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

[Dave]

Wow. Now we using people who suffered brain trauma as insults. Have some dignity. Brain trauma can happen to anyone. Cmon man

Is that what happened to you that turned you into a Trump follower?

 

[SoldierMan]

Wow. Now we using people who suffered brain trauma as insults. Have some dignity. Brain trauma can happen to anyone. Cmon man

You clearly don't know who you are talking to.

He several times on another forum told me (using the f-word) that I sleep with my mother and sister. On top of that he likes to call people c**ts as much as possible. Pretty low class person and a troll to boot. You're dealing with white trash, no point in trying for honest cordial debate.

 

[Dave]

speaking about the brain dead lobotomised…

 

[ScottulusMaximus]

Someone in this thread, can't be bothered to go back and look who, said doctors and dentists wear masks in surgery because it is a "tradition".

I think that says everything about the level of discourse in here.

Nevermind the frequency of breaking godwins law.

Have a beer, go get laid and go to bed gents.

 

[semaphore]

Someone in this thread, can't be bothered to go back and look who, said doctors and dentists wear masks in surgery because it is a "tradition".

I think that says everything about the level of discourse in here.

Nevermind the frequency of breaking godwins law.

Have a beer, go get laid and go to bed gents.

That would be noxibox, I’ve had him on ignore for a while and remember why.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

You don’t know how definitions work? It can’t “tick two of three boxes“ and be the definition. By virtue of having been tested (as in not untested) it can’t fall under the definition of experimental, that really is basic English.

Just like English isn’t German even though it ticks two boxes (spoken by native inhabitants from a European country) out of three (missed tick in from Germany).

nor can it untick one and not fit the definition at all

face it, you are grasping at straws and arguing semantics, it is experimental in every sense of the commonly accepted lexicon

to argue it is not is silly or pathetic, you may choose which

hell I don't even regard "experimental" as a bad thing, just a fact, yet here you are flailing against the wind

 

[Paulsie]

Covid-19 vaccines: In the rush for regulatory approval, do we need more data?

After rollout under emergency authorisation, manufacturers of covid-19 vaccines now have their sights on regulatory approval. But what’s the rush, asks Peter Doshi , and is just six months of data from now unblinded trials acceptable? In April 2021, Pfizer and Moderna announced efficacy results...

www.bmj.com

An interesting read

 

[Dave]

nor can it untick one and not fit the definition at all

face it, you are grasping at straws and arguing semantics, it is experimental in every sense of the commonly accepted lexicon

Nope, it is not experimental, most rational fact checkers have confirmed it’s not, and you trying to make up your own basic rules of English doesn’t change that.

steel body and engines? Is that the definition of a boat or a aeroplane?

I really need to start remembering just who has English as first language and just who only has a 30% pass in English as a second language, I suppose.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Nope, it is not experimental, most rational fact checkers have confirmed it’s not, and you trying to make up your own basic rules of English doesn’t change that

like I said, grasping at straws

attacking the source, in this case me, to boot is just further signs of weakness

a rational person does not need fact checkers btw ...

 

[Dave]

like I said, grasping at straws

attacking the source, in this case me, to boot is just further signs of weakness

a rational person does not need fact checkers btw ...

I’ve explained to you in more than one post why you can’t cherry pick only a part of a definition, you appear to be too dense to understand so what more can I do?

 

[zolly]

Look my man, You are not going to convince me, and I’m not going to convince you.

You are welcome to make whatever decision you want to make, but be clear about the information or reasoning as to why you are making that decision. If you're scared to take the vaccine and its irrational, then accept that. If you're scared to take the vaccine and its rational, then that's fine too, but make sure you know the difference between the two.

Its a fact the vaccine is only a few months old. Its a HARD FACT. Its a FACT that vaccines trails runs between 5 to 10 years.

Firstly, there is no "the" vaccine. There are multiple vaccines, with all being developed using the old method (weakened viruses) or newer mRNA technology. Edit. But yes, because most vaccines aren't trying to be developed to deal with a respiratory virus that spreads as quickly as COVID-19 does, we are dealing with vaccines that are "a few months old". Even TB, the closest equivalent, is relatively difficult to catch compared to COVID, hence the long trials for its vaccine.

The only logical conclusion is to wait, at least a year to see if there are long term side effect. Its not selfish of me to think like this. Its logical. Its rather selfish to try and manipulate people into taking the few months old vax because you are scared.

It is illogical. Either you wait 5-10 years (as you admitted, this is how long it takes for most trials to complete, and also the most reasonable amount of time that will reveal potential long-term effects), or you may as well take it now. Waiting 6-12 months to get the vaccine isn't suddenly going to reveal anything we don't already know.

Part of your argument is to hold off because one friend go sick. One. Out of all the people you know personally who have gotten a vaccine, not to mention the literal millions of people across the world, one person that you know had a bad reaction, so you're going to avoid the vaccine. You cannot deny that this is, again, illogical.

And I honestly don’t know why people are scared who took the vax, By your own logic if you take the vax, you are less likely to become seriously ill (Whats those numbers again?). Unless there is a CURE, the virus will always remain. Even if all the people has received the vax, the virus is not magically going to disappear. Its going to be here, forever. so what's the difference if there are people who wont take the vax?, Its going to remain here, Like the normal cold or Flu, vaxed or not.

I am not scared of the COVID vaccine and am aware that studies are still on-going. I am also fully aware COVID-19 is not going away and it will stay around (enough doctors have discussed how herd immunity is not going to make this virus go away). But, I put my faith and trust in medical experts who know more than me on this subject and defer to them, unlike many of the armchair analysts who won't take the vaccine because they think they know better.

If you want to ask me how I feel, this is how I feel: I am is frustrated.

People like to pretend they are making rational decisions to avoid the vaccine. COVID is just the cold or flu (it's not, last time I checked neither of these things screwed up my sense of taste for weeks or months, gave me long-term brain fog or random blood clots). I'm young I'll be fine (young, healthy people have randomly died from the virus). I'll wait a year (what difference is a year going to make?).

People should just admit "I don't understand this thing and it scares me so I'm not going to take it." Even when I tell people, fine, don't take any of the mRNA vaccines because they are new – you have the option to get vaccines based on the methods we've been using for decades (see J&J, which we're going to be receiving 31 million doses of). But even when you give them a safer option made with well established methods, they still make some excuse EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE TAKEN VACCINES USING THE SAME PROCESSES FOR DECADES.

These same people will trust their doctors to put anything else in them, even though they have no ****ING idea what their doctor is doing, but mention the word VACCINE and suddenly it's like their doctor pulled out a gun and tried to shoot them.

They then rely on conspiracy theory sites, Facebook, and very fringe opinions by "experts" who didn't even test their ideas before making them public, but put their theories out their because they, more than likely, want the attention more than anything else (any real expert worth their salt would bring evidence to the table before making any claims. See Dr. Pierre Kory, which is why I am not anti-ivermectin, since it seems to have had a positive effect for some people, with next to no downsides, even though the one study was shown to be a sham).

So yes, you are free to "agree to disagree". You are free to do as you please. Just don't pretend that you actually have any actual knowledge on the subject that actually supports your decision (something a lot of anti-vaxxers/vaccine hesitant people are claiming) – like most people here, none of us actually have any medical knowledge to be making anything near an informed decision without seeking the advice of medical experts.

And guess what the overwhelming majority of medical experts are saying?

The vaccine is safe for the overwhelming majority. Most people will experience mild side effects, or, more correctly, a mild reaction to the vaccine. The chances of there being any long-term side effects are close to zero.

 

[tetrasect]

I’ve explained to you in more than one post why you can’t cherry pick only a part of a definition, you appear to be too dense to understand so what more can I do?

I've explained a few dozen pages back that experimental in this context means as part an experimental trial. Once the trial is completed and it has been established what the vaccine does it is no longer experimental since the experiment has ended and conclusions have been made.

But that went right over their heads and instead they continue to believe that Pfizer is actually "experimenting" on the general population. They fail to understand that an actual trial or experiment is about observing and collecting data and some even go as far as believing that the "experiment" is to "see how much they can control us" or some garbage.

These guys have no clue what is real or not.

 

[zolly]

I'm with you but there are those out here arguing the misguided notion that getting vaccinated means your fellow human being is safe from you and because of this everybody needs to be vaccinated. See @zolly

You clearly cannot read very well. I said getting vaccinated reduces your risk of infecting someone else. Which was assumed to be the case and proven to be so until Delta came along and screwed things up.

COVID vaccines slash viral spread – but Delta is an unknown

Studies show that vaccines reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 by more than 80%, but the Delta variant is creating fresh uncertainty.

www.nature.com

But yes, I agree, everyone needs to be vaccinated. People should seriously consider getting the vaccine because, as I, and numerous other people have pointed out, the results are in: COVID-19 vaccines reduce the severity and deaths associated with COVID-19.

See the mountains of evidence and links pointing that out in this very thread.