mRNA Spike protein is very dangerous, it's cytotoxic - says INVENTOR of mRNA Technology

[Geoff.D]

In other words, big pharma would have sat back and done nothing. Only when a 10 Billion $ carrot was hung out did they commit to doing anything.

Sort of proves the point about big pharma being nothing more than huge blood-sucking leeches.

 

[buka001]

In other words, big pharma would have sat back and done nothing. Only when a 10 Billion $ carrot was hung out did they commit to doing anything.

Sort of proves the point about big pharma being nothing more than huge blood-sucking leeches.

No because Pfizer went and did it on their own volition and did not participate in Operation Warpspeed.

In the real world, outside of the conspiracy fuelled minds, people recognised very early that vaccines would be the best way out of the pandemic.

Hence, this was what was pursued.

The US government recognised that due to the world wide emergency, they needed to accelerate the process and threw money at the problem, to help them get out of the pandemic quicker.

 

[Geoff.D]

No because Pfizer went and did it on their own volition and did not participate in Operation Warpspeed.

In the real world, outside of the conspiracy fuelled minds, people recognised very early that vaccines would be the best way out of the pandemic.

Hence, this was what was pursued.

The US government recognised that due to the world wide emergency, they needed to accelerate the process and threw money at the problem, to help them get out of the pandemic quicker.

Okay, so Pfizer might have done that because they somehow recognised an opportunity to complete their mRNA work. Good for them IF that was their motive. The 10 Billion $ incentive would still have been a nice bonus - they got their cut.

 

[charlieharper]

Okay, so Pfizer might have done that because they somehow recognised an opportunity to complete their mRNA work. Good for them IF that was their motive. The 10 Billion $ incentive would still have been a nice bonus - they got their cut.

well if it wasn't for incentives and opportunities, in our case, money, there wouldn't be innovation. Human nature 101.

 

[kolaval]

I had my first Pfizer shot.
Sucks that I only have 2 years to live but the erections are fantastic.

 

[quovadis]

I'm asking YOU for the real world data to support your view. Where is the data and peer reviewed studies to support the 90%+ efficacy figures? Or do you deny those were the clinical claims? You're asking me for data to support what I continually state is an unknown and changing metric. It's ridiculous.

You stated that the data is showing the vaccines are being less and less effective then provide this data ?!????????!

Only in the absence of other effective treatments. Why you can't understand that is beyond me.

In case you haven’t noticed there’s a massive vacuum in terms of treatment that is clinically proven. The absence exists.

Yet you can't actually show it. Oversight and review has ALREADY BEEN RELAXED to allow their emergency use. I'm thinking you don't actually understand what it is you're referring to.

You’re incorrect. You’re obsessed with review requiring time as a wait and see as the only criteria.

You're asking me to support that there could be adverse effects that nobody knows or even thought to think about. That's like asking for evidence that there could be a planet consisting of steel in our galaxy. Nobody knows ffs, including you with your superior knowledge that there couldn't be one.

Once again, you stated that serious adverse reactions keep rising - please provide the data you’re using to support this view of yours.

 

[Daveogg]

Only for a certain amount of time. You've introduced competition into the market that would eventually make the overall profit less.

Yes and no. Insulin is a natural substance and can't really be patented. Some countries will allow discovered natural substances to be patented. But pharmaceutical companies have made changes to the synthetic versions that are patented and older ones have fallen into disuse.

What you are effectively trying to argue is no disruptive technology would ever be developed because incumbents would loose out.
Why would a disruptive technology in healthcare be any different.
You talk of "big pharma" as if it is one organization, or if multiple players a cabal. Assuming your conspiracy is correct and their is collusion to keep new treatments from market, what prevents a startup?

 

[AfricanTech]

I will take IVM provided it is prescribed by a doctor if I contract Covid. I know of a doctor that is treating Covid patients with IVM and successfully. I won't be waiting for all this noise about its approval --- it IS already approved for emergency use in SA.

As far as I can ascertain, at worst IVM will sommer sort out any worms/ parasites - so I'm on board.

In the meantime, had my first Pfizer shot, my 5G reception improved - 2nd shot due in August - roll on August.

 

[SauRoNZA]

I will take IVM provided it is prescribed by a doctor if I contract Covid. I know of a doctor that is treating Covid patients with IVM and successfully. I won't be waiting for all this noise about its approval --- it IS already approved for emergency use in SA.

The concern I have is that the doctors prescribing it seems to also be the hard leaning anti-vaxxer variety and proper conspiracy theory types.

As my recently ex-GP is an example of at least.

 

[Geoff.D]

The concern I have is that the doctors prescribing it seems to also be the hard leaning anti-vaxxer variety and proper conspiracy theory types.

As my recently ex-GP is an example of at least.

So there are doctors that are also showing anti-vax tendencies?
To all vaccinations or just to these ones with emergency use clearance?
Not our IVM GP. He is pretty objective about all the available treatments out there.

 

[Hush9300]

So there are doctors that are also showing anti-vax tendencies?
To all vaccinations or just to these ones with emergency use clearance?
Not our IVM GP. He is pretty objective about all the available treatments out there.

Our family GP is of the view that the elderly and vulnerable should get vaccinated as a matter of urgency, if they want. The rest should get on with it.

 

[SauRoNZA]

So there are doctors that are also showing anti-vax tendencies?
To all vaccinations or just to these ones with emergency use clearance?
Not our IVM GP. He is pretty objective about all the available treatments out there.

I would say specifically this one and not as a whole.

Which I don’t have such a problem with, but it was the complete and utter false information that went along with the conversation that will have me going elsewhere in future.

Very borderline conspiracy theorist believe anything on the WhatsApp group type stuff.

 

[Swa]

In other words, big pharma would have sat back and done nothing. Only when a 10 Billion $ carrot was hung out did they commit to doing anything.

Sort of proves the point about big pharma being nothing more than huge blood-sucking leeches.

$18bn and not even a few million to test treatments like IVM

No because Pfizer went and did it on their own volition and did not participate in Operation Warpspeed.

In the real world, outside of the conspiracy fuelled minds, people recognised very early that vaccines would be the best way out of the pandemic.

Hence, this was what was pursued.

The US government recognised that due to the world wide emergency, they needed to accelerate the process and threw money at the problem, to help them get out of the pandemic quicker.

Correction, people assumed vaccines would be the best way out of it.

What you are effectively trying to argue is no disruptive technology would ever be developed because incumbents would loose out.
Why would a disruptive technology in healthcare be any different.
You talk of "big pharma" as if it is one organization, or if multiple players a cabal. Assuming your conspiracy is correct and their is collusion to keep new treatments from market, what prevents a startup?

Disruptive technology that reduce costs substantially. There have been very few such innovations and it's usually slow gradual progress while the status quo stays relatively the same or increase with inflation. I can't see why healthcare would be different.

 

[Daveogg]

Disruptive technology that reduce costs substantially. There have been very few such innovations and it's usually slow gradual progress while the status quo stays relatively the same or increase with inflation. I can't see why healthcare would be different.

You love arguing don't you, seems your modus operandi is just to take the opposite position and never try to learn anything.
Let me remind you the basis of this thought experiment was that a cure for diabetes had been found. Your assertion that disruptive technologies are rare is immaterial to the debate.
Thank you for agreeing that slow gradual improvement is the norm, again immaterial to whether a disruptive treatment would be "blocked" or "hidden" by "big pharma".
Of course disruptive technologies are at play currently in healthcare. mRna vaccines are probably one of them, thank you Covid you may end up saving more lives than you take. Of course being the expert that you are I am sure you are aware of the current disruptive tech in healthcare.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

what prevents a startup?

patents, billions of dollars spent on "lobbying" by the incumbents, regulators that have been bought making up rules that startups just can't survive by, established contracts and NDA's among incumbents and suppliers etc etc etc

nothing new, any massive industry has entrenched players who help erect barriers to entry to the point where a startup has very little chance

 

[Daveogg]

patents, billions of dollars spent on "lobbying" by the incumbents, regulators that have been bought making up rules that startups just can't survive by, established contracts and NDA's among incumbents and suppliers etc etc etc

nothing new, any massive industry has entrenched players who help erect barriers to entry to the point where a startup has very little chance

Is that a problem specific to healthcare or is that crony capitalism at work?

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Is that a problem specific to healthcare or is that crony capitalism at work?

definitely the latter

 

[Swa]

You love arguing don't you, seems your modus operandi is just to take the opposite position and never try to learn anything.
Let me remind you the basis of this thought experiment was that a cure for diabetes had been found. Your assertion that disruptive technologies are rare is immaterial to the debate.
Thank you for agreeing that slow gradual improvement is the norm, again immaterial to whether a disruptive treatment would be "blocked" or "hidden" by "big pharma".
Of course disruptive technologies are at play currently in healthcare. mRna vaccines are probably one of them, thank you Covid you may end up saving more lives than you take. Of course being the expert that you are I am sure you are aware of the current disruptive tech in healthcare.

Well show us where all these disruptive technologies are in the context you're claiming. There's been very few of them and precisely for the reasons I mentioned. There's just no incentive by those that are capable to research anything that would undercut costs.

I already played your game and answered. IF someone were to invent something like that someone else would likely buy it out just to shelve it. Such takeovers regularly happen outside of medicine.

 

[Daveogg]

Well show us where all these disruptive technologies are in the context you're claiming. There's been very few of them and precisely for the reasons I mentioned. There's just no incentive by those that are capable to research anything that would undercut costs.

I already played your game and answered. IF someone were to invent something like that someone else would likely buy it out just to shelve it. Such takeovers regularly happen outside of medicine.

Have you heard of a drug called keytruda?
Answer before you Google it.

 

[JangoFett]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1416188314701475844