Mr. Tiny Penis, you continue to be an idiot.
Lying Weasel Fauci's Infatuation with Fame, While People were Dying
- Thread starter WCM
- Start date
Didn't Shamala say she wouldn't take a "Trump vaccine"?
Yes. Kamala Harris made clear statements in 2020 that she would not take a COVID vaccine based on Donald Trump’s word alone, while saying she would take one if public health experts like Dr. Anthony Fauci endorsed it.
Key quotes
- CNN interview (early September 2020): Asked whether she would take a vaccine approved and distributed before the election, Harris said: “I will say that I would not trust Donald Trump. And it would have to be a credible source of information that talks about the efficacy and the reliability of whatever he’s talking about. I will not take his word for it. He wants us to inject bleach. … No, I will not take his word.” She added that she trusted Fauci.
- Vice presidential debate (October 7, 2020):“If the public health professionals, if Dr. Fauci, if the doctors tell us that we should take it, I’ll be the first in line to take it. Absolutely. But if Donald Trump tells us that we should take it, I’m not taking it.”
She framed her skepticism around concerns that Trump might politicize or rush approval for electoral reasons, not around the science of the vaccines themselves (which were developed under Operation Warp Speed). Fact-checkers such as Snopes and PolitiFact have noted that she did not refuse vaccination in general or discourage people from taking the shots once experts backed them; the vaccines rolled out under the Biden-Harris administration after Trump left office, and she was vaccinated.
The shorthand “wouldn’t take a Trump vaccine” accurately captures the distinction she drew between Trump’s endorsement and expert recommendation.
Kamala Harris on Trump Vaccine Skepticism | Shared Grok Conversation
Didn't Shamala say she wouldn't take a "Trump vaccine"?
grok.com
Yakuda
Verified User
98% of the people who got covid survived it. They gained the immunity
Remember, Nancy Pelosi was HEAVILY invested in Pfizer at the moment she was leading the charge to spend $700 BILLION to buy up all doses to distribute nationwide.
Insider trading, it's a democrat tradition.
So you are saying that the best answer to Covid would have been no action inorder to allow a novel virus that spreads thru social contact to circulate freely?
Yakuda
Verified User
So it wouldnt matter to you if it was created in a lab and released so people could make boat loads of money pushing a so called "vaccine"?
I believe Fauci has already been threatened with such, very Christian of you to recommend such
I'm not a Christian, Anchovies. 86 Fauci.
You did not answer the question, yes or no, is your supposed vaccine the same vaccine that Trump said he was responsible for developing, that his Operation Warp Speed was aimed at creating?
Trying to move the goal posts, now that you were caught blatantly lying?
How shameful - how democrat.
Can you point to my post where I said intentionally released?
Got it, this is a straw man fallacy you are putting up to try and distract from the fact that you were exposed flat out lying.
Did Fauci's assurances regarding vaccine efficacy change over time?
Yes, Fauci’s public assurances on COVID-19 vaccine efficacy evolved over time, particularly regarding prevention of infection and transmission, as real-world data accumulated and variants emerged. Early statements emphasized high efficacy against disease and strong community benefits (including limiting spread), while later ones more explicitly noted limited durability against infection/transmission and focused primarily on reducing severe outcomes. He consistently framed shifts as responses to emerging evidence rather than contradictions.
Early period (late 2020–mid-2021)
Clinical trial data for the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech ~95%, Moderna ~94%) showed strong protection against symptomatic disease. Fauci highlighted these results as exceeding expectations (he had previously indicated 70–75% would be acceptable). He stressed protection against clinical disease as the primary goal, noting that prevention of infection itself was a secondary endpoint and not fully established early on.
As more data arrived, statements became more optimistic about transmission. In May 2021 on Face the Nation, he said vaccinated people become “a dead end to the virus” because breakthrough infections (when they occurred) typically involved low viral loads, making transmission “extremely unlikely—not impossible—but very, very low.” He linked vaccination to community-level reduction in spread. Similar comments around that time described favorable early evidence that vaccines limited transmission.
He also noted that no vaccine is 100% effective and that some breakthroughs were inevitable (comparing to flu vaccines), while emphasizing protection against severe disease.
Later shifts (mid-to-late 2021 onward)
With Delta and subsequent variants, waning immunity, and real-world breakthroughs becoming clearer, messaging adjusted. Fauci discussed the need for boosters due to declining protection against infection and (to a lesser extent) hospitalization. Protection against infection proved shorter-lived (measured in months) than initially hoped for sustained community impact.
In a January 2023 Cell Host & Microbe paper co-authored with colleagues, he and co-authors described vaccines against mucosal respiratory viruses (including SARS-CoV-2 and influenza) as generally providing “decidedly suboptimal” or incomplete/short-lived protection against infection and transmission. Their main value is reducing severe disease, hospitalization, and death; they noted challenges inherent to these viruses (rapid mucosal replication, antigenic change) that have historically limited sterilizing immunity from vaccines.
In June 2024 congressional testimony, Fauci stated that early on the vaccines “clearly prevented infection in a certain percentage of people, but the durability of its ability to prevent infection was not long. It was measured in months,” and that it “did not prevent transmission” in the sustained sense. He continued to stress that vaccines saved lives by reducing severe outcomes.
Fauci Vaccine Efficacy Evolution Over Time | Shared Grok Conversation
Did Fauci's assurances regarding vaccine efficacy change over time?
grok.com
countryboy
Verified User
It's almost hard to believe even the lefties are still sticking up for Fauci, almost.
No, today showed why that was necessary
Yeah, parroted off of Musk, enough said
No. I am saying the 50-state system gave us the best chance to learn what actually worked.
The worst approach was suppressing critics, discouraging open debate, and imposing one-size-fits-all policies across states with different populations, risks, and conditions. That replaced comparison and adaptation with enforced consensus.
ZenMode
Well-known member
I'm not moving anything.
You didn't say "intentionally released" but your nonsensical references to "designer virus" and Dr. Mengele is clearly meant to imply intent.
Also, not that I'd expect you to be informed, but the US has been funding GoF research around the world for decades. They've also had pauses at times. That was true under Fauci and his predecessor.
There are disagreements regarding the necessity of GoF research, but this isn't a grand conspiracy.