Not How Any Of This Works: Pandemic's Wrongest Man Sues Twitter For Kicking Him Off The Platform
from the throwing-money-down-the-toilet dept
For good reasons, Alex Berenson has been dubbed the "pandemic's wrongest man." He played up the fact that he once wrote for the NY Times and turned that into a weird, shady attack on pot, before going all in on medical misinformation. In the early days he played down the threat of COVID, and has since become a leading vaccine disinfo spreader. He had built a large Twitter following for his nonsense, and shortly before his Twitter account was finally shut down, he had warned that if it was shut down he would sue Twitter... for defamation. Then, once he was banned, he (in typical grifter fashion) immediately went into fundraising mode even though the extraordinarily wealthy heir of a frozen food fortune promised to fund such a lawsuit.
It's unclear whether or not your frozen TV dinners from the 1980s are now funding it, but a Berenson has now filed his long-awaited lawsuit against Twitter. Somewhat amazingly, given the multitude of bad legal theories put forth in the complaint, it doesn't include a defamation claim. Instead it has eight claims, and they start out laughable and, incredibly, only gets worse from there:
- Violation of the First Amendment
- Federal False Advertising and Unfair Competition
- Violation of California Common Carrier Law
- Violation of California Unfair Competition Law
- Breach of Contract
- Promissory Estoppel
- Violation of the California Constitution
- Unjust Enrichment
- Violation of the 1st Amendment: The government can violate the 1st Amendment. Twitter is not the government. Twitter cannot violate the 1st Amendment. Like a bunch of other failed lawsuits, Berenson tries to claim that Twitter has become a state actor because the federal government has been encouraging social media to be better about stopping the spread of misinformation, but that's not how any of this works.
- False advertising: This seems like the replacement claim after Berenson's lawyers realized defamation claims would even be a step too far. It's arguing that Twitter's labeling of some of Berenson's tweets as misleading is "false advertising" but, again, that's now how any of this works.
- California's common carrier law... is easily pre-empted by Section 230. Berenson's lawyers make a really weird argument that because this California law is so old, somehow that means federal pre-emption doesn't apply. But, um, again, that's not how any of this works.
- Unfair competition: Lol, wut? Berenson is not a competitor to Twitter. There's a lot of nonsense mumbo jumbo and out-of-context cites here, but the only attempt to actually explain how this is unfair competition is this bit of nonsense: "To the extent Twitter’s censorship conferred a competitive advantage on itself and Mr. Berenson’s journalistic competitors, the company cannot claim the benefit of section 230 immunity." Again, that's not how any of this works.
- Breach of contract: Again, Twitter's terms say they can remove you for any reason. There's no breach. The creative lawyering here is to argue that Twitter's terms are "a contract of adhesion" and then mumble, mumble, Twitter breached its contract. Say it with me: that's not how any of this works.
- Promissory estoppel: The argument here is that because Twitter's PR boss had, at an earlier time, made some vague comments to Berenson that his account wasn't likely being targeted by new misinfo rules, Berenson is claiming that was a promise that he then relied on. Except, even the quotes provided by Berenson from this single Twitter employee undermine this entire argument, as there's a point where the PR guy admits that it's others at the company who make these decisions, and he often finds out later. No promises were made, and even if you could somehow construe it as a promise about previous behavior that means fuck all (legally speaking) about future behavior. You know the chorus by now: that's not how any of this works.
- Violation of the California Constitution: Here, Berenson's lawyers pull out the Pruneyard card, because every one of these lawsuits has to cite Pruneyard, even though every one of them fails. Pruneyard, of course, was the case about a shopping mall and free speech, but which was (1) narrowly decided, and (2) multiple subsequent cases (all of which Berenson's lawyers ignore) have narrowed the Pruneyard standard so that today it basically applies to the Pruneyard Shopping Center and... almost no where else. So, yes, once again, that's not how any of this works.
- Unjust enrichment: Saving the dumbest for last. It's short and sweet and so dumb I'll just post the argument here for you to marvel at: "According to Twitter, for at least a certain time period, Mr. Berenson used Twitter in violation of the company’s policies, and Twitter profited in the process. Any profits traceable to Mr. Berenson’s reporting are a benefit conferred on Twitter that it should not have received." I mean, bold strategy, but, let's close this out with a final rendition: this is not how any of this works.
Twitter has the right to remove people from its platform. It's Twitter's platform. It makes the rules. If it feels Berenson violated the rules, game over. This case is nonsense piled upon nonsense.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: 1st amendment, alex berenson, content moderation, promissory estoppel, section 230, unfair competition
Companies: twitter
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Ignore? No. I'm sure it's much more like:
Lawyer: Cite Pruneyard!
Paralegal: But all the research shows subsequent decisions that Pruneyard isn't applicable.
Lawyer: Cite Pruneyard anyway! Just don't mention all those subsequent decisions that torpedo our case. Oh, and make sure you bill your hours for all that research.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Unjust Enrichment
There should be an unjust enrichment case here.... against the lawyers for enriching themselves by acting against the best interests of their client.
There isn't.
But there should be.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Unjust Enrichment
It's all a big grift.
The lawyers are getting paid, but the money is not coming out of the pockets of anybody directly related to the lawsuit. The rubes who think that these people are fighting "big tech" are glad to hand over their hard earned money just so that can have a feeling of "owning the libs".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Frankly
with this amount of legal nonsense, I'd not be surprised if Berenson got kicked off PACER to prevent rotting the brains of law students.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Unjust Enrichment
I love the irony. The rubes are giving money to grifters in the interest of 'owning the libs.' This leaves less donation money left to fund the right-wing*. TOL (The Orange Loser) has several grifts going, and he's inspiring others. The parasites might well kneecap the right for the midterms.
*Let's not bother with calling them conservative, anymore. No ideology left besides identity politics.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
it will happen
The CURE for Corona will be the cure for Corona
-segregation is not the cure for Corona
-testing is not the cure for Corona
-vaccinations are not the cure for Corona
The money is in the treatment, but we need the cure.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: it will happen
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: it will happen
they're not the cure, but they're the best mitigation tactics we have - if only the selfish assholes who compare wearing masks or getting vaccinated to being one step away from the next Holocaust would actually give a damn about other people
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: it will happen
You realise that a 'cure' is something used after infection right? The aim is to prevent or minimise transmission first. That's how vaccinations have virtually eliminated so many serious diseases.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There are other Berenson's out there?
Fuck me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: it will happen
The cure for Corona is another Corona. Pass me another bottle of beer, please.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: it will happen
"-testing is not the cure for Corona"
No, it's the method by which we determine how many people have it, and thus how many people will die or be injured long term by the disease, both directly and indirectly (most of the mitigation attempts are to avoid hospitals being overrun by COVID patients so that they can't deal with other patients, not just the people directly affected). No matter what the orange man told you, testing doesn't change the number of infected, it just informs us of who and where they are so that action can be taken if necessary.
"-vaccinations are not the cure for Corona"
Nobody who understands medicine has ever said they were.
"The money is in the treatment, but we need the cure."
OK. So, are you trying to say a cure exists but it's being suppressed, or are you trying to say we shouldn't do anything and whoever dies/suffers long term consequences from the disease are just acceptable collateral damage until it's made?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: it will happen
I agree with the sentiment, but no. Those diseases weren't cured by vaccination, but their ability to destroy lives and affect the daily lives of the population around them was either eradicated or greatly reduced. That's ultimately the aim here - you won't be able to get a magic shot that cures you of any of those diseases should you get them, but the chances of you getting them and the severity of the infection if you're unfortunate enough to do so have been greatly reduced. One day, we'll get to the same place with COVID, we just need to stop some people from fighting on the side of the virus.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
'It's nor RI- oh, you missed that one somehow.'
That's disappointing, he was on such a roll of fail I was sure he'd smuggle an accusation of a RICO violation in there.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: it will happen
All medications, vaccines, drugs, etc. have side effects (monoclonal antibodies included).
No medication has the same effect on every person; hence, the question “Are you allergic to any medications?” on most medical insurance paperwork.
Every disease should be treated with as Many Tools As Possible. Not just vaccines, but also therapeutics (anti-Covid pills, monoclonal antibodies), immune system boosters (Zinc, Vitamin D). One size fits all medicine is a fallacy. Panacea = snake oil
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
If you need it, the treatment for covid is to try and keep you alive until your immune system catches up and kills of the virus. Also, currently, hospital admissions for all variants of covid are almost all unvaccinated people. Vaccination will likely keep you out of hospital, even if you catch covid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
“Vaccination will likely keep you out of hospital, even if you catch covid.”
This is not universally true. Some are allergic to the vaccines ingredients ; others have succumbed to other infections since being vaccinated. Hence, we need to attack Covid-19 with any and all safe and effective medications, not Just vaccines.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: it will happen
"he cure for Corona is another Corona."
That shit will kill you. ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Remember when Judges would order lawyers to be horsewhipped for bringing stupid cases to court???
Can y'all go back to that... please....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: it will happen
"Vaccination" then from cowpow, a weaker version of smallpox.
The COVID jab is an experimental mRNA concoction that nowhere uses the virus, only -- at best -- what they believe its characteristics. You're not even comparing apples and oranges.
Clearly none of you read outside your propaganda box. Over 300 young athletes have just collapsed after a COVID jab. It's not at all like prior vaccination.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: it will happen
You're saying the vaccinated must wear masks and fear the unvaccinated because the "vaccine" is ineffective. Not much of a "vaccine" then, is it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
[Projects facts disproven by the moronically baseless propaganda comprising the rest of that comment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Shut up shut up shut up
No one believes the truth
Shut up
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Wasn't one of the chief arguments against the vaccine was that it used bits of COVID-19 virus, and you refused to believe anything contrary to that argument? Funny how the "truth" shifts based on what happens to be convenient for you.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: it will happen
At what point did someone claim that segregation would "cure" it? It's not. It's meant to prevent you Alex Jones shitposters from straining hospital workloads because you can't stand the idea of not getting a haircut.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: it will happen
Uh, this is the U.S.A. It enshrines the right to be a lethal danger to others in the Second Amendment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
300 versus ...?
Over 300 young athletes have just collapsed after a COVID jab. It's not at all like prior vaccination.
First and foremost [Citation Needed], but setting that aside for a moment 300 out of how many that have been vaccinated so far, other than 'collapsing' what other symptoms if any have they shown, has their been an investigation positively linking the two and how does three hundred people 'collapsing' compare to rates of infections and deaths before and after vaccination was rolled out?
Sometimes a company screws up in making a batch of medicine, the proper response to that is to go over what they got wrong to make sure it doesn't happen again not act like the medicine as a whole is tainted by association unless of course that's the entire point of raising that objection..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: 300 versus ...?
Collapse? Let's see your evidence then: I'll open for my side with:
Fainting after Vaccination - CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/fainting.html
and for the more severe:
Fact Check-No evidence COVID-19 vaccines are linked to athletes collapsing or dying from myocarditis : https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-coronavirus-sport-idUSL1N2SK160
Oh oh oh - I know the answer. "MSM is surpessing the facts". Fuck right off you irratating cockwomble. Over here in the UK, just about everyone I know - directly or indirectly - has suffered, at most, a sore arm for a day. Believe me, if anything more had occured, the local rumour line would have been on melt-down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: 300 versus ...?
Collapse? Let's see your evidence then: I'll open for my side with:
Fainting after Vaccination - CDC
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/fainting.html
and for the more severe:
Fact Check-No evidence COVID-19 vaccines are linked to athletes collapsing or dying from myocarditis : https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-coronavirus-sport-idUSL1N2SK160
Oh oh oh - I know the answer. "MSM is surpessing the facts". Fuck right off you irratating cockwomble. Over here in the UK, just about everyone I know - directly or indirectly - has suffered, at most, a sore arm for a day. Believe me, if anything more had occured, the local rumour line would have been on melt-down.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Most likely does not mean always. As to vaccine allergy, most people who would suffer from it already know, and have a valid reason for not being vaccinated.
What evidence do you have that there is any relationship between those deaths and the vaccination. I have seen none, and that assertion is a poor excuse for not getting vaccinated.
Outside of fantasy land, there is one thing that works against covid, and that is vaccination. Every other proposal is wishful thinking by someone who does not understand the science.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: 300 versus ...?
Guessing that was meant to be a reply to the person I was also replying to?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"The COVID jab is an experimental mRNA concoction that nowhere uses the virus, only -- at best -- what they believe its characteristics."
Believe its characteristics? It's not currently the best studied virus in the world and has no resemblance to SARS and MERS? Yeah, right.
Hey, why don't you do your own experimental treatment and let yourself get infected to see how well that goes?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
And how many of those have you figured out? Ivermectin? Salt water gargles? Don't make me fucking laugh.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Do you seriously believe that there is absolutely no other current medical/pharmaceutical treatment for Corona except for the "vaccine"?
Wow...OK.
-there's at least 2 anti-Corona pills awaiting FDA approval (one is already approved)
-monoclonal antibodies are not a fairy tale
Please don't be so selfish with whatever is is that you're smoking.
YOU can keep getting re-vaccinated every other time Fauci suggests. I'll be over here cheering on the scientist that are developing other effective medications that eradicate Corona without lingering, devastating side effects.
Most of the same people that are Pro Choice are also against choice when it comes to Corona medications and treatments. Idiotic
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Why do you not listen to the medical experts? Almost all hospital admissions for covid are now unvaccinated people. Even where the protection is not perfect, the vaccine is keeping people out of hospital.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
VAERS
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vaers/index.html
The CDC's own adverse reaction website.
If you want to get vaccinated against Corona, fine; if you don't, fine. No one can make anyone do anything. The cure is still the goal though.
By the way, Hepatitis C is a viral infection for which we now have a cure. It will happen.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blithering bell-ends
Monoclonal antibodies are currently only given to people who are already infected and it must be given as an infusion plus they don't provide long term protection.
The "anti-Corona" pills are also a treatment since they don't stop you from getting infected.
So, every time you test positive for COVID you must take these treatments.
It takes a particular type of stupid to complain about re-vaccination (which helps eradicate the disease) while at the same time suggesting treatments (which doesn't really stop the disease) that is needed every time someone gets infected.
So keep cheering like an idiot because the medications you mentioned, they don't eradicate they just treat. They are a compliment to the vaccine, not a replacement.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You do understand that VAERS is used for self-reporting, right? Most of the stuff in VAERS is subjective, not objective. If you want to draw conclusions from subjective reports, good luck but it's as useful as tits on a bull.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: 300 versus ...?
Indeed it was - and wasn't meant to be double post either.
Damn you, evil backarrow link.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: 300 versus ...?
Indeed it was - and wasn't meant to be double post either.
Damn you, evil backarrow link.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"Clearly none of you read outside your propaganda box."
Yeah because out of 800 000 dead and chtulhu alone knows how many hospitalized it turns out almost none of the dead or long haulers were vaccinated.
So by empirical observation the vaccine does appear to work rather damn well.
Somehow what really, really gets to me is that by now even basic math seems to be part of the "global conspiracy" you fscknuts pin your faith and lives on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"Not just vaccines, but also therapeutics (anti-Covid pills, monoclonal antibodies), immune system boosters (Zinc, Vitamin D)."
Out of those "potentials" the vaccine is actually the least harmful, statistically. Monoclonal antibodies is essentially what the vaccine tries to make your body produce - except that they've been developed in vitro, making them far less safe.
Antivirals are toxins meant to stop a virus by - hopefully selectively - impede the cell's ability to synthesize RNA. This shares many of the hazards and stress on the body of actual chemotherapy.
As for "immune system boosters"...just no. The immune system works just fine as long as it has the required minerals and vitamins available. It will not "supercharge" by taking more than the RDI. Doing that will instead risk you developing problems with your stressed kidneys and liver.
"One size fits all medicine is a fallacy."
Oh, so that is why Polio and Smallpox are gone? Someone rolled out a massive program of homeopathic therapies and vitamin treatments without anyone knowing about it?
No, I'm afraid that whether One Size Fits All medicine is a fallacy or not depends entirely on the illness to be cured. HIV, it turned out, needed a combination cocktail of antivirals. Cancer often requires radiation, chemo and surgery - or vaccination, as with cervical cancer and HPV.
"Every disease should be treated with as Many Tools As Possible."
This...is just flat-out wrong. Every doctor will agree that unless it's a life on the line or chronic conditions, always apply the bare minimum. Because you are ill served when the cure becomes worse than the disease - which is a real risk given that every medicine is, to some extent, a biowarfare agent used against an adversary using your own body as cover.
Consult your local physician and always ask for a second opinion. If medicine was simple enough you could get away with simple suggestions an M.D. would be a ten week evening course at a local college rather than about a dozen years worth of studies and GP before you're even considered fit to be considered an expert.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
By the way, Hepatitis C is a viral infection for which we now have a cure. It will happen.
Polio is also a viral infection for which there is no cure.
But hey, you go on being you. My only hope is that once enough of you dimwitted fucks either die or find yourselves bankrupt from your hospital stay, that the gene pool can finally cleanse itself of the stupidity you and idiots like you offer.
At this point, the problem to worry about isn't you assholes not wearing a mask, or choosing not to get vaccinated. It's that vaccinated people don't give anything close to a shit about you dying because you got COVID from one of us.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I like the 'They looked at me funnnneeeeyyyyyy" argument the best.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Only frauds cite raw VAERS reports as though it were some kind of evidence.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Notice how this AC conclusively proves how those who whine about the vaccine have zero capacity for rational, independent thinking.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
i think you are swapping the snake oil and sane prophylaxis, with a side of strawman "panacea".
You don't need to treat a disease if you don't catch it in the first place. derp.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
""Vaccination" then from cowpow, a weaker version of smallpox."
The first inoculation (not vaccination), which worked. Then, it was refined to not depend so much on the original contagion..
Did you have a point here?
"The COVID jab is an experimental mRNA concoction"
You are aware that there's multiple vaccines available some of which don't use mRNA at all... right?
"Over 300 young athletes have just collapsed after a COVID jab"
Correlation is not causation but I'd love top the the list as large as you say it is. Should be really easy to debunk.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
If you look at the current figures, it's mainly unvaccinated people dying or hospitalised and injured, and mainly in states that voted for Trump.
Which obviously means that it's a conspiracy against Trump and the disease is being targeted against his political opponents.
I wish I lived in a world here people didn't actually think that, but here we are...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"All medications, vaccines, drugs, etc. have side effects (monoclonal antibodies included)"
They do, which makes it important to consider those who are genuinely unable to participate are protected and we don't submit tom the "I read something on Facebook" crowd.
"Not just vaccines, but also therapeutics (anti-Covid pills, monoclonal antibodies), immune system boosters (Zinc, Vitamin D). One size fits all medicine is a fallacy. Panacea = snake oil"
Indeed, but so far there's little evidence that some of those really work, and the people who take horse pills and Infowars supplements will also refuse to take basic precautions such as masks and social distancing. Hence the adults in the room needing to enforce them.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"Some are allergic to the vaccines ingredients"
Most people don't have a problem with people with genuine medical reasons to not have vaccines deciding not to take them. The problem is the people who take Joe Rogan's medical advice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"The CDC's own adverse reaction website"
Yes, and when you understand the methodology involved there and statistics, you'll have less of a problem with it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Evidence so far is that not only do vaccine make it less likes to catch the disease, but it reduces the severity of it if you do catch it.
I don't think I've ever heard someone say that if you get vaccinated you're completely immune, but I have heard many strawmen lining up to claim that because it's not 100% effective (as no vaccine in history has ever been) then it's best to get sick instead...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"I'll be over here cheering on the scientist that are developing other effective medications that eradicate Corona without lingering, devastating side effects."
I can probably name 800k people who did the same. How did that turn out for them?
"Most of the same people that are Pro Choice are also against choice when it comes to Corona medications and treatments."
Maybe because pregnancy isn't something that can infect other around you and women should have autonomy over their own bodies, whereas they think that the same sane methods by which we eradicated smallpox and polio should apply to the most deadly global pandemic in the last century? Especially since most of the people complaining were already vaccinated against numerous other diseases without complaint before this?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Would have liked to see the tweets
I do not condone misinformation sharing, but I am no fan of all these social media bans (since social media is just an extension of the web, it's all just a way to justify the practice -- the open web content is next).
In particular, I understand the critique and derision aimed at whatever tweets this guy put out there, but I would have liked to see them in their original form straight from his keyboard to decide.
I would have liked to do that, but it appears Twitter is saying that I can't. That upon consumption of the commentary, whatever it was, I would as a drone-bot, immediately adopt the same position and begin the process of re-conveyance ... or something.
So I guess, thanks Twitter?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: 300 versus ...?
No worries, things can get a little hectic with a bunch of replies to replies just wanted to get clarification.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"You're saying the vaccinated must wear masks and fear the unvaccinated because the "vaccine" is ineffective."
Wearing a bullet proof vest in a war zone is better than being naked. But go ahead and keep claiming being protected to 95% is no different than not being protected at all.
800 000 dead, and you morons still don't bother to grok the simplest of math.
If the vaccine was 50% effective, 30% effective or even 10% effective the lives it would save still outnumbers any potential side effects even if those side effects were a thousand times as common.
The vaccine, in reality, is effective to between 70 and 90% depending on which strain you've been exposed to - and that still doesn't mean you want to risk being part of the group which got really unlucky.
But go ahead, nurgle cultist. Keep spitting on more dead americans than every war the US was embroiled in for centuries caused combined. Because you think Facebook randos and grifters are better sources of information than the scientific global concensus.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"This is not universally true."
No, just to 99%. Go look at any covid ward. You will for the most part find zero vaccinated people among those ill enough to merit hospitalization. For more proof of this, go count the vaccinated among the 800 000 americans dead to covid.
"Hence, we need to attack Covid-19 with any and all safe and effective medications"
No such exist.
Let me break this down to you; A virus makes use of the body's normal replication mechanism. ANY medicine impeding the transcription and replication of virus particles in a cell must do so by fucking with the cell's normal behavior.
That means any antiviral will be toxic and have undesirable and often unpredictable side effects.
Vaccination, otoh, simply gives your body's normal immune system a wanted poster and lets it do its job.
So that's the first part; Vaccination as a preventive measure is far more effective and far less harmful than trying to actually cure an already extant viral infection.
As for curing it's general medical practice to use the minimum amount of treatment possible - both because all medicine has side effects and because interaction with individual metabolisms is unpredictable.
TL;DR?
We do not have any safe ways to fight a covid infection.
What we have is a vaccine which is, cheat sheet in hand, considered safe and effective. We have basic precautions we can take - wash your hands, avoid crowds, and if you must socialize, keep your distance and wear a mask.
And we have 800 000 dead of whom the overwhelming majority point to not being vaccinated as a leading cause of risk in this pandemic.
Kindly stop it with fucking trying to avoid basic statistics and common sense in these desperate attempts to pretend the doctors don't know what they're talking about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
"Do you seriously believe that there is absolutely no other current medical/pharmaceutical treatment for Corona except for the "vaccine"?"
That's what the death toll tells us, yes. There is no medicine for most viral infections. Only toxins meant to disrupt the body's replication mechanism in more or less selective ways.
"-monoclonal antibodies are not a fairy tale"
You mean the expensive and resource-intensive attempt to create the end product of vaccination?
"-there's at least 2 anti-Corona pills awaiting FDA approval (one is already approved)"
None of which has a demonstrated effect beyond enriching Big Pharma. But go ahead and pin your hopes on the magic pills still under development while observable evidence shows we have a highly effective preventative in the form of a vaccine.
It just beggars belief that the US is 800k needlessly dead down the hole mainly because moron anti-vaxxers and Trumpists decided to make defying medical science an observance of Faith.
"Most of the same people that are Pro Choice are also against choice when it comes to Corona medications and treatments."
Let me know when pregnancy becomes a contagious and life-threatening to other people.
This is not us pro-choicers being idiots, it's you morons failing to grasp context, basic logic and common sense. Again.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Proper
You don't kick a person off a platform because you think they are wrong. You let them speak and then see how what they say and think holds up.
It's called freedom. Try it some time. One day, law suits for this kind of un-Americana garbage will win every single time. Sue them out of existence. They deserve it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Proper
And when you realize what they say have no connection to factual reality and is actually dangerous to public health you kick them off your platform. Just like what happened to Berenson. Your point being?
Oh, I forgot - you just come here to shit-post since engaging in actual debate is far above your paygrade.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Proper
So when are you going to let the leftists back on Parler?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Would have liked to see the tweets
If you want to see Berenson’s nonsense, he’s very active posting it on his Substack. He’s not been silenced.
I myself have been on a forced Twitter timeout (due to some admittedly uncharitable words about a certain Senator), and I’ve not been “silenced.” Look—Here I am!
But more to the point, if Twitter decides it wants to ban me from its platform for a week or forever, that’s its decision. And it doesn’t need to justify its decision to me or anyone else. No matter how much I might miss posting cat pictures (I do miss that), shitposting, or doing whatever, Twitter doesn’t have to let me use its resources to do it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Proper
We get it, you hate and want to censor constitutionally-protected speech you disagree with.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Proper
Ah, yes. Use the power of the government to force a private company to allow anyone to use their private space, in any way that person wants to.
I can smell the “freedom” from here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
Are there other treatments out there? Yes. However, they are more expensive and in shorter supply than the vaccines, they’re less effective at preventing deaths than the vaccines, and they do nothing about the long-term effects of infection.
These treatments are meant for those people who, for medical reasons, cannot get vaccinated or for whom the vaccine is ineffective. They’re basically a safety net for the vaccine for when necessary, not a replacement.
Uh, first off, no amount of curative treatment will eradicate a virus entirely. That’s just not how that works, especially when dealing with a virus that is contagious long before any symptoms show up at all. Preventative treatments (like vaccines) can and have eradicated viruses entirely, like with smallpox.
Second, the infection itself can have lingering, devastating effects. Curing it will not prevent those from happening.
Third, there is no evidence that the vaccines currently on the market have lingering, devastating side effects at all (outside of a select handful of cases, which is also the case for literally every treatment and vaccine that has ever existed), and a plethora of evidence suggesting that they don’t.
Fourth, many vaccines have to be readministered periodically, and some of them are actually mandated for employment by many businesses, in schools, and for government employees. The COVID vaccines are not substantially different in this regard.
When a woman has an abortion, it doesn’t cause anyone outside of the woman herself and/or what’s in her body to suffer any health effects at all, and it’s entirely the woman’s choice. And if she refuses to do so, that only affects (for good or for ill) herself, her significant other (if any), the father (maybe), and the child(ren). Either way, the effects of getting or not getting an abortion only affect a tiny number of people, and generally, they have some say in the decision, anyways.
When someone refuses to get vaccinated against a highly contagious and/or dangerous disease like COVID, that affects a lot more than just the person who refuses to get vaccinated; it affects everyone who ever comes in contact with that person, and people who come into contact with them, and so on.
Basically, one is a decision that could only directly affect a select few, while the other could directly affect an entire community.
Also, if the unvaccinated would at least wear a mask and social distance when outside, get tested periodically, and stay quarantined if they test positive or find out that they were recently in contact with someone who tested positive, then there would be less of a problem with some people refusing to get vaccinated. That is another method of preventing the virus from spreading.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it will happen
You can always tell when someone is knee deep in propaganda when they bring up VAERS as if it's a smoking gun or reliable resource.
What's sad is that its existence is evidence against the conspiracy theories, or at leat should be in the hands of the logical and sane. It's there because no medicine is 100% safe, and to take care of the extremely rare cases where they cause problems, but those problems are far outweighed by the diseases vaccinations take care of.
"The cure is still the goal though"
Indeed. But, in the time we're waiting for that, vaccinations are far better than the alternative of letting it spread untreated. There's no direct cure for polio or smallpox as far as I'm aware, but you didn't have to worry about those in your lifetime because you got vaccinated, or the people around you had been.
[ link to this | view in thread ]