|_|sername wrote:
If Fauci has/had zero to do with which vaccines get approved, why do anti vax people target him as evil?
Because they cant keep track of 5-10 different things in their head. They need one big bad guy.
This thread was deleted by a volunteer moderator. I certainly don't want a thread this big deleted so I've restored. THat being said, this thread has served it's purpose. I've closed it to new posts.
We have a new 2024 vaccine thread here. New people don't need to try to wade through 20,000 posts to figure out what is going on.
-
62
-
How are mRNA vaccines not VACCINES in their truest form? They literally are. They contain the instructions to make an ANTIGEN (one hallmark of a vaccine) that is used to stimulate the adaptive immune system (another Hallmark) and create some form of immunological memory (which varies).
Please tell me. Without looking anything up. What is your definition of a vaccine? And how don't the COVID vaccines fit in? Yes, they're not whole virus vaccines, but it's a similar concept with the same end result (memory of the antigen to lead to a more rapid response to the actual pathogen in name of an infection).
So please. What is the DanM definition of a vaccine? Entertain me.
33 -
The only people who say mRNA vaccines aren't true vaccines are those against advances in science. Science changed my friend. Just because at one point the majority of vaccines were whole viruses doesn't mean new platforms can't come along. You need to learn to roll with the punches
32 -
|_|sername wrote:
If Fauci has/had zero to do with which vaccines get approved, why do anti vax people target him as evil?
Because he was caught lying to the American people on several occasions.
43 -
2600 bro wrote:
|_|sername wrote:
If Fauci has/had zero to do with which vaccines get approved, why do anti vax people target him as evil?
Because they cant keep track of 5-10 different things in their head. They need one big bad guy.
Much as lions on the Serengeti seek out vulnerable zebras at the edge of a herd, special interests faced with adverse scientific evidence often target individual scientists rather than take on an entire scientific field at once. Part of the reasoning behind this approach is that it is easier to bring down individuals than an entire group of scientists, and it still serves the larger aim: to dismiss, obscure, and misrepresent well-established science and its implications. In addition, such highly visible tactics create an atmosphere of intimidation that discourages other scientists from conveying their research’s implications to the public. This “Serengeti strategy” is often employed wherever there is a strong and widespread consensus among the world’s scientists about the underlying cold, hard facts of a field . . .
21 -
From Canada, one example of propaganda methods and mind control tactics that were practiced by governments all over the world.
15 -
Why was the definition of "vaccine" changed?
31 -
the truth.. wrote:
Why was the definition of "vaccine" changed?
Because the old definition could be interpreted to mean that a vaccine induced 100% immunity. By that definition, nothing qualifies as a vaccine. Even rabies shots have been known to fail.
that interpretation was then used to imply that covid vaccines didn’t fit in with previous vaccines due to it also not producing 100% immunity
31 -
the truth.. wrote:
Why was the definition of "vaccine" changed?
To guarantee that the pharmaceutical companies are free from liability for deaths and injuries caused by the mRNA goop injections.
23 -
Ummmmm wrote:
|_|sername wrote:
If Fauci has/had zero to do with which vaccines get approved, why do anti vax people target him as evil?
Because he was caught lying to the American people on several occasions.
Still has nothing to do with vaccines - you're just mad.
42 -
This is the illness that many mRNA vaxxed people cannot fight off.
What hath we wrought ?
22 -
Ummmmm wrote:
|_|sername wrote:
If Fauci has/had zero to do with which vaccines get approved, why do anti vax people target him as evil?
Because he was caught lying to the American people on several occasions.
maybe according to schizophrenics and a few alt right media sources. Where was the intent to deceive?
32 -
For those who wonder why some of us were skeptical of the CDC/WHO from the beginnings of the pandemic, look at this.
- - - -
...Among patients over age 65 who were vented, the mortality rate was 97.2%
"The recommendation to place COVID patients on mechanical ventilation as a first-line response came from the World Health Organization, which allegedly based its guidance on experiences and recommendations from doctors in China. But venting COVID patients wasn’t recommended because it increased survival. It was to protect health care workers by isolating the virus inside the vent machine."
- - - -
It was obvious from the beginning that the CDC/WHO were pathetically incompetent. Instead of testing alternatives, they just TOOK THE WORD OF CHINA that ventilation was the way to go. How is that "follow the science?!" It's purely anecdotal. As a results, 74% of 18-64 ventilated in NYC died!
Scientists should have been field testing or even challenge testing treatments that were found to be working in some locations... HCQ or IVM and zinc, vitamin D, etc. Instead, the CDC stayed with the ventilation protocol even when it has been shown not to work effectively.
Speaking only for myself, when I saw the woeful incompetence of the CDC and WHO, I wasn't going to take their advice on a vaccine that was tested on average for only two months and 1 of 8 participants in the clinical trial were "lost" to follow-up after the first vaccine dose. How incompetent to you have to be to lose 1 in 8 adults when you have all their contact information? I personally believe that some of these 1 in 8 had adverse effects and refused to come back. I believe that some of those 1 in 8 were "lost" on purpose when they had adverse events. One of these 1 in 8 was a South American whistleblower who has been trying to get visibility for his adverse events.
I know that provaxxers will discount all of this. So be it. I'm sharing my rationale to take a different approach. You do you and best of luck for no health issues in the future.
(This article will only be available for a couple of days and then it will be deleted so if you're interested, don't delay in reading it."
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.25 -
fisky wrote:
For those who wonder why some of us were skeptical of the CDC/WHO from the beginnings of the pandemic, look at this.
- - - -
...Among patients over age 65 who were vented, the mortality rate was 97.2%
"The recommendation to place COVID patients on mechanical ventilation as a first-line response came from the World Health Organization, which allegedly based its guidance on experiences and recommendations from doctors in China. But venting COVID patients wasn’t recommended because it increased survival. It was to protect health care workers by isolating the virus inside the vent machine."
- - - -
It was obvious from the beginning that the CDC/WHO were pathetically incompetent. Instead of testing alternatives, they just TOOK THE WORD OF CHINA that ventilation was the way to go. 74% of 18-64 ventilated in NYC died!
Scientists should have been field testing or even challenge testing treatments that were found to be working in some locations... HCQ or IVM and zinc, vitamin D, etc. Instead, the CDC stayed with the ventilation protocol even when it has been shown not to work effectively.
Speaking only for myself, when I saw the woeful incompetence of the CDC and WHO, I wasn't going to take their advice on a vaccine that was tested on average for only two months and 1 of 8 participants in the clinical trial were "lost" to follow-up after the first vaccine dose. How incompetent to you have to be to lose 1 in 8 adults when you have all their contact information? I personally believe that some of these 1 in 8 had adverse effects and refused to come back. I believe that some of those 1 in 8 were "lost" on purpose when they had adverse events. One of these 1 in 8 was a South American whistleblower who has been trying to get visibility for his adverse events.
I know that provaxxers will discount all of this. So be it. I'm sharing my rationale to take a different approach. You do you and best of luck for no health issues in the future.
(This article will only be available for a couple of days and then it will be deleted so if you're interested, don't delay in reading it."
One out of eight lost to follow up in a medical study is hardly unusual. Study participants can withdraw from participation at well. If they decide they no longer want to deal with the hassle of participating in the study then in a free society we have to allow that.
40 -
fisky wrote:
For those who wonder why some of us were skeptical of the CDC/WHO from the beginnings of the pandemic, look at this.
- - - -
...Among patients over age 65 who were vented, the mortality rate was 97.2%
"The recommendation to place COVID patients on mechanical ventilation as a first-line response came from the World Health Organization, which allegedly based its guidance on experiences and recommendations from doctors in China. But venting COVID patients wasn’t recommended because it increased survival. It was to protect health care workers by isolating the virus inside the vent machine."
- - - -
It was obvious from the beginning that the CDC/WHO were pathetically incompetent. Instead of testing alternatives, they just TOOK THE WORD OF CHINA that ventilation was the way to go. How is that "follow the science?!" It's purely anecdotal. As a results, 74% of 18-64 ventilated in NYC died!
Of everything I have read on Letsrun in 20 years, this Fisky, may be the dumbest.
If you get placed on a vent, it's because you literally cannot breathe on your own. You really think giving people Flintstone vitamins was the magic cure when someone is quite literally drowning in their own lung fluids? You make it sound like every person got hooked up to a vent--when most hospitals barely had any compared with the number of patients.
The sad reality is that if you needed a vent, you were already on the way out. It wasn't some nefarious or incompetent technique used to kill off more people.So many people are simply embarrassed for you right now.
60 -
Award for the dumbest Letsrun post I have ever read wrote:
fisky wrote:
For those who wonder why some of us were skeptical of the CDC/WHO from the beginnings of the pandemic, look at this.
- - - -
...Among patients over age 65 who were vented, the mortality rate was 97.2%
"The recommendation to place COVID patients on mechanical ventilation as a first-line response came from the World Health Organization, which allegedly based its guidance on experiences and recommendations from doctors in China. But venting COVID patients wasn’t recommended because it increased survival. It was to protect health care workers by isolating the virus inside the vent machine."
- - - -
It was obvious from the beginning that the CDC/WHO were pathetically incompetent. Instead of testing alternatives, they just TOOK THE WORD OF CHINA that ventilation was the way to go. How is that "follow the science?!" It's purely anecdotal. As a results, 74% of 18-64 ventilated in NYC died!
Of everything I have read on Letsrun in 20 years, this Fisky, may be the dumbest.
If you get placed on a vent, it's because you literally cannot breathe on your own. You really think giving people Flintstone vitamins was the magic cure when someone is quite literally drowning in their own lung fluids? You make it sound like every person got hooked up to a vent--when most hospitals barely had any compared with the number of patients.
The sad reality is that if you needed a vent, you were already on the way out. It wasn't some nefarious or incompetent technique used to kill off more people.
So many people are simply embarrassed for you right now.
Exactly - and during surges the death rate in hospitals increased! So when ventilators were less available, the chance of dying was higher! Really pokes holes in the conspiracies...
50 -
2600 bro wrote:
Exactly - and during surges the death rate in hospitals increased! So when ventilators were less available, the chance of dying was higher! Really pokes holes in the conspiracies...
22 minutes to respond. Don't you have a job... or is this your job? Just wondering...
04 -
fisky wrote:
For those who wonder why some of us were skeptical of the CDC/WHO from the beginnings of the pandemic, look at this.
- - - -
...Among patients over age 65 who were vented, the mortality rate was 97.2%
"The recommendation to place COVID patients on mechanical ventilation as a first-line response came from the World Health Organization, which allegedly based its guidance on experiences and recommendations from doctors in China. But venting COVID patients wasn’t recommended because it increased survival. It was to protect health care workers by isolating the virus inside the vent machine."
- - - -
It was obvious from the beginning that the CDC/WHO were pathetically incompetent. Instead of testing alternatives, they just TOOK THE WORD OF CHINA that ventilation was the way to go. How is that "follow the science?!" It's purely anecdotal. As a results, 74% of 18-64 ventilated in NYC died!
Scientists should have been field testing or even challenge testing treatments that were found to be working in some locations... HCQ or IVM and zinc, vitamin D, etc. Instead, the CDC stayed with the ventilation protocol even when it has been shown not to work effectively.
Speaking only for myself, when I saw the woeful incompetence of the CDC and WHO, I wasn't going to take their advice on a vaccine that was tested on average for only two months and 1 of 8 participants in the clinical trial were "lost" to follow-up after the first vaccine dose. How incompetent to you have to be to lose 1 in 8 adults when you have all their contact information? I personally believe that some of these 1 in 8 had adverse effects and refused to come back. I believe that some of those 1 in 8 were "lost" on purpose when they had adverse events. One of these 1 in 8 was a South American whistleblower who has been trying to get visibility for his adverse events.
I know that provaxxers will discount all of this. So be it. I'm sharing my rationale to take a different approach. You do you and best of luck for no health issues in the future.
(This article will only be available for a couple of days and then it will be deleted so if you're interested, don't delay in reading it."
You are a voice of reason. Thank you, Fisky.
01 -
fisky wrote:
2600 bro wrote:
Exactly - and during surges the death rate in hospitals increased! So when ventilators were less available, the chance of dying was higher! Really pokes holes in the conspiracies...
22 minutes to respond. Don't you have a job... or is this your job? Just wondering...
Yes - everything that doesn’t align with my worldview is a conspiracy!
I check LetsRun a few times throughout the day. Sometimes that happens to occur soon after you had posted.
Unfortunately I have a moral compulsion to combat bad information, conclusions, data, and lies.
10
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.