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

[Swa]

Please provide a link between ALS and the vaccine, with data.

Otherwise you are just making up useless comparisons.

You prove my point. Well done son.

Mybb is giving a platform for spreading fake news, if the mods won't do their jobs then we have no choice.

We love a good DISCUSSION, not clickbait BS claims to further cloud judgment of people who only read Facebook news feeds, like our 16 year old friend Soldierboytjie...

It's a platform to discuss. You and yours are the only ones labelling it fake news. Done with you.

Perhaps reread the thread and you’ll figure it out. As for Malone there was parallel research which achieved the same which is why he is so obsessed with correcting submission dates.

 

[Swa]

UK records 51,000 new COVID cases — highest daily tally since January

The spike comes with England set to fully lift restrictions on Monday.

www.euronews.com

Yay! The vaccines are clearly working.

 

[zolly]

No obvious reactions are visible or detectable. No evidence to support the conclusion that there are no adverse reactions.

Your argument is as follows:

- No evidence to show there is an obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

I entirely agree.

Wrong response and a fallacious analogy. See my answer to Buka

It's not a fallacious analogy.

- No evidence to show there is an (incoming meteor strike) obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO (incoming meteor strikes) adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

You can literally swap out the subject and it works for anything.

EG: Choking.

- No evidence to show there is an (increased risk of me dying by choking on something) obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO (increased risk of me dying by choking on something) adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

EG: Dying on the roads

- No evidence to show there is an (increased risk of me dying on the roads) obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO (increased risk of me dying on the roads) adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

Etc. etc. etc.

 

[zolly]

UK records 51,000 new COVID cases — highest daily tally since January

The spike comes with England set to fully lift restrictions on Monday.

www.euronews.com

Yay! The vaccines are clearly working.

I'm not sure if you're playing dumb on purpose or you're actually this dense. Here's a picture to explain everything for you.

 

[sand_man]

Your diagram is still too complicated. Here’s a lower grade version...

 

[Swa]

Your argument is as follows:

- No evidence to show there is an obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

I entirely agree.



It's not a fallacious analogy.

- No evidence to show there is an (incoming meteor strike) obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO (incoming meteor strikes) adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

You can literally swap out the subject and it works for anything.

EG: Choking.

- No evidence to show there is an (increased risk of me dying by choking on something) obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO (increased risk of me dying by choking on something) adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

EG: Dying on the roads

- No evidence to show there is an (increased risk of me dying on the roads) obvious reaction (so at this point, as stated we have no evidence).
- However, there is no evidence to support that there are NO (increased risk of me dying on the roads) adverse obvious reactions either.
- Hence something could still happen.

Etc. etc. etc.

Keep digging. Do you know how many drugs show adverse effects only after approval? Does Vioxx ring a bell? Are you even remotely aware how many drugs get shelved due to adverse reactions? None of the pharmaceutical companies want to sell to the private sector for a reason. They will never get insurance cover because the risks are completely unquantifiable. Do you know what that means? They don't even know what the risks are.

I'm not sure if you're playing dumb on purpose or you're actually this dense. Here's a picture to explain everything for you.

View attachment 1110726

Appears there's more than one here. If you're not sure and want to know why that graph doesn't say what you think it does just ask.

PS: It's glaringly obvious if you know statistics.
PPS: Would also be interesting to know where you get those graphs.

 

[DA-LION-619]

None of the pharmaceutical companies want to sell to the private sector for a reason. They will never get insurance cover because the risks are completely unquantifiable. Do you know what that means? They don't even know what the risks are.

No, it’s politics about distribution etc.
What’s next comparing it to Insulin?

 

[zolly]

PPS: Would also be interesting to know where you get those graphs.

It's glaringly obvious if you've heard about this thing called Google.

Appears there's more than one here. If you're not sure and want to know why that graph doesn't say what you think it does just ask.

PS: It's glaringly obvious if you know statistics.

Those graphs illustrate one simple point (one that you don't need a statistics course to know about): in the previous waves when no vaccine program was in place, lots more people were dying. Now that people are vaccinated, guess what? Less people are dying.

But I mean, of course the vaccines have nothing to do with that right? Because they don't work right? I bet all the people who were vulnerable to COVID died in the first two waves, and now COVID is just got the dregs at the bottom of the mug, which is why less people are dying /s

 

[Swa]

No, it’s politics about distribution etc.
What’s next comparing it to Insulin?

Wake up and smell the coffee. They can't distribute is because it's experimental medicine. They can't take on the risk.

 

[DA-LION-619]

Wake up and smell the coffee. They can't distribute is because it's experimental medicine. They can't take on the risk.

I rather read a valid source if you have one.

Big pharma out to get you with their profit driven morals but they won’t take a risk…

 

[Swa]

It's glaringly obvious if you've heard about this thing called Google.

Can't find it.

Those graphs illustrate one simple point (one that you don't need a statistics course to know about): in the previous waves when no vaccine program was in place, lots more people were dying. Now that people are vaccinated, guess what? Less people are dying.

But I mean, of course the vaccines have nothing to do with that right? Because they don't work right? I bet all the people who were vulnerable to COVID died in the first two waves, and now COVID is just got the dregs at the bottom of the mug, which is why less people are dying /s

Besides for the fact it has nothing to do with what I posted there's more than one thing contained in those graphs.
1. Q1-Q2 2020 was still the early stages. Nobody contracted it yet. What's strange is the low number of confirmed cases but ignoring that for now.
2. December was the Northern hemisphere's first winter with Covid so you'd expect a bunch of new cases and more deaths.
3. Q2 2021 was as I explained the Northern hemisphere's first summer living with Covid. By this time it was already expected a high number of people would have contracted it which could explain the lower number of deaths relative to cases.
4. Now this is the bizarre one. The number of cases haven't dropped substantially and in fact the difference is negligible. Yet the deaths are 95% less relatively. BUT only about half of people are fully vaccinated. Even if we count those that got one shot it isn't much more than two thirds. Let's make it even better for you and exclude all children and adolescents. Even with a perfect vaccine after one dose you still have about one tenth of the population susceptible. But you don't have 10% of people getting it dying and less than 5%.

Something about your stats don't add up. Either it's only vaccinated people getting it or other factors are at play. This so happens to be the warmest summer in decades. Contributing factor? More Vitamin D? Possibly there's also some natural immunity at play. Maybe the new Delta variant is more transmissible but less deadly.

You cannot make comparisons with changing conditions and attribute it to the vaccine. There's just too many variables to exclude to say what has had an effect and what hasn't.

 

[Grant]

But yeah it's all just rumours my good little Brown Shirts, heil Fauci and the WHO!

The S1 protein of SARS-CoV-2 crosses the blood–brain barrier in mice​

Abstract​

Pfizer/BioNTech animal trials show dangerous concentrations of nano-particles in organs​

Yea, no.

This study refers to intravenous injection - problem is covid vaccination is not administered via intravenous route, but intramuscular - for good reason.

Within the muscle used as the injection site, the process begins - which includes spike proteins being blocked.

 

[Swa]

Yea, no.

This study refers to intravenous injection - problem is covid vaccination is not administered via intravenous route, but intramuscular - for good reason.

Within the muscle used as the injection site, the process begins - which includes spike proteins being blocked.

You can't guarantee that. Secondly muscle has very high blood flow which is why it's not preferred for a lot of injections. Fat would be a better option.

 

[Grant]

You can't guarantee that. Secondly muscle has very high blood flow which is why it's not preferred for a lot of injections. Fat would be a better option.

Wow - you have it all upside down.
1) I absolutely gaurantee covid vaccinations are administered intramuscularly, not intravenously.

2) as a result of the high blood supply in muscle, the content of the injection is efficiently dispersed.

3) fat does not contain the blood vessels to deliver t-cells, b-cells etc - which trigger the production of antibodies.
Fat is not an option.

 

[Dave]

You can't guarantee that. Secondly muscle has very high blood flow which is why it's not preferred for a lot of injections. Fat would be a better option.

Well done, you’ve taken your pigeon playing to a new level, trying to tell a medical professional how the procedure works.

Next step for Swa, DIY brain surgery…

 

[Swa]

Wow - you have it all upside down.
1) I absolutely gaurantee covid vaccinations are administered intramuscularly, not intravenously.

Accidents happen.

2) as a result of the high blood supply in muscle, the content of the injection is efficiently dispersed.

Dispersed to where? What prevents it from leaving the site?

3) fat does not contain the blood vessels to deliver t-cells, b-cells etc - which trigger the production of antibodies.
Fat is not an option.

Fat is not isolated from those. The butt which contains more fat is used for vaccination but not routinely for other reasons. Maybe it should become a routine site.

 

[Swa]

Well done, you’ve taken your pigeon playing to a new level, trying to tell a medical professional how the procedure works.

Next step for Swa, DIY brain surgery…

It's new technology. Nobody can know exactly how it works and what all the risks are. Try to keep up.

 

[Chris_SA]

It's new technology. Nobody can know exactly how it works and what all the risks are. Try to keep up.

MRNA new technology? It's been around for 10 years in cancer research.

 

[buka001]

Can't find it.


Besides for the fact it has nothing to do with what I posted there's more than one thing contained in those graphs.
1. Q1-Q2 2020 was still the early stages. Nobody contracted it yet. What's strange is the low number of confirmed cases but ignoring that for now.
2. December was the Northern hemisphere's first winter with Covid so you'd expect a bunch of new cases and more deaths.
3. Q2 2021 was as I explained the Northern hemisphere's first summer living with Covid. By this time it was already expected a high number of people would have contracted it which could explain the lower number of deaths relative to cases.
4. Now this is the bizarre one. The number of cases haven't dropped substantially and in fact the difference is negligible. Yet the deaths are 95% less relatively. BUT only about half of people are fully vaccinated. Even if we count those that got one shot it isn't much more than two thirds. Let's make it even better for you and exclude all children and adolescents. Even with a perfect vaccine after one dose you still have about one tenth of the population susceptible. But you don't have 10% of people getting it dying and less than 5%.

Something about your stats don't add up. Either it's only vaccinated people getting it or other factors are at play. This so happens to be the warmest summer in decades. Contributing factor? More Vitamin D? Possibly there's also some natural immunity at play. Maybe the new Delta variant is more transmissible but less deadly.

You cannot make comparisons with changing conditions and attribute it to the vaccine. There's just too many variables to exclude to say what has had an effect and what hasn't.

1 - there was only limited and targeted testing during this phase. So the actual number of cases was undercounted
4 - your cognitive dissonance at display. You are seeing the effect the vaccines are having, but refuse to attribute it to the vaccine. They vaccined the elderly and people with serious co-morbidities first, so for the most vulnerable we actually have 80+ % of the people vaccinated. Nothing bizzare, just the result of the efficiency of the vaccine.

 

[Hush9300]

So more contagious = faster spread = able to get to those who are vulnerable to the disease more quickly yes? While the disease it causes (edit for typo) may not itself be more deadly, it can spread faster and therefore kill more people before we can properly protect ourselves against it. And death aside, COVID-19 still have some side effects that I would rather avoid if possible thanks.

Yes. That's why you protect the vulnerable...

Healthcare Workers

COVID-19 guidance, tools, and resources for healthcare workers.

www.cdc.gov

As per CDC Covid planning. In a worst case scenario regarding transmission the IFR (Infection Fatality Rates) in those under 65 would be 2% while under best estimate it 0.7%. For those over 65 it is 27% and 9% respectively.

Now the R0 (transmissibility) for the Delta variant is believed to be between 5 and 8 but the same logic applies. At the same time it also appears that the Delta variant is significantly less virulent according to UK data. It is causing way less deaths per case than the Alpha variant over the same period. The world is going on like this Delta variant is measles like in its transmissibility but it's far from it.

The virus is merely doing what viruses tend to do. Become more transmissible but less virulent. It doesn't serve the virus well to kill everybody it comes into contact with because it would soon run out of hosts. What we're witnessing is the virus becoming endemic. I.e. Finding its balance with its hosts.

Shifting goalposts. It's about minimising damage, which includes deaths. I never said anything about saving everyone. Go back and read my post properly.

Not shifting any goalposts but yes, get the vulnerable vaccinated above all else because that's how you keep hospitalisations and deaths down.

In my opinion there is an irrational fear regarding Covid. The measures taken and the plan to vaccinate the entire planet, even going as far as vaccine passports, is completely out of whack with the risk.