crime

Town hit by threats, complaints over COVID vaccination program for youth

98 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

98 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

How is a town out in the sticks able to vaccinate young people when us middle-aged people can’t get a vaccine in Tokyo?

35 ( +48 / -13 )

I am surprised that this small town has vaccine doses.

But if this small town has vaccine doses, shows that the vaccine roll out programm is running.

But why do they want to give the vaccine to teenagers, if there are many erderly people who needs it much more urgent?

27 ( +28 / -1 )

Why can’t Japan get this right? No other country is making such boneheaded mistakes.

surely the priority should be on a certain high density large urban area about to hold the work’s biggest sporting event. What is wrong with the Japanese?

24 ( +36 / -12 )

The town also received protest messages through over 20 emails and eight Faxes.

You know you live in the stone age when someone FAXES threats! A vaccine is a personal choice. If you don't want it, don't get it. If you want it get it. No reason to threaten people over a vaccine that is a CHOICE.

20 ( +32 / -12 )

So the calls are from anti-vaxers? Do they have a better way of stoping COVID-19 from spreading?

12 ( +32 / -20 )

What is the name of the town?

10 ( +16 / -6 )

@zichi 'What is the name of the town?'

Inecho on the Japan sea coast. It is a beautiful place.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

@P. Smith

How is a town out in the sticks able to vaccinate young people when us middle-aged people can’t get a vaccine in Tokyo?

Perhaps because it is so small that if they even attempt to be picky about who to vaccinate, they will end up with vaccine left in their hand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ine,_Kyoto

There was already an article stating that vaccine roll out in major city was lacking behind smaller ones. And of you remember the 100000 relief funds, it also was distributed earlier in small city that in big one.

As long as they have someone onsite able to administrate vaccine, thing can go quite smoothly and fast.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

According to the town, people who called the center were critical of the vaccination plan, saying there are risks for children receiving COVID vaccinations and that young women could become infertile from the shots.

Where did these people get their information?

9 ( +14 / -5 )

eight faxes.

There's nothing amusing about the story at all, but this raised a chuckle.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Ages 0-17 99.998%

Ages 18-49 99.95%

Ages 50-64 99.4%

Ages 65+ 91%

This is a common number being spread by the anti-vax lobby, but when you look at the actual number who have died between the ages of 18-49 and compare it to the actual number of cases for that age group in the US, you can see that the numbers don't tally with that percentage of deaths.

8 ( +23 / -15 )

I am not sure why vaccine advocates are so driven to ensure everyone is vaccinated,

A much more closer statement would be "why people are so driven to correct false, mistaken or misleading statements?" People can refuse to vaccinate for valid reasons (such as immune problems or history of life threatening allergies) and even for invalid reasons (such as thinking the vaccines are more risky than the infection) that is their freedom. What is not valid is to say their invalid reasons are rational, because that is something that can be examined and proved false. If someone wants to refuse a vaccine knowing their reasons are irrational that is their decision to make.

In Japan, there is yet to be any serious case or death due to Covid19 among the below 20 year olds (after about 79,000 confirmed infections). There is no need for them to take any of these investigational vaccines (except perhaps the few that have certain health issues) for which nobody knows the long term effects.

Nobody knows the long term effects of COVID, and since it already has proved to produce permanent ones there is definitely a need to vaccinate children, specially in a country like Japan that has made clear it will register as few cases, complications and deaths as it is possible. In the case of Japan you cannot say there has been no cases or deaths in any population group, you can only say there has been none reported, which is quite different. Any parent that rationally evaluates the information and see that vaccines represent less risk is perfectly justified in vaccinating their children (hopefully once all the population at higher need of the vaccine have already had their chance to be immunized).

Funny how you always say things like this and never produce any evidence

If no risk has been identified yet, that is still an advantage for the vaccines against COVID, if the point is that there is no evidence of an increase of risk after vaccinating kids, the lack of evidence is obviously the whole point.

And if there is no emergency, there is no need for administration of experimental drugs.

And anyone that claims they know the long term affects of Covid-19 infection or of vaccine side effects is misinformed or a charlatan.

Again, there is no need to "know" the long term effects for both things to know which one have a higher risk of producing them, the evidence collected until now allows that determination, specially when the infection already produced them, has been examined for much less time and there are already several characterized mechanisms for it to do it. It is the same as saying that nobody knows what kind of car accident you may have, that does nothing to prove wearing a seat belt is not much safer than not doing it, even if there is always the chance a person may die because of using it.

If a drug has been already examined and found less risky than the infection then that reduction of the risk is a perfectly valid justification to use it.

8 ( +17 / -9 )

The Japanese govt should prioritize Tokyo residents if they want to hold the Olympics. 

why you making it sound like covid only infects Tokyoites, why should the rest of japan have to wait after Tokyo, the rest of Japan isnt benefitting from the Olympics most dont want the Olympics so why should they be pushed to the back of the line

8 ( +9 / -1 )

@Goodlucktoyou so you’ve obviously seen data on deaths from vaccines somewhere. Why not share it with us?

8 ( +12 / -4 )

For those of you still wondering why a small town might be vaccinating all age groups first, It was the same in Canada, small remote communities get priority as they lack medical facilities and may have older demographics.

8 ( +12 / -4 )

The town also received protest messages through eight faxes.

Man, idk about you guys, but they REALLY mean business over there.

8 faxes?

That took at least 4 hours to send all of that.

7 ( +13 / -6 )

I don't get why anyone is surprise and anger by this. Each town and city has their own resources and officals that take care of it's people. Their own community. If the town want to vaccinate their youth and are capable to do it, who are we to judge them? Why are some getting angered that the town had the ability to vaccinate their own just because you yourself didn't get a shot living in a big city? For all we know they already secure their elderly in their town and now want to protect their kids. Is for the parents there to decide whether they want to send their kids or not.

6 ( +19 / -13 )

Why vaccinate the young when there are risks associated with the vaccine but none with Vivid??

The opposite is true, which would become reason enough, there are risks already associated with the infection even on children, and no risk at the moment from the vaccines.

So, maybe the towns folk have a point.

Since excess deaths because of the vaccines are much lower for all ages groups vaccinated the people still have not any point.

You understand that there are already vaccines for children that protect against diseases that don't kill any children? in comparison COVID vaccines have a much better cost/benefit ratio

Similarly, The FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from the pharmaceutical industry.

If you search the average cost of COVID hospitalization and the cost of a vaccine it is easy to see that not vaccinating would be much more profitable for the companies, maybe they are funding antivaxxer groups?

I don’t think people should be placed in pro-Vax or anti-Vax camps.

But is its perfectly valid to put qualify their opinions as rational, science based or the opposite. Because irrational opinions born from ignorance or inability to compare risks should not decide what should be done.

However, they are new. And while, over the past year or so, millions have already been successfully vaccinated with little or no short term adverse effect, since no long term studies have been conducted, no one - no doctor, no scientist, absolutely no one - knows what long term ill health effects may arise

But risk can be calculated and at this point the infection is hugely more likely to result in long term or permanent health effects, mostly because it has already done it, even on children. Also, mRNA has been used for many years already in hundreds of clinical trials without any specific problem attributed to the technology, that means that there is an advantage also on time over COVID. Saying that we should avoid them because there is always the risk of something bad happening is as valid as saying the vaccines should be compulsory because there is always the chance they will protect against an unidentified risk from the infection.

The problem with your argument is that the extremely unlikely possibility of side effects from the vaccines is much lower than the risks from the natural infection. Expressing a concern is fine, but many times that concern is irrational and based only on imaginary fears. Bring a specific mechanism where the vaccine could be riskier than the infection and that would have value.

Kory has been heavily criticized for playing loose with well known methodologies to conduct research, all in order to support what he thinks should be done. There are much better references to read than a person that thinks is valid to lower the quality of his research as long as he gets the answer he was looking for.

6 ( +19 / -13 )

Sweeping statements like the one above are not fully representative of our current situation.

What is not true about this statement?

Unless people can grow a new brain or pancreas, permanent is a perfectly valid term to describe some of the problems caused by COVID, there is nothing to "estimate" about it.

None of the setback or failures are due to problems with the technology itself that would be of worry for the COVID vaccines, one thing is that it was not able to surpass an available vaccine or therapy, or that the problem that they were used for is extremely resistant to all therapeutic approaches, that does not bring any risk against a new infection quite sensitive to the immunity against limited amounts of the expressed antigen like COVID.

Nothing about the emergency situation contradicts the available data that supports the safety and efficacy of vaccines on millions of people immunized, it does not mean future risks are more likely to be present or that those risks are more important, it just mean the vaccines were already much less risky than the infection on all population tested, and that also applies for children, there is simply much less risk from the vaccines than from the infection, even for them.

The fact that they have been allowed to be used on children means professionals trained and experienced in the evaluation of risks have concluded there is less risk from the vaccines than from the infection, so thinking the opposite without any scientific data to support it is still an irrational position.

6 ( +17 / -11 )

It seems some of you here have forgotten or have missed the news that Japan has approved Pfizer for vaccinating of 12 to 15 year-olds. So the town is trying to vaccinated the young thus preventing the spread and closure of schools. Makes sense to me! And the rest of us bellow the age of 65 will be eligible for vaccination from mid June. So stop screaming about the over 65's. If the government waits till all of the over 65's get vaccinated, the rest of us have to wait another 2 years!!!

6 ( +13 / -7 )

Does this make any sense? I highly doubt people make medical decisions because they know they are irrational.

Not because, but in spite of being irrational (for example refusing a transfusion for religious reasons), as long as they can recognize the irrationality of their decision that is fine, but trying to disguise it as rational or science-based when it is not can mislead other people that actually want to be rational about the whole thing, so a correction is something positive.

You have made some misleading statements in my opinion

For example? if you can't prove something is misleading, just that you don't like it, that is a completely different thing, I could prove easily that some consequences from COVID are permanent, even if you thought them not to be.

that’s an extremely reckless basis to submit the whole demographic to an Investigational medication.

You got it backwards, several studies around the world have proved the vaccine to be safe and efficient on the demographic, what the severely incomplete information from Japan is trying to be used for is to reject the conclusion of those studies, which is obviously invalid. The decision is based on information of much better quality. Being under emergency use do not mean it is not justified, as long as the intervention can scientifically be proved to lower the risk then it is fine.

Think for a moment, who is the one not respecting the wishes of the parents? the people that say they can vaccinate their children if they want to, because it means lowering their risks? or the people that irrationally believe the children are being subjected to some undefined dangers so they should not be allowed to be vaccinated? Read the article, nobody is forcing anybody to vaccinate, but the baseless complains are trying to force the elimination of that option. Try to respect the decision of the parents, if they want to vaccinate that is perfectly valid and supported by science.

6 ( +17 / -11 )

I don’t think people should be placed in pro-Vax or anti-Vax camps. We’re dealing with potential cures to a pandemic that is definitely killing an excessive amount of people.

With medicines, it’s always a risk / benefit call. An educated decision. The companies and organizations that bring us these medicines are running a big business. And they produce products that do more good than harm in general.

But not in the same way for every individual on the risk / benefit curve.

Don’t be afraid. Be aware.

5 ( +18 / -13 )

@Doc Have to agree with virusrex, nobody is forcing anyone to get a jab. These ignorant people are trying to take the option away. And BTW, my son in Canada is 13 and was vaccinated last week, it was HIS choice. Why would another adult even try to take his right to protect himself and others away when the vaccine as been approved by authorities? It's ridiculous.

5 ( +13 / -8 )

He is not allowed to drink, to get a tatoo, to drive or to vote, and yet he is allowed to make a possible life-altering decision.

Yeah, I think kids should be able to choose the lesser risk of a vaccine over the higher risk of getting a virus, when their parents are too caught up in their extremism to protect their children.

5 ( +12 / -7 )

You have been adamant on your previous posts that these vaccines were NOT experimental. I neither like or dislike the comments. I only know they are false.

Sure, corrected, they are being considered experimental by the FDA, the main point I make (that people are not participating in any experiment but being inoculated for the therapeutic value of the vaccine) does not change.

The University of Guelph in Canada is the top animal studies and veterinary school in the country. It has also been studying this very matter under a government grant.

If the research do not provided proof the risk from vaccination surpasses the risk from the infection this can't be used as an argument to force the parent's decision on their vaccination. Specially when he is willingly choosing to ignore the elephant in the room of spike protein production during the natural infection (that would cause huge health problems according to his explanation, in every single case).

I am sure the good doctor is beating back criticism 24/7 these days as a result

Well, making conclusions without scientific evidence can make this happen, perfectly valid criticism is not something a scientist would be hoping never to get, on the contrary, it is something desirable that will improve the knowledge of humanity in general.

If the study is refuted by the evidence from millions of inoculations already being done, exaggerate obvious things as if they were unexpected (biologically speaking nobody expects the inoculation site to be the only place where mRNA is transfected), do not provide any proof microgram levels of a protein are even comparable to the hugely larger quantities produced during the natural infection and much less suggest any other approach for vaccination to reduce the risk of COVID, then he has to be expecting criticism from the moment he wrote the first word of his report.

You choose to listen to what you want to hear, which explains your bias, but do not make your decision less biased. You are free to make them as you want, but "err on the side of caution" at this point definitely means vaccinating children since the unknown risks of COVID are much more clear and likely than from the vaccine.

4 ( +13 / -9 )

Typically anti vaxxers lunacy!

If it isn't your child then shut up!

No one is forcing you or your children.

Why Anti vaxxers with their false information can't just leave others alone.

Lunacy in their nonsense and anti science.

4 ( +12 / -8 )

How do you determine which institution is "respected"?

How do you think? I mean you can always put the institutions here, medical journals, hospitals, health promotion organizations, anything that say the same thing you believe. What big institutions come to your mind when you think about health or science?

the GBD is already debunked as a collection of personal opinions not sustained by science and heavily criticized by (yes) well respected institutions for its lack of scientific basis. How do you respond to those criticisms?

That’s quite entertaining. No matter how many times I read the article, I cannot find where that is clearly stated.

If you can find the scientific basis for the accusations of "commiting murder" or that "young women could become infertile" because of the vaccines you can share it here, else those are precisely irrational fears not substantiated by any data whatsoever. Once again bias. Also, if you cannot argument against something that proved your opinion as mistaken, what importance is who said it? does it becomes more or less true? obviously not. If you can learn to address the arguments instead of the people doing them it would be easier to understand your own bias and how you choose to ignore things.

Compared to full FDA approval, EUA products are not necessarily more dangerous, but they are certainly more risky.

No product is less risky after getting out of the EUA, their safety and efficacy do not change. That is a logical mistake. And more importantly, no vaccine for COVID under EUA is even remotely as risky as the natural infection, which is the whole purpose of the clinical trials. You remain "unsure" of their safety as a personal decision, but that has no importance on the data that is used by the professionals to approve the vaccines for this demographic, even as a EUA.

And you got the situation wrong. People that actively reject science and irrationally believe vaccines to be unsafe grab and exaggerate any and all excused they have to promote alternatives, even if the evidence is yet conflicting as in ivermecting or have already demonstrated that is worthless like HCQ.

Go look up the lawsuits against GlaxoSmithKline’s H1N1 swine flu vaccine Pandemrix over a decade ago, around 2010 after increased cases of narcolepsy emerged in Sweden and Finland among children who got it during the previous pandemic.

You forgot to include the most important detail, the safety problem with the vaccine was lack of purification of the viral nucleoprotein, that produce cross reactivity with a receptor on the brain. This is important because the natural infection obviously courses with hugely larger amount of nucleoprotein, because it is not a contaminant but specifically produced and contained in every virus. Even antivaxxers stopped using this to attack vaccines because at the end it proved that even the vaccines with insufficient purification protected from narcolepsy the children with the propensity (obviously the rest of the vaccines were not even related to the problem, providing much better protection against it).

Ah yes, and there are many other examples of pharmas being caught and fined for falsifying data, bribing,...

Then again, HCQ was mainly promoted by a researcher found to have manipulated results, fabricated data and falsified ethical approval for dozens and dozens of articles, something that for some reason is perfectly fine for you.

4 ( +11 / -7 )

Disinformation crazy

3 ( +10 / -7 )

@Ah-so

Your post is the first time I have ever seen the CDC referred to as “anti-Vax”

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-Focus-on-Ages-0-18-Yea/nr4s-juj3

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Why vaccinate the young when there are risks associated with the vaccine but none with Vivid??

No, there are certainly risks associated with Covid even the young and healthy

Here's a story of a 10-year-old who got Covid-19, asymptomatic, but his immune system kept fighting the infection and went into overdrive, developed blood clots leading to amputations of both hands and legs:

https://www.kiro7.com/news/trending/10-year-old-boy-has-hands-legs-amputated-after-mis-c-covid-19-diagnosis/2A7Q2NUKHVBBNBXETE5IOLOG2I/

“We see it happen in children that are otherwise healthy, so it does make it very challenging,” Dr. Rosemary Olivero, a pediatric infectious disease specialist at Helen DeVos Children’s Hospital, told WOOD.

Olivero told WXMI that she has seen it develop in children regardless of age, race or gender. She added that she doesn’t know if it is triggered by genetics, or if it will affect some groups more than others.

One thing doctors do know about MIS-C is that it affects how blood clots, Fox News reported.

Some patients also develop severe heart issues.

After, a child first contracts COVID-19 and recovers, then MIS-C may develop.

Dae-Shun and his family came down with COVID-19. The 10-year-old was asymptomatic, but after two weeks, he had no energy and complained of a headache. He eventually developed a high fever.

Here's another young girl developed blood clots, her heart even stopped, but they were able to save her leg:

https://gothamist.com/news/blood-clot-stopped-12-yr-olds-heart-doctors-think-she-had-late-reaction-covid-19

Jissel Rosario, 12, said she woke up one morning in April with a strange pain in her left leg. “Like someone was... I don't know, punching my leg or stabbing my leg," she said.

The clot would prove nearly fatal. It caused her heart to stop but a team of doctors was able to save her life. At first, doctors didn’t think it was related to the coronavirus. Jissel tested negative for the virus three times. But then, she tested positive for the antibodies. 

Dr. Marc Cohen, chairman of the Department of Medicine at Newark Beth Israel, said her severe clotting is likely a delayed reaction to the virus. 

"The infection occurred before and you don't face the music until after,” he said. “So that's just another feather in the cap of COVID being a horrific nightmare.”

Dr. Cohen said Jissel never had pneumonia, a fever, or any signs of an acute infection. She was a healthy child with no known underlying medical conditions. Unlike the inflammatory syndrome that impacts a child’s arteries (responsible for pumping blood from the heart to the rest of the body), Dr. Cohen said Jissel’s veins were affected. 

One of the common threads among some of these cases and Jissel’s: The body is still reacting even after the acute infection is gone.

“It’s more of a patient’s immune system,” said Dr. Jennifer Owensby, interim medical director at Bristol Myers Squibb Children's Hospital at RWJ University Hospital. “For whatever reason it keeps fighting; it keeps attacking. And, it is attacking the patient’s own body.”

“It is never common for a 12-year-old to out-of-the-blue develop a blood clot in the leg,” Dr. Cohen said. 

Alma Cruz said when she first took Jissel to an urgent care clinic, they thought she had cellulitis, a skin infection, and prescribed antibiotics. 

They didn’t work. Jissel’s leg turned purple; her toes red.

At Newark Beth Israel, doctors found the veins in Jissel's leg plugged up with clot. Her leg was two to three times its normal size. Dr. Cohen said during an invasive procedure to clear out her veins, the clot moved to her lungs and stopped her heart.

Jissel underwent CPR for almost an hour. A machine took over circulating her blood and a ventilator helped her breathe. Doctors fed blood-clot-dissolving medicine into her body through catheters inserted in her neck and groin.

Could the vaccine do worse than a child losing limbs to amputation?

3 ( +8 / -5 )

@Zaphod

If we used your thinking and the rest of the anti vaxxers we would still have smallpox, have yearly outbreaks of Polio, etc...

Good thing our parents and grandparents were smart enough to listen to the science and doctors and not claims on twitter, Facebook and anti vaxxer conspiracy sites.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

It appears that evidence is mounting that the vaccines induce the exact same effect.

Still mistaken, the same as the last time you posted the same theory that conflicts with reality. There was never the expectation for absolutely all the mRNA to be only delivered locally, and the amount of Spike protein is a tiny fraction of what is produce during natural infection, so the obvious problem with the supposed toxicity is that if microgram level of mRNA are supposed to produce important toxicity, how come the natural infection that produce several orders of magnitude more of that same protein can even course without symptoms? (not to mention, how to stop this huge amount of protein being produced in infected people without either the available vaccines nor any viable alternatives).

If the spike protein is so dangerous, that would mean it would be even more necessary to vaccinate, specially the children. No other neutralizing immunity have been found for other viral proteins, and if micrograms of the protein can protect from infection (and boatloads of spike protein accumulating in almost every organ examined) this would still be the only logical option to take.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

How is the "personal opinion" by 10,000 medical professionals different from the personal opinion of your debunkers?

The "debunkers" used available scientific data to prove non-pharmaceutical measures were effective and that there is no realistic way to protect vulnerable population without controlling the spreading in the general population. Objective data well analyzed vs personal opinions (many from people that were not even related to health care or were mislead into signing the declaration).

Oh really. This site compiles medical studies about HCQ:

A well known misleading site that fails completely to properly weight every article with the obvious purpose of exaggerating noise signal over real effects (or lack of effects). Proper meta-analysis do not give the same importance to "studies" of 5 patients treated with unknown dosage and actual studies with thousands of patients being examined in great detail for many different important variables.

Forget the media and journalists, go directly to primary sources, such as peer reviewed scientific articles in indexed journals, that is the minimum quality of evidence to pay attention to.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-77748-x

https://academic.oup.com/jac/article/76/1/30/5919602

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22446-z

(the statistical and epidemiological analysis part of the methods is the part to read with care, that is where the scientific part is)

"We found that treatment with hydroxychloroquine is associated with increased mortality in COVID-19 patients, and there is no benefit of chloroquine."

3 ( +8 / -5 )

This entire vaccine roll out in Japan is laughable. It's so backward. Unbelievable for a developed country!!

2 ( +6 / -4 )

So, why don’t you share with this board where I have displayed a position favoring either vaccination or abstaining.

Bias is not something that applies to every single aspect of a topic, if you choose to completely ignore the obvious risks from the COVID infection, while focusing in the "possible" risks of vaccination that is a reason enough to say you are biased in this. Specially when to support your point you use research that is validly criticized for the same bias.

And regarding the position taken that a University researcher is presenting unfounded assertions and personal opinions, how have you established that? Have you critiqued his review and analysis.

How is he defending about all the things I mentioned? Those are just some examples of the professional criticism he has been subjected from his peers as evidence of the low quality of his report and I have not read anything from him as a counterargument. Good research helps explaining what is observed in reality, bad research only provide explanations that contradict what is observed. No person is perfect and he could have simply made a mistake, that is nothing out of the ordinary. If it affects his career that would be a consequence of the problems with his research.

Again, I am having difficulty understanding “an unknown risk that is much more clear and likely”. Wouldn’t that be in the realm of the known , and not experimental?

Reducing it down, there is no known mechanisms that has been observed (instead of theorized) for the mRNA vaccines that would lead to important health problems in the vaccinated people. On the other hand there have been already many different problems (including in children) that happened with the COVID infection, that are consistent with further problems as observed in other viral infections.

This means that even if nobody knows what is going to produce more or bigger problems in the future it is already clear COVID is much more likely to do it, if only because it already has. Trying very hard to ignore this very clear fact is not a rational position, anybody can keep this way of thinking but that does not make it any less irrational.

2 ( +11 / -9 )

The VAERS numbers are not "theoretical". 5000 Americans dead from the new vaccines already;

That is false, (at least as false as the chimpanzee DNA thing). VAERS register everything that happens after vaccination, and it needs to be compared with the unvaccinated people of the same demographics to actually see if vaccination produces anything. Analysis of the data show no extra risk of death after being vaccinated, which mean the people would have the same possibility of dying being vaccinated or not. This is something expected when you prioritize vaccinating old people.

Also the emergency approval do not make anything more risky, the vaccines have been examined and found much less risky than remaining unvaccinated, something that was corroborated from the epidemiological data from millions of people around the world.

The glowing praise of the vaccines and the complete dismissal of treatment options are heavily criticized by a number of highly qualified experts

So of course you can link to the official communication of many recognized institutions of medicine and science, right? You obviously are not arguing that every single institution that deals with human health is being silenced (in their own sites) by a world wide conspiracy... are you?

He is not allowed to drink, to get a tatoo, to drive or to vote, and yet he is allowed to make a possible life-altering decision. That makes sense to you?

If the decision is made according to the best available science there is no problem. Choosing not to vaccinate is also a "possible life-altering decision", so he should not be allowed to have an opinion about it?

2 ( +11 / -9 )

After subjecting readers to countless “scientific” counter arguments , a core aspect of his whole argument was undermined by this complete oversight of a basic fact.

There is nothing "core" about it, that is again your bias showing. The core is still the same, people are being vaccinated not to be included in an experiment (as people mistakenly the Nuremberg code keep repeating) but to be subjected to its therapeutic value. The way they are called have absolutely no importance in this actually important part of the argument, and that i have already explained it, something else you choose to ignore.

On the other hand, repeatedly commenting a theory that runs contrary with the observed effect of the vaccines in millions of people, and that makes no sense against the evidence from asymptomatic infection that indicates very clearly a lack of desire to be truthful, and instead just repeat information that has already was proved to be misleading.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

Now that you finally understood that these vaccines are classified experimental by the regulatory agencies, you can further advance your education by actually reading the Nuremberg code again as it pertains to the administration of experimental compounds into human beings.

That is a new mistake, the Nurenberg code is against forced human experimentation, but it says absolutely nothing about therapeutic use, the EUA would be enough to make it irrelevant, even if it applied outside of war situations.

Then again, to be able to understand why vaccines are at the moment used therapeutically and represent less risk for all demographics where it has been approved for emergency use it would be first necessary to accept mistaken arguments you have used, instead of just abandoning them or even worse, repeating them after they were validly criticized without making any effort to address the criticism. It was so with the spike protein, the baseless accusation of the article, the H1N1 nucleoprotein, the irrational medical decisions, etc.

2 ( +8 / -6 )

And hundreds of studies around the world, not counting the thousands of harmed people attest to the fact that the "so called" vaccines are not safe and efficient against Covid at all. 

Any link to those studies? or are something only you can see? How do you explain that no single respected institution say you are correct? Are they (and the thousands over thousands of health care and scientific professionals that work on them) part of an impossibly huge conspiracy?

Now, what kind of job would make anything I wrote (that can easily be confirmed by multiple sources) false? correcting false or misleading information is something anybody interested in public health should be doing, is it that bad for you that people can see when something written is actually wrong?

Anyway folks, I think we can now see what may be driving the reaction in our little Japanese town

Well, it is clearly written in the article, irrational fears not substantiated by any data whatsoever held by people that think death threats are a valid way of making people do as they want.

1 ( +10 / -9 )

The accusations are not baseless, and up until now no defense has been even provided against them, if you say vaccines are not to be trusted even without any evidence of problems with the data of the clinical trials, then having clear evidence of unethical scientific malpractice should be more than enough to take anything from that researcher as completely invalid, but strangely this is not the case, as if the standards were double.

A compilation of the multiple problems and likely even illegal activities

https://forbetterscience.com/2021/03/23/didier-raoult-fraud-je-ne-regrette-rien/

Also, retractions take time, and a couple of dozens of those papers are now likely directed to that end.

Other penalties are corrections and expressions of concern, which also indicate heavy problems

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147957120301077

https://www.isac.world/news-and-publications/official-isac-statement

Imagine if the developers of a vaccine were discovered to fabricate results from the clinical trials, change the methods on the fly without justification or charge for false hospitalizations. And that they threatened the person that discovered the multiple problems with lawsuits? would you think, "sure must be nothing"?

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/05/scientists-rally-around-misconduct-consultant-facing-legal-threat-after-challenging

1 ( +8 / -7 )

Forget the media and journalists, go directly to primary sources, such as peer reviewed scientific articles in indexed journals, that is the minimum quality of evidence to pay attention to.

How DARE you provide data and facts that does not fit their conspiracy. You do realize that by doing so, you would be making them look bad for believing Trump. That's as unreasonable as thinking that he actually lost the election, so the articles you posted are an offense and must therefore be fake news if not outright lies.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

I got my first shot. Pfizer. My arm is sore. That proves that these are poison and no one should get them.

I mean, the above is about as strong as any of the anti-vaxxers logic.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

the 13-year old hardly has put much effort into researching various opinions.

If you had kids you might know that sometimes our kids are more open minded and smarter, or at least less fixed in their ways, then the adults in their lives. They often see things more clearly than their adult parents.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

The mRNA vaccines are a promising new technology, with great potential for the rapid development and treatment of other diseases such as malaria and cancer. However, they are new. And while, over the past year or so, millions have already been successfully vaccinated with little or no short term adverse effect, since no long term studies have been conducted, no one - no doctor, no scientist, absolutely no one - knows what long term ill health effects may arise. So it is reasonable for people to weigh the known dangers of COVID-19 (relatively low for young people, and exponentially severe for the more elderly) against the unknown dangers of the vaccines. Since most of their lives is still ahead of them, young people face the greatest risk of any unforeseen future health problems possibly arising from these new vaccines. People should not be labeled anti-vax and dismissed as anti-science for expressing this concern or for having a different level of risk aversion than others.

0 ( +10 / -10 )

The witch hunters want to label any who question as antivaxxers...what a load of bunk! 

Agreed. The FDA classifies these vaccines as Investigational / Experimental medicines.

Anyone can easily look up what the definition of this classification on the US FDA website

And let parents decide what’s best for their kids. It’s their job.

0 ( +9 / -9 )

But risk can be calculated and at this point the infection is hugely more likely to result in long term or permanent health effects, mostly because it has already done it, even on children. Also, mRNA has been used for many years already in hundreds of clinical trials without any specific problem attributed to the technology, 

Sweeping statements like the one above are not fully representative of our current situation.

Before risk is accurately calculated, the term “permanent” is a variable that cannot be defined yet. Possibly for several years. Maybe the term “estimated” is more valid concerning risk.

It is true the mRNA medicines have been in clinical trials for years , even decades. But there has been serious setbacks and failures. This is why they never made it to market. This is why these vaccines are classified as experimental.

Our current situation and the widespread deployment of these medicines (mRNA and non-mRNA type) are the result of an emergency condition. This clearly defined by the regulatory approval agencies.

I posted this previously, so it may be beneficial to some to do so again.

The prime source of who defines safe, approved, experimental, or whatever classification is the government health regulation body.

If you're American, you can always check what the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issues. On December 11, 2020, the FDA issued an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for emergency use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID‑19 Vaccine for the prevention of COVID-19.

The use of Vaccines like the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID‑19 fully authorized and are approved. 

That’s a fact.  

However, their use is authorized by the FDA under an EUA emergency use. And in this case, these vaccines are categorized as an Investigational Vaccines.  The FDA defines states that an Investigational drug can also be called an Experimental drug and is being studied to see if your disease or medical condition improves while taking it. 

https://www.fda.gov/patients/learn-about-expanded-access-and-other-treatment-options/understanding-investigational-drugs

You can read the approval description here from the FDA dated last month.

https://www.fda.gov/media/144412/download

 "Pfizer-BioNTech COVID‑19 Vaccine is for use for active immunization to prevent COVID-19 caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in individuals 12 years of age and older. The vaccine contains a nucleoside-modified messenger RNA (modRNA) encoding the viral spike (S) glycoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 formulated in lipid particles. It is an Investigational vaccine not licensed for any indication."

G. Pfizer Inc. must submit to Investigational New Drug application (IND) number 19736 periodic safety reports at monthly intervals in accordance with a due date agreed upon with the Office of Biostatistics and Epidemiology (OBE)/CBER beginning after the first full calendar month after authorization."

The FDA themselves refer to IND as an experimental drug. 

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/investigational-new-drug-ind-application#Emergency

"Emergency Use of an IND vaccine allows the FDA to authorize use of an experimental drug in an emergency situation that does not allow time for submission of an IND in accordance with 21CFR , Sec. 312.23 or Sec. 312.20. It is also used for patients who do not meet the criteria of an existing study protocol, or if an approved study protocol does not exist."

So, these vaccines are essentially approved, fully authorized, and so far deemed safe as investigational / experimental drugs according to the FDA.

Those are the facts.

0 ( +14 / -14 )

If you are informed about very important and corroborated sources of risk from COVID and you insist on not taking that into account when comparing those risks with theoretical ones from a vaccine, that means you are choosing to ignore them. And no, "examining alternative opinions" is not a display of bias, the bias come by giving exaggerated weight to reports that have been heavily criticized for their lack of scientific quality just because they say what you want to hear.

0 ( +10 / -10 )

It is a well known mistake to include low quality or problematic studies as if they had the same value as well designed detailed and comprehensive studies

The same is true of information. It's amazing how many people are willing to take sketchy websites and news organizations at their word. Low quality information should be either disregarded, or well fact-checked.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

As expected, any story about vaccines, and specially about vaccinating children, will always bring the same people repeating the same disinformation. VAERS, GBD, HCQ, anything to avoid recognizing that vaccines work and protect people from a very dangerous disease.

As expected, people continue to ignore the facts:

Kids are very little affected by Covid19. In Japan, zero deaths and zero serious cases in the below 20y so far out of 79,000 confirmed infections.

Transmission from kids has been shown to be very low.

These are investigational vaccines that have only been authorized for emergency use and whose long term effects are completely unknown. This is not an emergency for kids.

Any well-informed parent would definitely refuse to vaccinate their kids. So I am very happy that people in that small town are speaking up. I'd be happier if the whole nation (and world) would speak up, and that there would be open and honest discussions.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

The problem with comparing mortality rates with confirmed infection rates is that it has been shown that actual infection rates for Covid are likely 6 ~ 20 times greater than recorded infections. With most people contracting this illness showing minimal to no symptoms is it any wonder the numbers are way off. In any normal year 2-3 million people die from influenza related illnesses like pneumonia. The witch hunters want to label any who question as antivaxxers...what a load of bunk! The mRNA are new and under studied for long term effects. NONE of these vaccines are fully approved! To just offer up your child for vaccination based on current evidence is ludicrous. No doubt the naysayers here don't even have children...

Vaccinate the most at risk leave the others be!

-1 ( +11 / -12 )

Let me assist you once again with your selective comprehension of matters.

The one trying desperately to avoid addresing the point would not be me, why do you quote the main point that makes your reference irrelevant if you are going to ignore it anyway? Vaccines are obviously not being forced by a town offering them, and most importantly the people vaccinated are not participating in any experiment, the vaccines are being used for their protective, therapeutic value, which makes the Nuremberg code irrelevant.

In healthy individuals, much of the virus are dealt with at the normal point of entry in the upper respiratory tract.

This is mistaken, much of the initial amount of virus is dealt this way, but inside the body it still replicates billions or trillions of times, which is why the spike protein has been found accumulating in almost every tissue that has been examined. If it as as toxic as described it would be impossible to find asymptomatic patients that have orders of magnitude more protein circulating in their bodies.

The "misleading site" compiles all active studies on HCQ, while the selective meta-study in "Nature" that you keep quoting refers only to selected 19 studies.

I quoted 3 studies, and they are just a fraction. The most important part of the meta-analysis is precisely the methods used for the comparison. It is a well known mistake to include low quality or problematic studies as if they had the same value as well designed detailed and comprehensive studies, that is why your reference is not an actual scientific study, it is just a compilation of results with a known bias. Which of my references are "mainstream media", once again the minimum level of evidence should be peer reviewed articles from indexed journals.

-1 ( +5 / -6 )

The one trying desperately to avoid addresing the point would not be me, why do you quote the main point that makes your reference irrelevant if you are going to ignore it anyway? Vaccines are obviously not being forced by a town offering them, and most importantly the people vaccinated are not participating in any experiment, the vaccines are being used for their protective, therapeutic value, which makes the Nuremberg code irrelevant."

 

Don't you even recognize the answers that are to the points that YOU brought up. The answers are powerful and you may not have not noticed, but they have selectively undermined your credibility and arguments.

The more you respond the more of that comes out.

Nobody said vaccines were forced on the town. Just you. Coercion is a powerful tool when government pushes things. Especially Japan.

You state that people are not participating in any experiment, after been caught telling people for ages that these vaccines were not experimental. So how would you know?

Doc didn't want to talk about Nuremburg codes. You did. Doc simply corrected your errors again.

And just because YOU don’t know that something bad could come out of an experiment process doesn’t make you free of guilt. That’s why criminal negligence is a crime.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Why are they focusing on youth?

Even if you were born yesterday, you would know to take care of the elderly and vulnerable first.

Kids are an absolute last priority, if they should even be vaccinated at all.

I think people need to start taking matters into their own hands if “leaders” continue to force inept or corrupt COVID policies down their throats.

-2 ( +18 / -20 )

no risk at the moment from the vaccines

Funny how you always say things like this and never produce any evidence

Is the COVID-19 vaccine safe and effective for children and young people?

At the time of writing the answer to this question is unknown.

https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/resources/coronavirus-vaccination-programme-statement

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

All right! I am glad that the people of Japan are finally taking measures to protect the children from this untested “vaccine”.

-2 ( +8 / -10 )

Of course the word "experimental" is a key definition word of this drug downplayed systematically by every mRNA extremist posters, ask yourself how parents will react if they were presented to this mRNA vaccine in a pure and honest ethically way by a doctor "Do you give your consent that we inject your children an experimental drug now?" No surprise it is downplayed, it can appeal only to one who will get a financial benefit of the vaccination, difficult to imagine parents willing to submit their children to something experimental with a balance/risk so heavy in the risk zone.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

WilliB

He is not allowed to drink, to get a tatoo, to drive or to vote, and yet he is allowed to make a possible life-altering decision. That makes sense to you?

Equating getting a vaccine to drinking alcohol or getting a tattoo? Absurd. Let's hope the Delta variant doesn't get to Japan, you do know it's primarily infecting 12 to 20 year olds?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

Lol.

I see I have an equal amount of positives and negative ranks on my posts. I find that interesting when I pull my information from the vary sources often referenced by fellow posters.

I supposed we are split between pro-Vax and anti-Vax polarity. Like a small Japan town now just brought to our attention.

Once again, I would advise to view it all from a risk / benefit vantage point for you personally, and your family.

I am not sure why vaccine advocates are so driven to ensure everyone is vaccinated, especially if some have personal concerns regarding the classification and safety of these medicines. That’s their right.

After all, if you’re vaccinated, aren’t you protected from Covid-19? Be at peace.

-3 ( +10 / -13 )

Using the available data (from whatever source and motivation), there simply isn’t an emergency case to vaccinate young folks and children.

And if there is no emergency, there is no need for administration of experimental drugs.

And anyone that claims they know the long term affects of Covid-19 infection or of vaccine side effects is misinformed or a charlatan.

-3 ( +13 / -16 )

virusrex

You got it backwards, several studies around the world have proved the vaccine to be safe and efficient on the demographic, what the severely incomplete information from Japan is trying to be used for is to reject the conclusion of those studies, which is obviously invalid. The decision is based on information of much better quality. Being under emergency use do not mean it is not justified, as long as the intervention can scientifically be proved to lower the risk then it is fine.

And hundreds of studies around the world, not counting the thousands of harmed people attest to the fact that the "so called" vaccines are not safe and efficient against Covid at all. Hundreds of doctors are witness to the damages caused and can be found speaking out on video, of course not on main stream news. virusex certainly has a keen interest in debunking any narrative against the "vaccines" Who does virusrex work for ?

-3 ( +10 / -13 )

Also the emergency approval do not make anything more risky...

Compared to full FDA approval, EUA products are not necessarily more dangerous, but they are certainly more risky.

But even medicines that do get full FDA approval, many are later found to have serious adverse effects. In a 2011 study published in JAMA, 32% of FDA-approved drugs (2001-2010) were found to have safety issues years after approval. “The median time from approval to first postmarket safety event was 4.2 years (IQR, 2.5-6.0 years)”

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2625319

So imagine how much more likely it is for a product that is only authorized for emergency use to have such safety issues years down the line.

... the vaccines have been examined and found much less risky than remaining unvaccinated,

That might be true for old unhealthy people that do not have access to certain treatments. Not so sure that also applies for healthy kids.

Unfortunately, these very safe and effective treatments will probably never be approved because:

“FDA may authorize unapproved medical products or unapproved uses of approved medical products to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by CBRN threat agents when certain criteria are met, including there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives."

I think that also explains why those who push the strongest for these vaccines also happen to be the most opposed to things like ivermectin, HCQ+azithromycin, vitamin D…

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

virusrex

A well known misleading site that fails completely to properly weight every article with the obvious purpose of exaggerating noise signal over real effects (or lack of effects). 

The "misleading site" compiles all active studies on HCQ, while the selective meta-study in "Nature" that you keep quoting refers only to selected 19 studies.

Yes, I am sure you keep an eye on all the thousands of studies, instead of finding an article in well-known establishment paper that you like.

Dr. Peter McCullough (who testified in congress) refers to the institutional bias and to what collegues say in private but not in public for fear of repercussion in this interview:

https://vimeo.com/553518199

Maybe you can take time off from your mainstream media read and take a listen.

-3 ( +6 / -9 )

As expected, any story about vaccines, and specially about vaccinating children, will always bring the same people repeating the same disinformation. VAERS, GBD, HCQ, anything to avoid recognizing that vaccines work and protect people from a very dangerous disease.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

I think that the choice for an Emergency Use Approved “Investigational Drug” should be an adult and personal decision.

A government with demonstrated ineptness should not be imposing anything on anyone that may be uninformed.

As at March 19, 2021, even questionable numbers, the CDC arrived at the following survival rates:

Ages 0-17 99.998%

Ages 18-49 99.95%

Ages 50-64 99.4%

Ages 65+ 91%

And the CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which is over 40% of its total budget.

Similarly, The FDA receives 45% of its annual budget from the pharmaceutical industry.

“The World Health Organization (WHO) gets roughly half its budget from private sources, including Pharma and its allied foundations.

So, maybe the towns folk have a point.

-4 ( +26 / -30 )

As at March 19, 2021, even questionable numbers, the CDC arrived at the following survival rates:

Ages 0-17 99.998%

Ages 18-49 99.95%

Ages 50-64 99.4%

Ages 65+ 91%

And the CDC, frankly, is a vaccine company; it owns 56 vaccine patents and buys and distributes $4.6 billion in vaccines annually through the Vaccines for Children program, which is over 40% of its total budget.

Yes, very important points.

And I would expect the survival rates to be even higher in Japan, considering the very high obesity levels in the US, even among kids.

In Japan, there is yet to be any serious case or death due to Covid19 among the below 20 year olds (after about 79,000 confirmed infections). There is no need for them to take any of these investigational vaccines (except perhaps the few that have certain health issues) for which nobody knows the long term effects.

-4 ( +11 / -15 )

This is far from done - the worst is yet to come! Be safe out there, please!

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

For example? if you can't prove something is misleading, just that you don't like it, that is a completely different thing,

You have been adamant on your previous posts that these vaccines were NOT experimental. I neither like or dislike the comments. I only know they are false.

As for parental concerns, Japan is not the only nation grappling with this issue of child vaccinations. The University of Guelph in Canada is the top animal studies and veterinary school in the country. It has also been studying this very matter under a government grant.

You can listen to it here, and it makes other comments regarding science.

https://omny.fm/shows/on-point-with-alex-pierson/new-peer-reviewed-study-on-covid-19-vaccines-sugge

Ironically, these researchers obtained a Japanese Biodistribution study to support there findings. I have read the English translation. I suggest you do the same.

I am sure the good doctor is beating back criticism 24/7 these days as a result. But that’s how research and investigation works. And that why these vaccines are classified Investigational in nature.

Once again. I choose what I listen to, and evaluate risks with information provided. Regarding medical treatments, the choices I make for myself often differ to those I make for my children.

Err to the side of caution with all your decisions on this matter. And whatever decisions you do make, try not inflate risks which are not significant.

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

I have not chosen to ignore anyone or anything. Not yet.

Time will reveal the true realities behind this mass deployment of new medicines.

Some concerns and viewpoints are surfacing that don’t all reinforce confidence or the undisputed requirement to vaccinate everyone.

If examining these alternative opinions and analysis is interpreted as a display of bias or irrationality, then I suspect we facing an even more dire sickness.

-4 ( +8 / -12 )

virusrex

If you are informed about very important and corroborated sources of risk from COVID and you insist on not taking that into account when comparing those risks with theoretical ones from a vaccine,

The VAERS numbers are not "theoretical". 5000 Americans dead from the new vaccines already; any traditional one would have been pulled at this point. And none of the mRNA vaccines has full FDA approval... they are all given on an emergency exception basis.

And no, "examining alternative opinions" is not a display of bias, the bias come by giving exaggerated weight to reports that have been heavily criticized for their lack of scientific quality just because they say what you want to hear.

That would apply to you, would it not? The glowing praise of the vaccines and the complete dismissal of treatment options are heavily criticized by a number of highly qualified experts. The only reason you seem unaware of that is because the corporate media muffles them.

-4 ( +9 / -13 )

Anyway folks, I think we can now see what may be driving the reaction in our little Japanese town.

Let’s hope it all works out well.

-4 ( +7 / -11 )

Then again, HCQ was mainly promoted by a researcher found to have manipulated results, fabricated data and falsified ethical approval for dozens and dozens of articles, something that for some reason is perfectly fine for you.

... say the many baseless accusations from the pharma-linked ankle biters; a perfect example of the hit lists that pharmas have to "destroy," "neutralize" or "discredit" dissenting doctors that criticized one of their drugs.

But they are clear baseless accusations, as none of Didier Raoult's HCQ papers have been retracted. The HCQ paper that was retracted was the Lancet paper behind the Lancet-Gate scandal, a fake study to discredit the effectiveness of HCQ at a perfect time to get these vaccines their EUA (one criteria for EUA: "there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives.")

Other examples of accusations that are not baseless are the 71 actual legal convictions over the past 20 years where Pfizer has been fined (for bribes, falsifying data...) for a total of $4,660,896,333. Other pharmas have similar convictions. But you somehow continue to trust them!!!

Oh, and Didier Raoult is not the only one to promote HCQ+azithromycin, hundreds of studies world-wide have confirmed its effectiveness. But I know that the hit list compels you to label those studies as "bad studies."

If that town is able to raise hell over the vaccination of kids, they should definitely raise greater hell to push for the use of HCQ+azithromycin and/or ivermectin.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Sure, corrected, they are being considered experimental by the FDA, the main point I make (that people are not participating in any experiment but being inoculated for the therapeutic value of the vaccine) does not change.

Those are Virusrex own words down playing the fact that his repeated claims that these vaccines were not experimental in nature for months was an insignificant oversight .

After subjecting readers to countless “scientific” counter arguments , a core aspect of his whole argument was undermined by this complete oversight of a basic fact.

That is not easy to downplay. It’s typical of agenda driven dialogue that has dominated these vaccine discussions since the beginning.

We now arrive at a point where the same party advocates vaccinating children, claiming that their erroneous historic claims that these vaccines were never experimental have no relevancy and that the facts are clear.

Sorry, but it’s not a minor oversight. It reveals that Virusrex did not even understand a fundamental fact regarding these medicines, or simply chose to ignore it for whatever reasons.

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Could the vaccine do worse than a child losing limbs to amputation?

It appears that evidence is mounting that the vaccines induce the exact same effect.

Indeed. The damage is largely cause by the spike protein.

In healthy individuals, much of the virus are dealt with at the normal point of entry in the upper respiratory tract. But during vaccination, all those barriers are bypassed and it has recently been confirmed that the mRNA vaccine and the expressed spike protein find their way into the bloodstream and spread throughout the body reaching the brain, spleen, large intestine, heart, liver, lungs and other organs.

There was never the expectation for absolutely all the mRNA to be only delivered locally,

Are you sure? I do remember that you and another member were making fun of me several months ago for indicating that the vaccine will get in the blood stream (I was right, BTW).

and the amount of Spike protein is a tiny fraction of what is produce during natural infection, so the obvious problem with the supposed toxicity is that if microgram level of mRNA are supposed to produce important toxicity, how come the natural infection that produce several orders of magnitude more of that same protein can even course without symptoms?

That is so wrong. There is no way a natural asymptomatic infection in a healthy individual produces “several orders of magnitude more of that same protein”

-4 ( +5 / -9 )

Don't you even recognize the answers that are to the points that YOU brought up.

It would be better if you could at least read the comments you are trying to talk about, yours makes no sense.

A town just offering to vaccinate children is simply not coercion no matter how much you want to twist it. Coercion would be to make death threats unless they stop.

People are simply not being included in any experiment for the vaccination, the purpose is to protect those that are inoculated, can you provide the trial where they are supposedly being included in? who is directing it, what are the primary endpoints? what committee approved it? Unless you can do this the only rational thing is to accept the people are not included in any experiment, they are being protected.

It is understandable that a person that don't understand why the Nuremberg codes are irrelevant for "legal" repercussions of a completely optional therapeutic measure would not want to talk about it, nobody forced him to make that mistake.

And just because you don't know that something bad could come out from making someone refrain from vaccinating doesn't make you free of guilt. So, you will accept criminal negligence charges if someone dies after reading your comment? because that makes as much sense as your suggestion.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

If someone wants to refuse a vaccine knowing their reasons are irrational that is their decision to make.

Does this make any sense? I highly doubt people make medical decisions because they know they are irrational.

You have made some misleading statements in my opinion. I suppose it defines the rationale behind your personal opinions. That is %100 your right.

It is not you that defines the validity or invalidity of a person’s decision. It is expected that you respect it. That’s how free societies function.

We all face a decision with regards to this health issue. By your own words:

If a drug has been already examined and found less risky than the infection then that reduction of the risk is a perfectly valid justification to use it.

And I fully agree. That’s why the drug is in use. But the subject of risk reduction is a moving target, and it is not necessarily achieved via an experimental vaccine alone.

And if your thesis is partially founded on the premise that “in the case of Japan you can only say there has been no deaths reported” for a certain demographic, that’s an extremely reckless basis to submit the whole demographic to an Investigational medication.

I seldom hear of life saving experimental drugs administered under emergency use when no deaths have been reported.

I suggest you leave decisions regarding children to the parents themselves. They have a far greater interest in the matter.

Try and respect that.

-5 ( +10 / -15 )

In a topsy turvy world it looks like the provaxers have now become the antivaxers...

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

virusrex

Any link to those studies? or are something only you can see? How do you explain that no single respected institution say you are correct?

How do you determine which institution is "respected"? By the corporate media tell you so? Have you checked the signers of the Great Barrington Declaration? They are unqualified, unrespected hacks in your mind?

-5 ( +8 / -13 )

@RawBear

Go look up the lawsuits against GlaxoSmithKline’s H1N1 swine flu vaccine Pandemrix over a decade ago, around 2010 after increased cases of narcolepsy emerged in Sweden and Finland among children who got it during the previous pandemic. But a recent report by The BMJ suggests greater safety problems with the vaccine, which neither GSK nor health authorities have made public.

The pattern is hauntingly familiar. Even Tony Fauci was involved pounding the drum on that one. Another Memory Hole event that somehow quietly disappeared.

Everything was perfect. It always is.

Until it isn’t.

-5 ( +7 / -12 )

Go look up the lawsuits against GlaxoSmithKline’s H1N1 swine flu vaccine Pandemrix over a decade ago, around 2010 after increased cases of narcolepsy emerged in Sweden and Finland among children who got it during the previous pandemic. But a recent report by The BMJ suggests greater safety problems with the vaccine, which neither GSK nor health authorities have made public.

Ah yes, and there are many other examples of pharmas being caught and fined for falsifying data, bribing,...

And Merck was also found to have created a hit list to "destroy," "neutralize" or "discredit" dissenting doctors that criticized one of their drugs. So it's not surprising that whenever we bring up an expert making certain claims that big pharma does not like, there is no shortage of baseless hit pieces referenced to in reponse.

The pattern is hauntingly familiar. Even Tony Fauci was involved pounding the drum on that one. Another Memory Hole event that somehow quietly disappeared.

Yeah, they have a way of silencing that kind of info... I've been saying for months that Fauci was a fraud. The good news is that with his leaked E-mails, more people are seeing this and he will hopefully be on his way out very soon, if not in prison.

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

Antiquesaving

If we used your thinking and the rest of the anti vaxxers we would still have smallpox, have yearly outbreaks of Polio, etc...

Did I not just ask you to stop this meaningless mislabelling? Again, doubting the unproven and still not FDA approved new mRNA vaccines does not not mean "anti-vaxxer". Fwiw, none of the many critics of the current mass vaccinations that I read is against vaccines in general.

So can we finally bury this strawman?

-5 ( +6 / -11 )

You choose to listen to what you want to hear, which explains your bias, but do not make your decision less biased. 

Biased, am I ?

So, why don’t you share with this board where I have displayed a position favoring either vaccination or abstaining.

And regarding the position taken that a University researcher is presenting unfounded assertions and personal opinions, how have you established that? Have you critiqued his review and analysis.

It would seem to be a career limiting characteristic for a such a professional to a an arm waving zealot. And there are other medical opinions that also have expressed caution.

...at this point definitely means vaccinating children since the unknown risks of COVID are much more clear and likely than from the vaccine.

Again, I am having difficulty understanding “an unknown risk that is much more clear and likely”. Wouldn’t that be in the realm of the known , and not experimental?

As a self proclaimed follower of science, wouldn’t it best if you tolerated people who choose to manage the “unknown risks” as they see fit?

-6 ( +8 / -14 )

jaybeeb

@Doc Have to agree with virusrex, nobody is forcing anyone to get a jab. These ignorant people are trying to take the option away. And BTW, my son in Canada is 13 and was vaccinated last week, it was HIS choice.

He is not allowed to drink, to get a tatoo, to drive or to vote, and yet he is allowed to make a possible life-altering decision. That makes sense to you?

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

Strangerland

Yeah, I think kids should be able to choose the lesser risk of a vaccine over the higher risk of getting a virus, when their parents are too caught up in their extremism to protect their children.

You do not know which risk is lesser, and the 13-year old hardly has put much effort into researching various opinions.

-6 ( +7 / -13 )

Could the vaccine do worse than a child losing limbs to amputation?

It appears that evidence is mounting that the vaccines induce the exact same effect.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/vaccine-researcher-admits-big-mistake-says-spike-protein-is-dangerous-toxin

Now, the above could all be lunacy by a scientists employed at highly respected academic institutions (not pharmaceutical companies) and on government grants. Or maybe, there are grounds for caution. Just maybe.

In response to a request, Bridle emailed a statement that he had received hundreds of positive emails. He added, too, that “a vicious smear campaign has been initiated against me. This included the creation of a libelous website using my domain name.”

“Such are the times that an academic public servant can no longer answer people’s legitimate questions with honesty and based on science without fear of being harassed and intimidated, However, it is not in my nature to allow scientific facts to be hidden from the public.”

He attached a brief report outlining the key scientific evidence supporting what he said in the interview. It was written with his colleagues in the Canadian COVID Care Alliance (CCCA) — a group of independent Canadian doctors, scientists, and professionals whose declared aim is “to provide top quality, evidence-based information about COVID-19, intent on reducing hospitalizations and saving more lives.”

A focus of the statement was the risk to children and teens who are the target of the latest vaccine marketing strategies, including in Canada.

All sounds like complete heresy to me. You decide for yourself.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

I make no conclusions with regards to these vaccines. I cannot at this point. I only post relevant concerns as I observe them.

Now that you finally understood that these vaccines are classified experimental by the regulatory agencies, you can further advance your education by actually reading the Nuremberg code again as it pertains to the administration of experimental compounds into human beings.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199711133372006

One observation that I have noted is that it appears you are encountering increasing credibility problems with your positions.

My opinion only. I will let readers judge the conversations accordingly.

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

virusreks

the GBD is already debunked as a collection of personal opinions not sustained by science and heavily criticized by (yes) well respected institutions for its lack of scientific basis. How do you respond to those criticisms?

How is the "personal opinion" by 10,000 medical professionals different from the personal opinion of your debunkers?

Then again, HCQ was mainly promoted by a researcher found to have manipulated results, fabricated data and falsified ethical approval for dozens and dozens of articles, something that for some reason is perfectly fine for you.

Oh really. This site compiles medical studies about HCQ:

https://c19hcq.com/

Have you looked at all of them and formed your opinion, or are you just repeating opinions from corporate media journalists?

-6 ( +5 / -11 )

The Japanese govt should prioritize Tokyo residents if they want to hold the Olympics. That seems like a no brainer to me but I guess not to the government

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

It's alarming that the town would make such decisions without taking people's concerns into consideration at all. Why are discussions about the topic off the table?

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

The town is right. It is totally irresponsible to inject children and pregnant women with this experimental mRNA stuff.

-7 ( +8 / -15 )

Well, it is clearly written in the article, irrational fears not substantiated by any data whatsoever....

That’s quite entertaining. No matter how many times I read the article, I cannot find where that is clearly stated.

Must be another one of those unknown risks that’s clearly identified. But this isn’t about clarity, is it?

Now, what kind of job would make anything I wrote (that can easily be confirmed by multiple sources) false?

Once again, you drift between clear confirmation and risk mitigation with “pseudoscientific agility”.

Do you know who stated: “The question is not what I knew, but what I could have known if I wanted to.”

Look it up.

It may help you out get through things with a little more coherence.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

Antiquesaving

Typically anti vaxxers lunacy! If it isn't your child then shut up!

Can we do without the name-calling? Questioning the injection of kids with an unproven, experimental mRNA substance is not being "anti vaxxer".

There are plenty of scientists who are critical of this, including Nobel Prize winning virologists and ex Pfizer CEOs.

-7 ( +7 / -14 )

Nurenberg code is against forced human experimentation, but it says absolutely nothing about therapeutic use, 

Let me assist you once again with your selective comprehension of matters.

The code does address force. But it goes further to include “without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.”

Now, I don’t what to get into the realm of legality. I only want to point out that you should avoid venturing into another field where you likely have little expertise as well.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Could the vaccine do worse than a child losing limbs to amputation?

Yes.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

This entire vaccine roll out in Japan is laughable. It's so backward. Unbelievable for a developed country!!

It takes time to know the long term effects of introducing Chimpanze DNA into humans. Japan may escape the biggest human experiment.

-9 ( +6 / -15 )

Ages 0-17 99.998%

Ages 18-49 99.95%

Ages 50-64 99.4%

Ages 65+ 91%

doesn’t include new variants. USA based statistics. Pre-existing condition s.

Also, deaths from vaccines is very hidden and hard to find.*
-10 ( +6 / -16 )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwr4Wm9pREY

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

Why vaccinate the young when there are risks associated with the vaccine but none with Vivid??

Vaccinate the elderly and sick let others choose!

-11 ( +24 / -35 )

Good. Keep that crap out of our kids arms.

-22 ( +20 / -42 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites