.”

[tnt]

It’s so funny…for years, conservatives here and on the airwaves claimed private money was the cure to all ills. Poverty, homelessness, health care…all should be solved by private charities…not government programs.

Along comes a man who puts up his own private money to solve a big damn problem…and he’s labeled dangerous and accused of putting particles in people for nefarious purposes.

[LeroyBrown]

@Samson_Corwell

Nano-particles can’t do that! They’re too small to have any of the components necessary for interacting with electromagnetic signals like that.

Except for Bill and I had a long discussion about how he could program the nano-particles to work together to perform complex operations so he can force DNS leaks and obtain IP and eventually MAC addresses to get around the whole VPN problem. 5G was going to be the solution but too many people learned about how we were going to use it to cook people in their homes.

[altair1013]

@markdido

"Billionaire Microsoft founder and climate activist Bill Gates said Monday that large-scale economic shutdowns are “nowhere near sufficient” to curtail climate change. Rather, we need “to get rid of emissions from all the different sectors.”

And replace them with what?