Skip to main content

@napacat posted:

Serious question…no taking sides attacking  others…just a general question with genuine replies.  Is no one concerned about the potential side effects from the vaccine(s)? They are not fully without complications.  Verse if you have already had COVID and have no co-morbidities.

Side effects are next to nothing according to reputable medical sources. Especially compared to the actual effects of Covid. Several here have had it including two who now have long Covid. Billions have been vaccinated and the seriously negative side effects as so rare as to be essentially meaningless.

The known side effects of the vaccine are trivial compared to the virus itself.  Every medical procedure, more or less, has side effects.  It's reasonable to be concerned about them.  What is not reasonable is to be so concerned about small and trivial side effects that it prevents you from getting the vaccine, so as to protect yourself against the significant and potentially deadly consequence of getting the virus.

@irwin posted:

The known side effects of the vaccine are trivial compared to the virus itself.  Every medical procedure, more or less, has side effects.  It's reasonable to be concerned about them.  What is not reasonable is to be so concerned about small and trivial side effects that it prevents you from getting the vaccine, so as to protect yourself against the significant and potentially deadly consequence of getting the virus.

Exactly. I know some people (particularly women) who refuse to get vaccinated because the vaccines could cause blood clots.  This is only a possibility, as far as I know, with the J&J.  And even so, I tell these women (and others) that they are 10,000 more likely to get a blood clot from taking "the pill" than they are from any Covid vaccine.  There is one side effect of the Moderna vaccine (and perhaps of Pfizer and others, too) is tinnitus.  For some, it's temporary.  For some others, like me, who already experience tinnitus, it can exacerbate it.  But, the side effects are so bloody minimal, in terms of percentage of those vaccinated and compared to vaccines for other diseases, that I don't understand the hesitancy.

The mRNA vaccines have virtually no side effects. No reason not to get those IMO.

The J&J/AZ had some serious ones, that frankly were undersold. Especially for young healthy folks that had few risks of catching COVID. Friend’s neighbour died from clots after getting AZ. Bet his family wishes he waited for one of the others.  

@csm posted:

The J&J/AZ had some serious ones, that frankly were undersold. Especially for young healthy folks that had few risks of catching COVID. Friend’s neighbour died from clots after getting AZ. Bet his family wishes he waited for one of the others.  

Certainly any death is tragic, but from the Australian Department of Health, "There is a very low chance of this side effect, which may occur in around 4-6 people in every million [or .004% to .006%] after being vaccinated." 9/24/21

Unless I'm wrong this is significantly less than the death rate from unvaccinated people who get Covid. Humans are very bad at judging risk.

Last edited by The Old Man

when they get to the hospital, they're taking some foreign persons blood/antibodies directly injected into their system.

Remdesivir, leads to potential liver failure, jaundice, weakened kidney function potential failure.



And since we're a wine forum and i assume everyone here drinks wine, ethanol isnt exactly a chemical without its sometimes deadly side effects.

I mean if folks were really worried, they should look at what goes on in our food supply chain.  Tailpipe tuna, pink meat, bleached protein...

I wonder if the people who refuse a vaccination because they don't want to take the chance that they'll be one of the 5 in a million who die due to the vaccination (using the Australian data above) also buy tickets in the mega millions or other similar lotteries, where the chances are 1 in 300 million that you purchase a winning ticket.

The difference between good luck and bad luck is that good luck is good and bad luck is bad.

@irwin posted:

I wonder if the people who refuse a vaccination because they don't want to take the chance that they'll be one of the 5 in a million who die due to the vaccination (using the Australian data above) also buy tickets in the mega millions or other similar lotteries, where the chances are 1 in 300 million that you purchase a winning ticket.

The difference between good luck and bad luck is that good luck is good and bad luck is bad.

Well i think the corollary would be  "Would you buy a ticket if you had a 5 in 1 million chance of dying?"

@The Old Man posted:

Certainly any death is tragic, but from the Australian Department of Health, "There is a very low chance of this side effect, which may occur in around 4-6 people in every million [or .004% to .006%] after being vaccinated." 9/24/21

Unless I'm wrong this is significantly less than the death rate from unvaccinated people who get Covid. Humans are very bad at judging risk.

True but it depends on the individual I think.  This guy was 43 years old, fit (i.e not overweight - a significant percentage of people dying from/experiencing more negative outcomes from Covid were overweight) and didn't have any other comorbidities.

He had a 100% chance of dying from the AZ shot he received (albeit with no way of knowing), and 99.7% chance of surviving if he got covid during the month or so he would have had to have waited for a Pfizer or Moderna shot.  Doing the right thing for society was a really bad result for this poor guy. 

For the record, not saying he shouldn't have been vaccinated, he absolutely should have.  He just should have waited.  I got the AZ shot myself as I have sleep apnea and had a pregnant, unvaccinated wife at the time.  I weighed the risks and thought it was the right decision.  I did not, however, feel comfortable sitting in the chair at the pharmacy as it was being administered.  It wasn't an easy decision for me.

@csm posted:

True but it depends on the individual I think.  This guy was 43 years old, fit (i.e not overweight - a significant percentage of people dying from/experiencing more negative outcomes from Covid were overweight) and didn't have any other comorbidities.

He had a 100% chance of dying from the AZ shot he received (albeit with no way of knowing), and 99.7% chance of surviving if he got covid during the month or so he would have had to have waited for a Pfizer or Moderna shot.  Doing the right thing for society was a really bad result for this poor guy.

For the record, not saying he shouldn't have been vaccinated, he absolutely should have.  He just should have waited.  I got the AZ shot myself as I have sleep apnea and had a pregnant, unvaccinated wife at the time.  I weighed the risks and thought it was the right decision.  I did not, however, feel comfortable sitting in the chair at the pharmacy as it was being administered.  It wasn't an easy decision for me.

that's really terrible usage of math btw and would acutally be a logical fallacy from a math proof

just like how one didnt know they'd be affected by this particular vaccine, one won't know that they won't be affected by covid.

you can't extrapolate individual results from statistical group study on un related data sets.

otherwise i would argue that it's not covid that's killing people it's healthcare facilities since 92% of all deaths are in them.  Or better yet to increase your odds, just don't tell anyone where you will die since only .00164% of all folks have passed away from covid in "Place of death unknown"

@g-man posted:

that's really terrible usage of math btw and would acutally be a logical fallacy from a math proof

just like how one didnt know they'd be affected by this particular vaccine, one won't know that they won't be affected by covid.

you can't extrapolate individual results from statistical group study on un related data sets.

otherwise i would argue that it's not covid that's killing people it's healthcare facilities since 92% of all deaths are in them.  Or better yet to increase your odds, just don't tell anyone where you will die since only .00164% of all folks have passed away from covid in "Place of death unknown"

Whatever you say.

You have no way of knowing this of course, but we were being told constantly in Canada that the "right thing to do" was to take the first vaccine offered.  Statistically speaking, I think that was right, but the point was that there were real side effects from the AZ vaccine that, while remote, were undersold and aren't just statistics.  Real people died from getting the vaccine that would more than likely have survived getting Covid.  And that was napacat's original question I think.  Aren't people scared of the side effects and potential side effects?  At least some individuals should have been when talking about the AZ vaccine at least.

If the AZ vaccine was the only option, I would agree that the best choice was to take it given the risks associated with Covid.  With Pfizer and Moderna, which had no such similar side effects coming down the pike, it was at least arguably the better choice was to wait for one of those for a couple of months and risk getting Covid. It certainly would have been in the case of this one individual.

Last edited by csm
@csm posted:

True but it depends on the individual I think.  This guy was 43 years old, fit (i.e not overweight - a significant percentage of people dying from/experiencing more negative outcomes from Covid were overweight) and didn't have any other comorbidities.

He had a 100% chance of dying from the AZ shot he received (albeit with no way of knowing), and 99.7% chance of surviving if he got covid during the month or so he would have had to have waited for a Pfizer or Moderna shot.  Doing the right thing for society was a really bad result for this poor guy.

For the record, not saying he shouldn't have been vaccinated, he absolutely should have.  He just should have waited.  I got the AZ shot myself as I have sleep apnea and had a pregnant, unvaccinated wife at the time.  I weighed the risks and thought it was the right decision.  I did not, however, feel comfortable sitting in the chair at the pharmacy as it was being administered.  It wasn't an easy decision for me.

He didn't have a 100% chance of dying.  He had like a .004% chance of dying.  The fact that he died doesn't mean his chances were 100%, it just means he was incredibly unfortunate.

In addition, while his chance of survival was 99.7 (I am not sure I agree with that, but I'll take your number at face value), he also faced risks of significant illness and/or long Covid as well.  It isn't just the death rate that should be looked at, it's also the chances of hospitalization, long Covid, etc.  Those rates are probably pretty low as well for someone his age, but they should also be considered in addition to just the death rate.

@csm posted:

Whatever you say.

You have no way of knowing this of course, but we were being told constantly in Canada that the "right thing to do" was to take the first vaccine offered.  Statistically speaking, I think that was right, but the point was that there were real side effects from the AZ vaccine that, while remote, were undersold and aren't just statistics.  Real people died from getting the vaccine that would more than likely have survived getting Covid.  And that was napacat's original question I think.  Aren't people scared of the side effects and potential side effects?  At least some individuals should have been when talking about the AZ vaccine at least.

If the AZ vaccine was the only option, I would agree that the best choice was to take it given the risks associated with Covid.  With Pfizer and Moderna, which had no such similar side effects coming down the pike, it was at least arguably the better choice was to wait for one of those for a couple of months and risk getting Covid. It certainly would have been in the case of this one individual.

i mean, just don't make up numbers?  you can certainly support your ideals in other ways.

the death rate of covid in canada 73 per 100,000 people.

The death rate of the AZ vaccine is 1 in 1 million people.

As with side effects, aren't people scared of the side effects of covid?  You have a higher incident rate of diabetes since new studies show it attacks the pancreas.  What about the long term cancer rates from all the damage covid does to the body cells?   Taste buds?  alot of folks still can't smell or taste.  Breathing capacity?  Alot of those affected have lowered their lung capacity by 30% due to the horrible scarring in their lungs.  A few newer studies have suggested possible neurological issues too.

Why is it valid to question the possible side effects of a vaccine but completely ignore the real observable side effects of Covid-19?

If one were to properly weigh the pros and cons of each, then I'd say it'd be a much more honest argument vs what someone like napa is copy pasting.

Last edited by g-man
@Rothko posted:

He didn't have a 100% chance of dying.  He had like a .004% chance of dying.  The fact that he died doesn't mean his chances were 100%, it just means he was incredibly unfortunate.

In addition, while his chance of survival was 99.7 (I am not sure I agree with that, but I'll take your number at face value), he also faced risks of significant illness and/or long Covid as well.  It isn't just the death rate that should be looked at, it's also the chances of hospitalization, long Covid, etc.  Those rates are probably pretty low as well for someone his age, but they should also be considered in addition to just the death rate.

I didn't mean 100% in the statistical sense, as in it was a statistical certainty but I'll say it another way, had he not taken the AZ vaccine he would not have died when he did.  Whatever percentage you want to put on that I'm fine with.  It's tragic irregardless of that number.

But I think we're all getting away from the question that was asked, which is whether people are scared of any side effects associated with the vaccines.  Most are saying or implying that there are no logical reasons to be scared or worried about any side effects.  With the mRNA vaccines I agree.  With the AZ/J&J, I don't.  I think there were real side effects to consider.  So much so that many countries simply stopped offering it once the supplies of the mRNA vaccines became more plentiful. Had I known I was going to be able to get one of the mRNA vaccines a month or so after I got the AZ one, I would have waited and gotten what I viewed as the safer option.  No question.  The reason would have been the side effects associated with the AZ vaccine.   I'm saying I was one of the people scared about the side effects.  I got it anyway, but I wasn't comfortable when I did.

And to be clear, I'm not trying to say that the vaccines are evil or people shouldn't get them.  It's frankly remarkable that something so effective came out so quickly.  It's simply that the viral vector vaccines (pardon the alliteration) are less safe than the others.

@g-man posted:

i mean, just don't make up numbers?  you can certainly support your ideals in other ways.

the death rate of covid in canada 73 per 100,000 people.

The death rate of the AZ vaccine is 1 in 1 million people.

As with side effects, aren't people scared of the side effects of covid?  You have a higher incident rate of diabetes since new studies show it attacks the pancreas.  What about the long term cancer rates from all the damage covid does to the body cells?   Taste buds?  alot of folks still can't smell or taste.  Breathing capacity?  Alot of those affected have lowered their lung capacity by 30% due to the horrible scarring in their lungs.  A few newer studies have suggested possible neurological issues too.

Why is it valid to question the possible side effects of a vaccine but completely ignore the real observable side effects of Covid-19?

If one were to properly weigh the pros and cons of each, then I'd say it'd be a much more honest argument vs what someone like napa is copy pasting.

What numbers did I make up?  I meant that this one individual had a 100% chance of dying, because he did as a result of taking the shot but also that it only was a possibility to know that after the fact.  It's a post on a wine forum, not part of my doctoral thesis.   I was simply saying that this one poor dude took the AZ shot and died as a result.  That is not in dispute, and it was a side effect of the vaccine plain and simple.

I'm not discounting the effects of covid nor am suggesting one should ignore them.  I know a couple of people that had horrible experiences with the virus.  I also think that in Canada we were sold something of an inaccurate bill of goods.  Do the right thing and take the first vaccine you're offered was the message.  Until we got a bunch of mRNA vaccines then it was don't take the AZ vaccine because of the potential for the clotting side effect.  The government stopped offering it once the others became available in adequate supply because it was unsafe, or at least less safe than the others such that it wasn't worth the risk.  Even for those of us that got the first dose of AZ.  We all were told it was safe, then told don't get the second shot, get an mRNA vaccine because it's safer.

I personally would have accepted the risk of getting covid for an extra 4-6 weeks to wait for one of the mRNA vaccines had I known it was going to be a possibility. The reason would have been the side effects associated  with the AZ vaccine.

The mRNA vaccines are safer than the Viral Vector ones and.  That was the point I was trying to make, albeit poorly it seems.

Last edited by csm

Down here it was also “get the first shot available” - in my case, that was JJ. The AZ was never an option here. With 6-1/2 months of hindsight I may have waited a few weeks for one of the others. My wife and I jumped on the opportunity, wanting to get on with life. Here we are, and I’m not typing this from the grave.

Last edited by billhike
@csm posted:

What numbers did I make up?  I meant that this one individual had a 100% chance of dying, because he did as a result of taking the shot but also that it only was a possibility to know that after the fact.  It's a post on a wine forum, not part of my doctoral thesis.   I was simply saying that this one poor dude took the AZ shot and died as a result.  That is not in dispute, and it was a side effect of the vaccine plain and simple.

I'm not discounting the effects of covid nor am suggesting one should ignore them.  I know a couple of people that had horrible experiences with the virus.  I also think that in Canada we were sold something of an inaccurate bill of goods.  Do the right thing and take the first vaccine you're offered was the message.  Until we got a bunch of mRNA vaccines then it was don't take the AZ vaccine because of the potential for the clotting side effect.  The government stopped offering it once the others became available in adequate supply because it was unsafe, or at least less safe than the others such that it wasn't worth the risk.  Even for those of us that got the first dose of AZ.  We all were told it was safe, then told don't get the second shot, get an mRNA vaccine because it's safer.

I personally would have accepted the risk of getting covid for an extra 4-6 weeks to wait for one of the mRNA vaccines had I known it was going to be a possibility. The reason would have been the side effects associated  with the AZ vaccine.

The mRNA vaccines are safer than the Viral Vector ones and.  That was the point I was trying to make, albeit poorly it seems.

Did the individual get Covid?  How would you know that he wouldn't have a 100% chance of dying of covid due to the way the spike proteins interact with his immune system?  Especially considering one of the major killers of Covid was massive blood clots, similar to the cause of death in the AZ Vaccine.

But yes, not all vaccines are created equally, as seen by the absolutely terrible Johnson and Johnson fiasco with that virginia facility that was just out to make money. 

It is a legitimate conversation about oversight of production when the government is mandating vaccination across the entire population.  There will always be greedy individuals who literally ruin it for the rest of us.

While mRNA technology appears to only have started around 30 yrs ago or so, you could also look at the polio vaccine which was rather rushed but still very successful.  It too had it's manufacturing hiccup with almost 40k kids being given live viruses instead of attenuated strains.

@Rothko posted:

He didn't have a 100% chance of dying.  He had like a .004% chance of dying.  The fact that he died doesn't mean his chances were 100%, it just means he was incredibly unfortunate.

In addition, while his chance of survival was 99.7 (I am not sure I agree with that, but I'll take your number at face value), he also faced risks of significant illness and/or long Covid as well.  It isn't just the death rate that should be looked at, it's also the chances of hospitalization, long Covid, etc.  Those rates are probably pretty low as well for someone his age, but they should also be considered in addition to just the death rate.

This post (not yours but the post you are addressing) which relects a common misunderstanding of statistics and probability reminds me of those who claim that the 3rd base player in a game of blackjack because he "took" the dealer's bust. Without card counting, its just as likely they took the card that would have helped the dealer.

Last edited by The Old Man

I had a booster in early August. Read the Israeli study, was planning on travel, and 8 months out from last PFE shots. So walked into CVS, said I wanted a vaccine, and got one.  There is no registry or communication between states. There still is excess vaccine that needs to be used.  I can’t trust US organizations to make timely reasonable medical decisions for me.

Last edited by drtannin 2
@napacat posted:

Serious question…no taking sides attacking  others…just a general question with genuine replies.  Is no one concerned about the potential side effects from the vaccine(s)? They are not fully without complications.  Verse if you have already had COVID and have no co-morbidities.

I'm not sure anyone has addressed your direct question, so I'll take a stab at it.  It's an interesting issue: Covid vaccine vs. natural immunity from prior infection.

From what I've been able to gather from reading, while people who were previously infected (and survive) do carry antibodies from their bout with Covid, those antibodies do wane over time.  Taking a Covid vaccine after a prior infection results in increased antibodies and thus increased protection. 

Now, I suppose it wouldn't be quite as important if the strain of Covid was the same as the prior infection, but with the Delta variant out there, people who were infected with the original or a prior variant face an increased chance that the Delta variant will overcome their natural immunity. 

So, it again boils down to a risk/reward analysis.  Taking a Covid vaccine (especially the Mrna versions) has a very minor chance of complications vs. not taking the vaccine and hoping your natural immunity is enough to stave off Covid again.

From my perspective, the main goal is to avoid full Covid infection(s), with their attendant complications and risks.  If the Covid vaccine provides significant additional protection over natural immunity, it seems worth the very minor risks inherent with the vaccine.

@Rothko posted:


From my perspective, the main goal is to avoid full Covid infection(s), with their attendant complications and risks.  If the Covid vaccine provides significant additional protection over natural immunity, it seems worth the very minor risks inherent with the vaccine.

or, even more cynically, not clog up the health care system at the costs of tens of thousands when they could have gotten a safer 10 $ jab.

I am still personally annoyed that I have been hit w ith over 3k/month insurance payments and have not been able to find a primary care doctor because no one takes new patients since they're all swamped.

and people like napa like to copy paste things about fiscal responsibility.  what a joke.

@drtannin 2 posted:

I had a booster in early August. Read the Israeli study, was planning on travel, and 8 months out from last PFE shots. So walked into CVS, said I wanted a vaccine, and got one.  There is no registry or communication between states. There still is excess vaccine that needs to be used.  I can’t trust US organizations to make timely reasonable medical decisions for me.

Dr. T:  What are your thoughts about Moderna boosters.  It seems logical to me to wait until the boosters are approved, but, on the other hand, that seems inevitable.  I got my 2nd of the two shots in mid-March.  No real significant co-morbidities except for having a hyperactive fork and being 68 yrs. old.

@drtannin 2 posted:

I had a booster in early August. Read the Israeli study, was planning on travel, and 8 months out from last PFE shots. So walked into CVS, said I wanted a vaccine, and got one.  There is no registry or communication between states. There still is excess vaccine that needs to be used.  I can’t trust US organizations to make timely reasonable medical decisions for me.

What did they do to verify your identity (if anything)?  Were there residency requirements or anything?

Heading to Texas in a couple of weeks and wanted to get a second Moderna shot.  Have heard that full vaccination is going to be a requirement for foreigners traveling to the US as of November and wanted to make sure that I have 2 recognized shots,  so there is perhaps less of a question that I'm fully vaccinated when I try to go to Florida for Thanksgiving.

From the NY Times, "The World Health Organization on Wednesday endorsed the first ever vaccine to prevent malaria, debuting a tool that could save the lives of tens of thousands of children in Africa each year.

Malaria is among the oldest known and deadliest of infectious diseases. It kills about half a million people each year, nearly all of them in sub-Saharan Africa — among them 260,000 children under age 5."

First, it's fake news. How many of those people died of something else and the government coded it as death by malaria? Second, I hear there are microchips in the vaccine that will allow the government to track everything you do. Is that what you'd like? Third, like a miracle, it will just disappear one day. Fourth, there are already excellent cures for malaria like injecting household cleaning products into your veins and also using animal deworming products. And finally, there's always hydroxychloroquine as a last resort.

The lamestream media publishes these so-called horrors about malaria to peddle their papers; it's a disgrace. Just say no to vaccines!

@The Old Man posted:

From the NY Times, "The World Health Organization on Wednesday endorsed the first ever vaccine to prevent malaria, debuting a tool that could save the lives of tens of thousands of children in Africa each year.

Malaria is among the oldest known and deadliest of infectious diseases. It kills about half a million people each year, nearly all of them in sub-Saharan Africa — among them 260,000 children under age 5."

First, it's fake news. How many of those people died of something else and the government coded it as death by malaria? Second, I hear there are microchips in the vaccine that will allow the government to track everything you do. Is that what you'd like? Third, like a miracle, it will just disappear one day. Fourth, there are already excellent cures for malaria like injecting household cleaning products into your veins and also using animal deworming products. And finally, there's always hydroxychloroquine as a last resort.

The lamestream media publishes these so-called horrors about malaria to peddle their papers; it's a disgrace. Just say no to vaccines!

i think you miss a majority of these folk's thinly veiled attempt at rationalization that it could be boiled down to one particular thing.  that diseases like these affect a certain population harder than others.

@csm posted:

What did they do to verify your identity (if anything)?  Were there residency requirements or anything?

Heading to Texas in a couple of weeks and wanted to get a second Moderna shot.  Have heard that full vaccination is going to be a requirement for foreigners traveling to the US as of November and wanted to make sure that I have 2 recognized shots,  so there is perhaps less of a question that I'm fully vaccinated when I try to go to Florida for Thanksgiving.

There is no state registry in VA; I believe some states like California have one, but most do not.  There is no national registry. The vaccination card remains the ID, though I believe I handed the lady my driver's license. A physician friend of mine in Boca Raton suggested I do this, as many of the health care workers had done this themselves and their families in July and earlier August when Florida cases jumped. Some people are saying they are immunocompromised, and most not offering or needing proof. There is excess vaccine everywhere. Most places offer only 1 vaccine type, but it doesn't matter if you mix or match.  You won't be refused the vaccine!

Last edited by drtannin 2
@Rothko posted:

Has anyone used any of the at-home Covid tests?  With the Biden Administration investing $1 billion to get more of these tests into homes, I am wondering whether to get a few to have, just in case.  I could see where it might be handy to have one around.  A bit concerned about their accuracy, though.

We have had excellent success with them - we used them before going to Peru and for our return trip. 

@Rothko posted:

Do you mean that you were able to use them for official entry to Peru and/or the U.S.?   I know the U.S. will let you use an antigen test for entry; does that include an at-home test?

Yes, United provides a link to an over-the-counter test kit (developed by Abbott Labs) that they accept for entry back into the US.  I bought two, but never used them.  It was easier for me just to go to a nearby pharmacy in Marseille to get a PCR test.

@Rothko posted:

Do you mean that you were able to use them for official entry to Peru and/or the U.S.?   I know the U.S. will let you use an antigen test for entry; does that include an at-home test?

the at home tests are the same as the pcr tests you get at CVS.

basically a break off swab, twist in your nose, ship it off to a lab and you get results back in 1-3 days

@napacat posted:

I just cannot fathom making a person take a vaccine when they have already had COVID.  That just goes against all prior scientific certainty.

No, it doesn't.  The vaccine increases the immunity in those with prior infections.  Two much-beloved long time posters here not only had Covid but continue to suffer from long Covid.  One is a doctor who got it early and almost died.  Twice.  Both got the vaccine, twice, and one has received a third booster shot.  The more immunity, the better!

@bman posted:

No, it doesn't.  The vaccine increases the immunity in those with prior infections.  Two much-beloved long time posters here not only had Covid but continue to suffer from long Covid.  One is a doctor who got it early and almost died.  Twice.  Both got the vaccine, twice, and one has received a third booster shot.  The more immunity, the better!

yep, mr copy paster.  0 original thought.  rather disingenuous questioning on his part too.  he's just fishing for someone to tell him what he heard on news max.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×