That would be false, because the mRNA from the vaccines is degraded in the course of hours, a few days at much, on the other hand the viral infection means the viral mRNA is continuously replicated reaching much higher quantities that what is contained in the vaccines. How come then people can have asymptomatic infections with huge quantities of spike proteins? if that is the case that means the tiny microscopic fraction that the vaccines produce is obviously even less toxic.
The upper respiratory tract is loaded with lymphocytes ready to deal with infections, most viruses do not get any further. Trace amounts of virsuses or viral particles may escape and find their way in other parts of the body, but nowhere close to what can be produced from 30mcg of mRNA injected into the arm, most of which quickly moves away and spreads throughout the body. I don't know if it is because of the lipid nanoparticles, but they move away from the injection sight at a level that has never been observed for conventional vaccines.
For those who contributed to the rejection of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for the sole purpose of getting these vaccines an EUA
3,788,927 covid deaths so far according to worldometer.
Yes, many places that have adopted these lifesaving drugs have seen a clear decrease in deaths, and I suspect also spread. But unfortunately, these products were heavily attacked by greedy #&$%s that just want to get their precious vaccines authorized.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
One, big news but athtletes on international competitions are not peak condition immunologically speaking, it is well known they are unusually susceptible to infections and complications because of the physical taxing efforts they have to make.
The paper you previously provided about this was not very convincing. It was largely based on anecdotal evidence about why they seemed to get sick, and included as a possible explanation that athletes have greater exposure to pathogens than nonathletes....
if you can change a 99.7% for a 99.997% chance of surviving, for no real increase of risk
The 99.7% includes those with comorbidities, obese, unhealthy... Any healthy person should expect a much higher survival rate.
And these experimental vaccines do have a risk, so you can't say "for no real increase of risk".
0 ( +1 / -1 )
Life must start to return to normal. I can not wait for these travel restrictions to lift. Just get the the dang shots and use a mask, wash hands and lets move forward.
No need for these dang shots to return to normal...
-10 ( +3 / -13 )
Aduhelm reduces amyloid beta proteins in the brain, which are believed to play a key role in causing Alzheimer's disease.
Do the amyloid beta proteins actually cause the disease, or are they just associated with it? Just like firetrucks are associated with house fires, but do not cause them...
-4 ( +0 / -4 )
The bigger story is that three scientists on the FDA panel reviewing this product resigned over the decision to approve this when not one person on the panel voted to approve it since there is no data or evidence that it offers any benefit to patients with Alzheimer's disease.
Not one person on the panel voted to approve it, and yet it was approved!
I fail to see virusrex's point that this article disproves the idea that "regulating bodies in medicine are deeply in the pocket of pharmaceutical companies". Despite big pharmas being fined several billions over the years for falsifying data and bribing. If anything, the above article reinforces pharma's influence.
-3 ( +1 / -4 )
"Indeed, zero deaths (and zero serious cases) is not an emergency that would warrant taking a risk with an investigational vaccine that has only been authorized for emergency use."
If your argument can only be held by the worst possible available data set you can find, and it is contradicted by the better ones that are also available that points much more clearly for it to be mistaken. A personal opinion about what has or not been registered is also not an argument. Either you have evidence to sustain it or use the much better data sets available. If having not enough data is supposed to help backing up something then the absolute lack of even one case of death because of the vaccine in people younger than 18 yo would be enough to justify it.
Oh, I'm terribly sorry. I must have missed your post where you provided data on the kids in Japan dying from Covid!
But this is very much like when you say that the 100's of studies demonstrating the the effectiveness of HCQ+azithromycin are all "bad studies". Just blame the data.
Oh, and Doc, please stop the scaremongering. Providing official data showing that no kids have died from Covid19 will keep all the children up at night. Think of the children!
-7 ( +2 / -9 )
So , let’s look the mortality numbers in Japan for 12 to 18 yrs in the last 18 months, since the Covid debacle started. They record a figure of zero. Give or take another zero.
Indeed, zero deaths (and zero serious cases) is not an emergency that would warrant taking a risk with an investigational vaccine that has only been authorized for emergency use.
And why choose the country that is famous for its sketchy testing and tracing? that would be like making the argument that not a single death has been registered in the 12-18 yo group because of the COVID vaccines.
One, because the article is about Japan.
Two, their testing is indeed sketchy, and so there are definitely many infections that go uncounted. But I very much doubt that many (or any) covid19 deaths among the young go uncounted. If a young person is actually hospitalized with covid symptoms, I can't imagine them not getting tested.
-4 ( +7 / -11 )
Because the argument that "clinical trials are made to find out all and every single problem that can happen" is false,
You actually think that clinical trials not looking for adverse reactions helps your case?!!!
When the vaccination rollout started, they were surprised that many were reacting to the PEG or who knows what else was in the vaccine. If they really did 100's of clinical trials, they should have expected this.
Who knows what other surprises people will get...
You continue to use misleading words when you are referring to the "microscopic fraction" when referring to the vaccine and "endless accumulation of spike protein" for the natural infection. Only trace amounts of viral products have been detected in some infected patients, nowhere close to the 1 gram you claimed.
The body is designed to handle the virus at the normal point of entry. However, regardless of how healthy one is, the vaccine will bypass this natural barrier and most likely immediately spread throughout the body.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
the mRNA technology has years of advantage in this aspect, being used for long time in hundreds of clinical trials without evidence of any negative effect specific for the technology.
Oh, so there must be a number of products using this technology on the market. Are there?
The spike protein being expressed by these Covid19 vaccines are very toxic and find their way throughout the body (brain, spleen, liver, ovaries...). The mRNAs you say were used in 100's of trials were not for spike proteins.
And strange that when they started vaccinating people, they seemed surprised that many people had negative reactions to the PEG. Why didn't they know that from the "hundreds of clinical trials without evidence of any negative effect specific for the technology"?
-3 ( +1 / -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 )
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 )
Could the vaccine do worse than a child losing limbs to amputation?
-8 ( +2 / -10 )
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 )
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 )
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)”
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 )
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 )
Ooops, premature submit...
Well, what other reason would they have for pushing this deceptive narrative of the very predictable decreased antibodies equaling decreased immunity. Even virusrex knows this is not valid; I remember her early posts about how decreased antibodies is not a problem and that the innate immunity was more important. That was the only time I found any of her posts to be worthy of a positive vote.
-2 ( +0 / -2 )
at this point that is not the medical consensus from the scientific data, if the experts opinions contradict yours it is much safer to listen to the people that deal with the disease in the first place.
Since you talk about medical consensus I expected actual data. But instead, you just provided a link to a report from someone at John Hopkins, stating the usual vaccine salesperson talking point:
Immunity from natural infection starts to decline after 6 to 8 months. We know that fully vaccinated people still have good immunity after a year—and probably longer.
With the 6-8 months, she was probably referring to confirmation of detectable antibodies. If she is such an expert, she should know that does not equal immunity. She should also be aware that those who recovered from the first SARS-CoV still have the memory lymphocytes that make them still immune today, after 18 years.
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
One, he is explicitly saying that he is having trouble confirming the infection,
Yes, that is why I included the word “if”.
Two, scientific data have strongly indicated vaccination produce a higher protective immune reaction than some natural infections, saying that anybody infected is "more protected" is not a valid conclusion.
Yes, perhaps some natural infections, like some asymptomatic infections or false-positive PCR results. But he clearly had symptoms.
A number of reputable sources have claimed that the current data shows that natural infection offers slightly better protection than the vaccine.
Wrong. Immunity from infections last around 8 months.
Wrong. You are probably referring to confirmation of detectable antibodies; that does not equal immunity. There are also memory lymphocytes, which are much longer lived and can possibly last a lifetime. For example, those who recovered from the first SARS-CoV, still have these and are therefore still immune today, after 18 years.
0 ( +1 / -1 )
in any case, they're offering me vaccination next month, so.....
If you did had the C-thing (with symptoms), then there is no need for you to get the vaccine. You would already be more immune than anyone who only had the vaccinations.
I think that the idea that Japanese are biologically different than people in other countries (e.g Korea, China) is not very helpful
Or perhaps they just don't trust studies done abroad.
it will not give any information of use, so, how about accelerating the vaccination efforts first and after the country reaches immunity other things can become a priority?
Sounds like someone is worried that the information they will find will make many reconsider getting the vaccine. Deciding to take or pass on the vaccine should be an informed decision, so I'm glad they are doing their own investigation.
-1 ( +6 / -7 )
Questioned by Congress last week, Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health denied this amounted to gain of function research, but Ebright said it clearly does.
Fauci's recently released emails show that he knew very well that they were doing gain of function research. He should be fire immediately, at the very least...
@ Steve Martin
Welcome back; I made sure to make back up copies of your last recent great posts.
Thanks for the names. I know many of them, but I'll make sure to check out the remaining ones.
Don't worry about the down votes, I suspect they do not all come from separate members.
There are a number of decent posters, including a bunch of news ones...
-4 ( +4 / -8 )
Excellent posts. You made it very clear that these are investigational vaccines; however I avoid saying that these vaccines are FDA approved, as this implies that they have a level of safety that is not warranted.
On the FDA's own homepage under Emergency Use Authorization, they state:
"Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act), when the Secretary of HHS declares that an emergency use authorization is appropriate, 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 believe the distiction between "FDA Approved" and "Emergency Use Authorization" is important.
-1 ( +2 / -3 )
And at risk of being off-topic, here is research by doctors on the ground who have been working with Ivermectin. Remember that "consensus" is a phone argument. Medicine like any other science is constantly evolving. All it takes is for one person to find something new to render the consensus meaningless.
I don't remember ever hearing an actual scientist talking about "consensus", is a phony argument used to silence opposing views and push a narrative that can't be defended otherwise. Scientists do not use that word, or extremely rarely.
BTW, here is a long discussion between Pierre Kory & Bret Weinstein. Haven't listened to it yet, but it promises to be good: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tn_b4NRTB6k
-4 ( +3 / -7 )
Sorry, but there are many current experts who insist that PCR cycles are important. Including Didier Raoult, who runs a large institute and is always using the latest technologies.
If your reference is a researcher that is well known for making unethical human research, falsifying approvals, manipulating data, fabricating results and hiding multiple conflict of interest you may as well accept from the beginning you have no argument.
Sorry, but again you are simply repeating the usual baseless accusations against Didier Raoult from gamma ankle biters linked to big pharma. In contrast, accusations that are not baseless, that are actual legal convictions, are the 71 times over the past 20 years that 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!!!
1 ( +3 / -2 )
Sorry but anybody that worked in a biology lab for 20 years and still believed the nonsense about PCR cycles is like a cop that worked 20 years in the force but says he believed handcuffs could only be opened by breaking them. Either this person is not being truthful or never learned anything at his job.
Sorry, but there are many current experts who insist that PCR cycles are important. Including Didier Raoult, who runs a large institute and is always using the latest technologies. I even provided a link to a paper his group published last year specifically about this. You always countered with long yet incomplete/unclear comments about multiple primers, controls, manufacturers' protocols, but you have yet to provide a coherent explanation as to why PCR cycles are irrelevant.
That would explain your admiration for Mikovits.
Judy Mikovits should be admired. And based on Fauci's recently released E-mails, I think more people will realized that she was right all along...
-1 ( +3 / -4 )
How much did you calculate (because you are just not talking about what you imagine is the quantity, right?)
I actually did calculate it a while back, using extremely generous parameters to get some rough idea of the upper limit, and it was nowhere close to 1 gram.
how do you explain that even very old people can get vaccinated without any health problem?
Oh, I see. It doesn't kill everyone, so it's perfectly fine...
-1 ( +1 / -2 )
Everything can be pathogenic, the most important thing is that the mRNA vaccine causes the body to produce the spike protein at the microgram level, while the natural infection can reach grams, that is a million times more.
Oh, but the spike protein is very pathogenic. That is the protein that is causing most of the damage. The mRNA vaccines get into the bloodstream, resulting in the toxic spike protein spreading and accumulating throughout the body (brain, spleen, liver, adrenal glands, ovaries...). This happens regardless of whether you are healthy or not. While in healthy people, a natural infection does not get very far.
I remember several months ago you saying that an asymptomatic infection results in a gram of viral protein. There is no way that is true, not even close. And you never provided a reference for that, you just multiplied two random numbers.
-2 ( +1 / -3 )
The problem is that many are "providing" baseless opinions or even information that is completely incorrect or false.
Yes, a great example is:
That has no importance, vaccines are still a much safer way to train the immune system as demonstrated scientifically, healthy people have died from the infection, and also have spike protein spreading throughout their bodies, that is a natural part of the infection, except of course at much higher levels than what is observed with the vaccine.
That does not happen in healthy people. And I hope you won't bring up again the 1 gram of viral protein in asymptomatic people.
-5 ( +4 / -9 )
I'm so glad that every poster on JT is a scientist...
Some of us might be scientists (I know for a fact that at least one is), but most of us can spot the obvious sale-person BS trying desperately to sell as many vaccines as possible. Plus, many of us are providing information from actual scientific experts that are ignored by the controlled media.
In the history of (VAERS) the vast vast majority have been proven to have no connection with any of the Vaccines.
No, not proven, they just add a statement that the numbers are perfectly normal. And please note that only a small fraction of adverse reactions (ca. 1%) are ever reported.
If 4000 unvaccinated people of the same demographics have also died during the same time what do you think it means?
Except that they generally don't look at effects over the same time. Some will look at the adverse reactions (or death) within a few days of vaccination and compare that number with the normal frequency over a year and say they're about the same...
Terribly sorry but the article you link to makes absolutely no sense, For example it recommends "attenuated antigens" instead of spike proteins, but the spike protein ARE the antignes the writer is recommending, and its attenuation would refer to the virus, not the antigen, meaning that instead of having one kind of RNA producing viral proteins in your cells you would have a couple of dozens types, and since the virus would replicate it would mean higher amount of the spike proteins (and the others). So apparently he thinks more spike protein is better?
But the spike protein is the one that is causing most or all of the problems. If you have multiple antigens, then you are less likely to have problems with variants. That is why I tend to prefer the Chinese vaccine (inactive virus) which cannot replicate in your body. Unfortunately, it's Chinese so I don't trust the quality of the cell lines used to produce them.
-3 ( +7 / -10 )
In a short version, the vaccine is asking, through the messenger RNA, cells to manufacture spike proteins so your immune system can develop antibodies against it, however it appears that those vaccine-induced spike protein can unexpectedly enters the bloodstream and accumulate in tissues and organs, they do not stay in the Deltoid muscle region like the manufacturer assumed it will be (this was confirmed by the Japanese Ogata biodistribution study), spike protein has been identified as the toxin which lead to many side effect of the Sars-Cov2.
Much of the damage in infected people is caused by the spike protein. And now millions are getting injected with the mRNA vaccines that get into the bloodstream, resulting in the toxic spike protein spreading and accumulating throughout the body (brain, spleen, liver, adrenal glands, ovaries...).
Our immune system (innate and adaptive) is well designed to handle natural coronavirus infections through natural entry points. If you are healthy, the virus will not get far. But being healthy does little to prevent the mRNA vaccine and the spike protein from spreading throughout your body.
-4 ( +8 / -12 )