I thought that might be what he meant, but I decided that homebiscuit was too smart to believe that political leaders and big pharma over the entire world could all be conspiring, without any leaks or dissent, to reduce global economic output, and tangle up supply chains, all for some chance that they might gain more power or money that way. I respect all of you too much to think any of you believe something that crazy and illogical.

You are the most blindly naive person I have ever met in my life. It must be fun to go through life staring at rainbows and unicorns.

I'm curious to know your thoughts on the moon landing.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

I think the most interesting thing about all this discussion is that you guys are all talking about Bob Saget and I was talking about Rafael Silva (page 2 of this thread for reference), who isn't dead by the way, they identified a congenital heart defect, he's since recovered and been sent home. Ronster was using the video clip to attribute his health incident to the vaccine yet the doctors said that wasn't the case and gave him the correct diagnosis. Of course it seems that no matter the facts of the case I'm wrong about everything I say even when you guys aren't even discussing the same [BLEEP] patient that I am. Of course all the internet experts surely know more than the actual physician who treated the patient, that's the world we live in and why these discussions serve little purpose. 

Please show where they found a congenital heart defect in Silva because I can find nothing but speculation. The last update I can see he was still in the hospital.

Suspecting he has some unknown undiagnosed problem is not identifying anything.

---

I agree, but I also have no doubt that in the future when this is all examined through an historical lens, there’s going to be a lot of subterfuge and intentional misinformation discovered for the sake of political power and money.

Either I didn't understand this statement or others on this board didn't. I take this to mean that you are at least acknowledging that we are going to uncover how politicians and Big Pharma leveraged this "crisis" to gain more power and money. Kind of like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD0i_YxPATc

That is what I meant. There are huge legitimate and altruistic efforts to contain and understand this virus with science and well-intentioned policy, and it's not my aim to dismiss it. Medical and pharmaceutical research along with accelerated manufacturing efforts have proven to be hugely beneficial to the American public and the world. But any time the government pours its resources into an abrupt and mammoth effort, there are always those who are looking to benefit. Historians will most certainly ascertain politicians, bureaucrats, and industry were working hand in hand to push some questionable policies and influence research for maximum payout. This should be of no surprise. The military industrial complex has been doing it for decades. 

I can't help but believe that some of the senseless policy we see today, much of it driven by Howdy Doody Fauci, is not arrived at purely for the public good. A multi trillion-dollar tsunami washed over the earth in the last 36 months, it is an absolute given that corruption is a featured component.

---

Either I didn't understand this statement or others on this board didn't. I take this to mean that you are at least acknowledging that we are going to uncover how politicians and Big Pharma leveraged this "crisis" to gain more power and money. Kind of like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD0i_YxPATc

I thought that might be what he meant, but I decided that homebiscuit was too smart to believe that political leaders and big pharma over the entire world could all be conspiring, without any leaks or dissent, to reduce global economic output, and tangle up supply chains, all for some chance that they might gain more power or money that way. I respect all of you too much to think any of you believe something that crazy and illogical.

I think you underestimate the power of greed.

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

Either I didn't understand this statement or others on this board didn't. I take this to mean that you are at least acknowledging that we are going to uncover how politicians and Big Pharma leveraged this "crisis" to gain more power and money. Kind of like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD0i_YxPATc

That is what I meant. There are huge legitimate and altruistic efforts to contain and understand this virus with science and well-intentioned policy, and it's not my aim to dismiss it. Medical and pharmaceutical research along with accelerated manufacturing efforts have proven to be hugely beneficial to the American public and the world. But any time the government pours its resources into an abrupt and mammoth effort, there are always those who are looking to benefit. Historians will most certainly ascertain politicians, bureaucrats, and industry were working hand in hand to push some questionable policies and influence research for maximum payout. This should be of no surprise. The military industrial complex has been doing it for decades. 

I can't help but believe that some of the senseless policy we see today, much of it driven by Howdy Doody Fauci, is not arrived at purely for the public good. A multi trillion-dollar tsunami washed over the earth in the last 36 months, it is an absolute given that corruption is a featured component.

Well, this is what I have been diving into. I wish people wouldn't give so much credit to these people. I was honestly on the fence with the vaccine. I mean, not for myself. I wasn't planning on taking it unless the virus became more deadly, or we were able to get a few years of public data under our belt. But I thought it was at least a good idea for the elderly and at-risk individuals. I also thought it could help quell public fear for individuals looking to get extra protection. Early studies showed it was successful at reducing hospitalizations and deaths, and I never doubted that. I still don't. However, when the CDC didn't recognize natural immunity and started treating vaccination as the only prevention measure, my spidey sense started tingling. Most of the rest of the scientific world recognized natural immunity. 

So, then I started digging into the process, because I figured this kind of policy had to be money-driven, and I absolutely think the American people are being taken advantage of. 90% of big Pharma's money comes from the US. That's a crazy stat. The FDA recalls 1200 drugs a year for unknown side-effects... drugs that made it through the entire process. Drug companies don't need to release their data for peer review. The FDA has been primarily funded by corporate money since the 2000's. I started looking at public trials that show these guys lie and never get arrested. 

Just read one where Merck sold 12 billion dollars' worth of a drug over 5 years. It killed 40k-60k people. They were fined 1 billion by the government and lost a lawsuit for 4.4 billion after a 12-year-old died. There company wasn't dissolved, and no one went to jail, and they still made money. Documents released show they knew their product caused heart problems. They removed the 3 cases from their studies where people had a major heart problem and said it was an outlier. Their top scientist even emailed the CEO and said something to the effect that even though there was a heart problem with the drug, they were going to do very well financially. To make it worse, they made this drug to replace a previous drug that was causing gastro-intestinal issues at a rate of 53 per 100000. There new drug was causing heart problems at a rate of 72 per 100000 but defended themselves by saying it was within limits. Did they market that fact to us? Nope. 

Made money. Killed thousands. Now, add to this protection of government from lawsuit. You really think we're getting the true numbers? This is one story of MANY I've been reading. This whole system is built on the trust of these institutions, because doctors just don't have the capacity to fact check their data. Does this mean all drugs are bad? No. It does need we need public scrutiny and time to see what's actually happening before we give a drug to and ENTIRE nation.

---

That is what I meant. There are huge legitimate and altruistic efforts to contain and understand this virus with science and well-intentioned policy, and it's not my aim to dismiss it. Medical and pharmaceutical research along with accelerated manufacturing efforts have proven to be hugely beneficial to the American public and the world. But any time the government pours its resources into an abrupt and mammoth effort, there are always those who are looking to benefit. Historians will most certainly ascertain politicians, bureaucrats, and industry were working hand in hand to push some questionable policies and influence research for maximum payout. This should be of no surprise. The military industrial complex has been doing it for decades. 

I can't help but believe that some of the senseless policy we see today, much of it driven by Howdy Doody Fauci, is not arrived at purely for the public good. A multi trillion-dollar tsunami washed over the earth in the last 36 months, it is an absolute given that corruption is a featured component.

Well, this is what I have been diving into. I wish people wouldn't give so much credit to these people. I was honestly on the fence with the vaccine. I mean, not for myself. I wasn't planning on taking it unless the virus became more deadly, or we were able to get a few years of public data under our belt. But I thought it was at least a good idea for the elderly and at-risk individuals. I also thought it could help quell public fear for individuals looking to get extra protection. Early studies showed it was successful at reducing hospitalizations and deaths, and I never doubted that. I still don't. However, when the CDC didn't recognize natural immunity and started treating vaccination as the only prevention measure, my spidey sense started tingling. Most of the rest of the scientific world recognized natural immunity...

This was also the first indication for me that not everything was above board.

---

Well, this is what I have been diving into. I wish people wouldn't give so much credit to these people. I was honestly on the fence with the vaccine. I mean, not for myself. I wasn't planning on taking it unless the virus became more deadly, or we were able to get a few years of public data under our belt. But I thought it was at least a good idea for the elderly and at-risk individuals. I also thought it could help quell public fear for individuals looking to get extra protection. Early studies showed it was successful at reducing hospitalizations and deaths, and I never doubted that. I still don't. However, when the CDC didn't recognize natural immunity and started treating vaccination as the only prevention measure, my spidey sense started tingling. Most of the rest of the scientific world recognized natural immunity...

This was also the first indication for me that not everything was above board.

First, I don’t put much trust in the government doing anything right. Then combine an inept government with a greedy pharmaceutical company and that should scare everyone.

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

Well, this is what I have been diving into. I wish people wouldn't give so much credit to these people. I was honestly on the fence with the vaccine. I mean, not for myself. I wasn't planning on taking it unless the virus became more deadly, or we were able to get a few years of public data under our belt. But I thought it was at least a good idea for the elderly and at-risk individuals. I also thought it could help quell public fear for individuals looking to get extra protection. Early studies showed it was successful at reducing hospitalizations and deaths, and I never doubted that. I still don't. However, when the CDC didn't recognize natural immunity and started treating vaccination as the only prevention measure, my spidey sense started tingling. Most of the rest of the scientific world recognized natural immunity...

This was also the first indication for me that not everything was above board.

This

---

"Remember Red, Hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things. And no good thing ever dies."  - Andy Dufresne, The Shawshank Redemption

Well, this is what I have been diving into. I wish people wouldn't give so much credit to these people. I was honestly on the fence with the vaccine. I mean, not for myself. I wasn't planning on taking it unless the virus became more deadly, or we were able to get a few years of public data under our belt. But I thought it was at least a good idea for the elderly and at-risk individuals. I also thought it could help quell public fear for individuals looking to get extra protection. Early studies showed it was successful at reducing hospitalizations and deaths, and I never doubted that. I still don't. However, when the CDC didn't recognize natural immunity and started treating vaccination as the only prevention measure, my spidey sense started tingling. Most of the rest of the scientific world recognized natural immunity...

This was also the first indication for me that not everything was above board.

I think I understand where you're coming from.
I think you presume that immunity gained from infection and recovery is just as efficacious and long lasting as immunity gained from a vaccine.
That's probably not true, but suppose it is.
You're still not considering the full picture. 
Someone actually infected with the virus will spread it while they recover. And then those people will spread it, etc.  Somewhere along the line, it's likely that extra people get hospitalized this way.
Vaccinated people spread nothing while their body reacts to the vaccine.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

You don't know what you're talking about.

---

Refuge? You just can't say, "Gosh, I overreacted and didn't have the facts right?" Really?

I'll take it on the chin and admit that I misapplied your comment to Bob Saget. I probably got a couple Ronster posts mixed up and was mistaken about which one you responded to. I am back at work now and check this forum once or twice a day from my phone. If a post is low energy and one line, it's probably all I have time to write that the time. So, when I ask if that's your refuge, I'm not talking about the obvious miscommunication. I'm talking about the only thing that makes sense in that context, which was this: "Of course all the internet experts surely know more than the actual physician who treated the patient, that's the world we live in and why these discussions serve little purpose." You have come to rely on strawman tactics in our recent discussions. If that's where you want to take refuge, go ahead. 

Even still, it only slightly modifies my original position. There are more tests they can run for someone who is alive, but unless they dial in on a specific defect (to which they are saying it's a congenital heart defect), it's almost impossible to rule out the vaccine completely, even if it just served as a catalyst aggravating the existing condition. Again, I am not saying it was caused by the vaccine. In fact, I am outright admitting there's a small probability of it being the cause. I will go one step further and proclaim that Ronster is most likely wrong for attributing these heart attacks to the vaccine. There's a lot of that going around. 

HOWEVER, none of that negates my original point, that we should encourage good science, and a lot of that starts with challenging the status quo. I think it's irresponsible for a doctor to say the heart attack was unrelated to the vaccine because he can't know that. He is unqualified to state that definitively, and probably should be more specific in his word choices. While you might think it's a small change to make that condition, I think it's everything in building institutions of trust. Furthermore, I don't think it's a big ask from you to be on board with that line of thinking. Or Marty. Or any of the other people who are blindly following the narrative that has been created by people and institutions we KNOW to be duplicitous.

You aren’t to blame, that is totally on me. I mixed up this thread and the Bob Saget thread with my comment about the autopsy. Sorry about that guys!

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

That is what I meant. There are huge legitimate and altruistic efforts to contain and understand this virus with science and well-intentioned policy, and it's not my aim to dismiss it. Medical and pharmaceutical research along with accelerated manufacturing efforts have proven to be hugely beneficial to the American public and the world. But any time the government pours its resources into an abrupt and mammoth effort, there are always those who are looking to benefit. Historians will most certainly ascertain politicians, bureaucrats, and industry were working hand in hand to push some questionable policies and influence research for maximum payout. This should be of no surprise. The military industrial complex has been doing it for decades. 

I can't help but believe that some of the senseless policy we see today, much of it driven by Howdy Doody Fauci, is not arrived at purely for the public good. A multi trillion-dollar tsunami washed over the earth in the last 36 months, it is an absolute given that corruption is a featured component.

While there were plenty of people trying to do good, leadership in government and companies don't care. The virus is still a mystery because they can't isolate it from a human. It is still all a simulation or best guess. They shouldn't have produced a vaccine that they knew at best was going to do little to nothing.

The plan was to lockdown through 2024 and totally destroy the world, they have published the plan and run test scenarios on it. Trump blew it up because he won and then said they would have a vaccine through approvals. At that point they had no choice but to deliver it or HCQ and ivermectin would have become the treatment plan; also it seems they work on a lot of other diseases and maybe even some cancers so they probably don't want that getting out.

Well, this is what I have been diving into. I wish people wouldn't give so much credit to these people. I was honestly on the fence with the vaccine. I mean, not for myself. I wasn't planning on taking it unless the virus became more deadly, or we were able to get a few years of public data under our belt. But I thought it was at least a good idea for the elderly and at-risk individuals. I also thought it could help quell public fear for individuals looking to get extra protection. Early studies showed it was successful at reducing hospitalizations and deaths, and I never doubted that. I still don't. However, when the CDC didn't recognize natural immunity and started treating vaccination as the only prevention measure, my spidey sense started tingling. Most of the rest of the scientific world recognized natural immunity. 

So, then I started digging into the process, because I figured this kind of policy had to be money-driven, and I absolutely think the American people are being taken advantage of. 90% of big Pharma's money comes from the US. That's a crazy stat. The FDA recalls 1200 drugs a year for unknown side-effects... drugs that made it through the entire process. Drug companies don't need to release their data for peer review. The FDA has been primarily funded by corporate money since the 2000's. I started looking at public trials that show these guys lie and never get arrested. 

Just read one where Merck sold 12 billion dollars' worth of a drug over 5 years. It killed 40k-60k people. They were fined 1 billion by the government and lost a lawsuit for 4.4 billion after a 12-year-old died. There company wasn't dissolved, and no one went to jail, and they still made money. Documents released show they knew their product caused heart problems. They removed the 3 cases from their studies where people had a major heart problem and said it was an outlier. Their top scientist even emailed the CEO and said something to the effect that even though there was a heart problem with the drug, they were going to do very well financially. To make it worse, they made this drug to replace a previous drug that was causing gastro-intestinal issues at a rate of 53 per 100000. There new drug was causing heart problems at a rate of 72 per 100000 but defended themselves by saying it was within limits. Did they market that fact to us? Nope. 

Made money. Killed thousands. Now, add to this protection of government from lawsuit. You really think we're getting the true numbers? This is one story of MANY I've been reading. This whole system is built on the trust of these institutions, because doctors just don't have the capacity to fact check their data. Does this mean all drugs are bad? No. It does need we need public scrutiny and time to see what's actually happening before we give a drug to and ENTIRE nation.

If you read the trials data being released, Pfizer actually killed more people than the placebo did. Then tainting the control group, they killed any long term studies that could have shown it not working after 3 months or the ADEs that a lot of people are having now.

There was a coordinated push to discredit all other treatment options and to even kill several hundred people that they overdosed with HCQ.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---

That is what I meant. There are huge legitimate and altruistic efforts to contain and understand this virus with science and well-intentioned policy, and it's not my aim to dismiss it. Medical and pharmaceutical research along with accelerated manufacturing efforts have proven to be hugely beneficial to the American public and the world. But any time the government pours its resources into an abrupt and mammoth effort, there are always those who are looking to benefit. Historians will most certainly ascertain politicians, bureaucrats, and industry were working hand in hand to push some questionable policies and influence research for maximum payout. This should be of no surprise. The military industrial complex has been doing it for decades. 

I can't help but believe that some of the senseless policy we see today, much of it driven by Howdy Doody Fauci, is not arrived at purely for the public good. A multi trillion-dollar tsunami washed over the earth in the last 36 months, it is an absolute given that corruption is a featured component.

While there were plenty of people trying to do good, leadership in government and companies don't care. The virus is still a mystery because they can't isolate it from a human. It is still all a simulation or best guess. They shouldn't have produced a vaccine that they knew at best was going to do little to nothing.

The plan was to lockdown through 2024 and totally destroy the world, they have published the plan and run test scenarios on it. Trump blew it up because he won and then said they would have a vaccine through approvals. At that point they had no choice but to deliver it or HCQ and ivermectin would have become the treatment plan; also it seems they work on a lot of other diseases and maybe even some cancers so they probably don't want that getting out.

Well, this is what I have been diving into. I wish people wouldn't give so much credit to these people. I was honestly on the fence with the vaccine. I mean, not for myself. I wasn't planning on taking it unless the virus became more deadly, or we were able to get a few years of public data under our belt. But I thought it was at least a good idea for the elderly and at-risk individuals. I also thought it could help quell public fear for individuals looking to get extra protection. Early studies showed it was successful at reducing hospitalizations and deaths, and I never doubted that. I still don't. However, when the CDC didn't recognize natural immunity and started treating vaccination as the only prevention measure, my spidey sense started tingling. Most of the rest of the scientific world recognized natural immunity. 

So, then I started digging into the process, because I figured this kind of policy had to be money-driven, and I absolutely think the American people are being taken advantage of. 90% of big Pharma's money comes from the US. That's a crazy stat. The FDA recalls 1200 drugs a year for unknown side-effects... drugs that made it through the entire process. Drug companies don't need to release their data for peer review. The FDA has been primarily funded by corporate money since the 2000's. I started looking at public trials that show these guys lie and never get arrested. 

Just read one where Merck sold 12 billion dollars' worth of a drug over 5 years. It killed 40k-60k people. They were fined 1 billion by the government and lost a lawsuit for 4.4 billion after a 12-year-old died. There company wasn't dissolved, and no one went to jail, and they still made money. Documents released show they knew their product caused heart problems. They removed the 3 cases from their studies where people had a major heart problem and said it was an outlier. Their top scientist even emailed the CEO and said something to the effect that even though there was a heart problem with the drug, they were going to do very well financially. To make it worse, they made this drug to replace a previous drug that was causing gastro-intestinal issues at a rate of 53 per 100000. There new drug was causing heart problems at a rate of 72 per 100000 but defended themselves by saying it was within limits. Did they market that fact to us? Nope. 

Made money. Killed thousands. Now, add to this protection of government from lawsuit. You really think we're getting the true numbers? This is one story of MANY I've been reading. This whole system is built on the trust of these institutions, because doctors just don't have the capacity to fact check their data. Does this mean all drugs are bad? No. It does need we need public scrutiny and time to see what's actually happening before we give a drug to and ENTIRE nation.

If you read the trials data being released, Pfizer actually killed more people than the placebo did. Then tainting the control group, they killed any long term studies that could have shown it not working after 3 months or the ADEs that a lot of people are having now.

There was a coordinated push to discredit all other treatment options and to even kill several hundred people that they overdosed with HCQ.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

Can you provide a link to the plan and scenarios about destroying the world by 2024.

---

While there were plenty of people trying to do good, leadership in government and companies don't care. The virus is still a mystery because they can't isolate it from a human. It is still all a simulation or best guess. They shouldn't have produced a vaccine that they knew at best was going to do little to nothing.

The plan was to lockdown through 2024 and totally destroy the world, they have published the plan and run test scenarios on it. Trump blew it up because he won and then said they would have a vaccine through approvals. At that point they had no choice but to deliver it or HCQ and ivermectin would have become the treatment plan; also it seems they work on a lot of other diseases and maybe even some cancers so they probably don't want that getting out.



If you read the trials data being released, Pfizer actually killed more people than the placebo did. Then tainting the control group, they killed any long term studies that could have shown it not working after 3 months or the ADEs that a lot of people are having now.

There was a coordinated push to discredit all other treatment options and to even kill several hundred people that they overdosed with HCQ.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

Can you provide a link to the plan and scenarios about destroying the world by 2024.

I'll try to find them but the plan was for 8 years of Hillary and basically freedom being done by 2024 elections with only dems left.

I think one of them was event 201 or something like that. It's coming from the global groups that have meetings every few years.

Edit - This is the great reset, it's been planned well before 2020 and most of the stuff is contained within it. https://www.weforum.org/great-reset/

Event 201 was a scenario play with very similar things to covid and then covid happens. There were other similar ones to that.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---

This was also the first indication for me that not everything was above board.

I think I understand where you're coming from.
I think you presume that immunity gained from infection and recovery is just as efficacious and long lasting as immunity gained from a vaccine.
That's probably not true, but suppose it is.
You're still not considering the full picture. 
Someone actually infected with the virus will spread it while they recover. And then those people will spread it, etc.  Somewhere along the line, it's likely that extra people get hospitalized this way.
Vaccinated people spread nothing while their body reacts to the vaccine.

Oh. My. God. You should stop. Really. Because your last sentence is beyond disinformation. Those who are vaxxed might shed less virus but they still shed it and can infect others.

---

I think I understand where you're coming from.
I think you presume that immunity gained from infection and recovery is just as efficacious and long lasting as immunity gained from a vaccine.
That's probably not true, but suppose it is.
You're still not considering the full picture. 
Someone actually infected with the virus will spread it while they recover. And then those people will spread it, etc.  Somewhere along the line, it's likely that extra people get hospitalized this way.
Vaccinated people spread nothing while their body reacts to the vaccine.

Oh. My. God. You should stop. Really. Because your last sentence is beyond disinformation. Those who are vaxxed might shed less virus but they still shed it and can infect others.

I think this is why I quit keeping up with this [BLEEP].  You can or can’t or will or won’t depending on what the left says at the time.  I personally am over it.  I may or may not have gotten it. I am vaccinated.  At this point, personally I can’t do anything else.  I’ll live my life and not in fear.  I’ve got other things to worry about. This back and forth “facts” are bull [BLEEP]

---

I think I understand where you're coming from.
I think you presume that immunity gained from infection and recovery is just as efficacious and long lasting as immunity gained from a vaccine.
That's probably not true, but suppose it is.
You're still not considering the full picture. 
Someone actually infected with the virus will spread it while they recover. And then those people will spread it, etc.  Somewhere along the line, it's likely that extra people get hospitalized this way.
Vaccinated people spread nothing while their body reacts to the vaccine.

Oh. My. God. You should stop. Really. Because your last sentence is beyond disinformation. Those who are vaxxed might shed less virus but they still shed it and can infect others.

Your reading comprehension is really really poor.
Your hate for me makes you really dumb.  Temporarily, anyways.
A vaccinated person doesn't spread anything FROM THE VACCINE while their body reacts to the vaccine. They MIGHT spread the virus, if they happen to catch it during that time.  In contrast to the person who deliberately infects themselves hoping for natural immunity.  That person WILL spread the virus.  
I thought that was obvious.  Apparently not.
Hate less.  You'll feel better, and regain your ability to read and understand things the first time.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Oh. My. God. You should stop. Really. Because your last sentence is beyond disinformation. Those who are vaxxed might shed less virus but they still shed it and can infect others.

Your reading comprehension is really really poor.
Your hate for me makes you really dumb.  Temporarily, anyways.
A vaccinated person doesn't spread anything FROM THE VACCINE while their body reacts to the vaccine. They MIGHT spread the virus, if they happen to catch it during that time.  In contrast to the person who deliberately infects themselves hoping for natural immunity.  That person WILL spread the virus.  
I thought that was obvious.  Apparently not.
Hate less.  You'll feel better, and regain your ability to read and understand things the first time.

So who all do you hate?  Cause whoever they all are it’s causing stupidity to run rampant with you.

---

I think I understand where you're coming from.
I think you presume that immunity gained from infection and recovery is just as efficacious and long lasting as immunity gained from a vaccine.
That's probably not true, but suppose it is.
You're still not considering the full picture. 
Someone actually infected with the virus will spread it while they recover. And then those people will spread it, etc.  Somewhere along the line, it's likely that extra people get hospitalized this way.
Vaccinated people spread nothing while their body reacts to the vaccine.

Oh. My. God. You should stop. Really. Because your last sentence is beyond disinformation. Those who are vaxxed might shed less virus but they still shed it and can infect others.

The vaccine itself doesn't make you capable of infecting others. It's possible to have a breakthrough infection and then shed virus but you must be infected to be capable of infecting others. Does that make sense?

---

I'm condescending. That means I talk down to you. 
Check out the Jag's Forum Alternative: Duval Football Fans.

We've done this before. There are 190 studies on natural immunity being superior to the vaccine. If I recall correctly, 17x more for hospitalizations and 27x better for deaths. And you don't have to get it 4 times a year to keep it effective. Omicron may have changed those numbers, but I don't have the time to do the research anymore, so I'm becoming uninformed, like most of you.

---