Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche explains his theory that mass vaccination will increase COVID-19

Lead Foil Hat wrote:]It is not that fringe....just fringe to the CNN "science" Nazi dogma.

And unfortunately, there’s no vaccine to ward off stupidity...

There's no need to debate Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche's position. That horse has left the barn. Besides, his concern is primarily the rise of more deadly variants. That horse has also left the barn.

Although more deadly variants are a concern, my primary concern is the long-term effects of the vaccine itself. Still, I think the following two articles are worth reading.

The first article is "18 reasons" not to get the vaccine. It was posted on another thread, but since there were no comments about it, I don't think many posters took the time to read it so I'm posting it again.

Within that first article, there is a link that shows a very disturbing fact about the Pfizer vaccine study. In that trial, there were 3,410 suspected but unconfirmed cases of COVID... 1,594 in the vaccine group and 1,816 in the control group. If you include these "suspected" cases of COVID, the efficacy of the vaccine drops down to about 19%... not 95%.

This was the most important clinical trial in history. Why in the world wouldn't they test "suspected but unconfirmed cases" to determine if it was actually COVID??!! Maybe it's because 19% sounds pathetic, whereas 95% puts Pfizer in the #1 position to sell a few BILLION doses of vaccine. Yes, the vaccine does do a great job of keeping at risk populations (fat, elderly, low levels of vitamin D, sedentary) out of the hospital, but for everyone else, the risk vs reward is not impressive. I'm not taking the vaccine... unless I'm forced to, which might happen this summer.

https://www.deconstructingconventional.com/post/18-reason-i-won-t-be-getting-a-covid-vaccine?fbclid=IwAR1dO1hEM5Ey9rkU6qTARWJRBXD94rWDCnPyPaNXiWcoxx9Splhgks8YCsA

https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2021/01/04/peter-doshi-pfizer-and-modernas-95-effective-vaccines-we-need-more-details-and-the-raw-data/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bmj%2Fblogs+%28Latest+BMJ+blogs%29&g=w_bmj-com

Oh, by the way, my previous post was to provide some additional data to consider about Jamin's position. My position is overwhelmingly based on only one issue: point #6 in the 18 Reasons article, cited below.

Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no long-term safety data. In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now--for ANY population.

Now, those long-term effects might be beneficial. There may be none. There may be a few isolated negative effects. There might be horrific long-term effects.

The posters arguing that we have enough data to show long-term effects are mistaken.

Example: A stock goes public. Its price goes steadily up for six months. Where will it be five years from now? The bottom line is that you don't know. There are many risks that can affect future stock prices.

For those saying we have long-term data on other mRNA vaccines, I'll pose this analogy. A few stocks go public several years ago. Their price goes steadily up for years. Does that mean that ANY stock that goes public, even when it does something different than these other stocks, will go up steadily for several years? Of course not.

In the stock market, you "bet" with money AND you diversify your holdings in case you are wrong. With these mRNA vaccines, you are betting with your life and you cannot diversify your risk.

We need at least two years of data for a very large test group to find out... preferably five years of data. I'm taking a wait and verify approach, but you do you.

I really, really hope the vaccines will be "safe and effective" long term and my concerns will prove to be false.

fisky wrote:

.... We need at least two years of data for a very large test group to find out... preferably five years of data. I'm taking a wait and verify approach, but you do you. ....

In the 1970’s, it was discovered the an ingredient in many baby foods caused irreversible damage to the hypothalamus in young animals (single dose: injected or oral intake) at doses equivalent to what humans could ingest. The health effects were not seen until the animals reached puberty. This was not the only product shown to cause these effects.

In my opinion, no matter how many long-term studies the drug companies fund on young children and infants, the long-term effects are unknown until there are several groups of independent reseachers who conduct both human and animal studies looking for the above-mentioned effects and other possible effects. I don’t think it’s a good idea to subject a child to poorly-tested, experimental drugs.

They did test. The article asks that we view a suspected case with a negative pcr test as a Covid infection. To do so we would need to imagine that the pcr test only detects 1 case of Covid out of every 20 that occur. By this standard, on average, everyone in the United States has had Covid twice.

Here is your protocol

1) check for symptoms possibly consistent with Covid. If positive go to step 2

2) check pcr for coronavirus , if positive put in the database to be matched with vaccine or placebo.

He wants every positive result in step 1 to be considered positive for Covid. In short he is asking for proof that the vaccines prevent EVERY condition that produces: respiratory tract symptoms, malaise, g I disturbance, fever, chills. Cough, weakness, etc.

Of course that would water down results immensely.

Also, why do you imagine pcr results happen to match with vaccine usage? These results would be so ridiculously improbable if random.

Honestly, in the article even he doesn’t seem to really doubt that the vaccines prevent Covid 19. He appears more preoccupied with other concerns, which have been addressed in the interim.

Thanks. I followed a link and it appears that this was the protocol. I stand corrected.

Considering you seem to have made up your mind about the vaccine weeks ago, fisky, yet still continue to fearmongers suggests:

1) you don’t see this as a personal choice and are actively trying to convince others to join you

And/or

2) you have not fully convinced yourself your decision is the correct one (it’s not, you should get vaccinated) and are spamming denier-blogs to reassure your reasoning.

Nobody can stop you from being openly ignorant but this is not the first time you’ve posted a denier-blog with some “bombshell” only to have someone refute it after one google search. At least do a little homework instead of just posting the first thing that fits your priors?

Are you talking about MSG in baby food?

They did do studies in humans. It turns out humans metabolize it way faster than rats so it was effectively impossible for levels to get high enough to cause brain toxicity. Animal models are helpful

I don’t think people appreciate how much our understanding of biology and methods of probing it have improved since the 70s and 80s. We have a much larger body of work to build upon, including, in this case, several mRNA vaccines for other indications that were first given to patients starting in 2012 or so.

Messenger RNA vaccines are exciting in part because of their short half-life. RNA is naturally short lived in the cell. Nothing sticks around after a few days. This good for long term effect boogeymen.

Lastly I’ll add that for every severe vaccine adverse event in history, symptoms have arisen in 8 or less weeks from vaccination.

It’s always possible to induce the specter of delayed onset adverse events for ANYTHING. Who’s to say those new Nike 4%’s won’t lead to paralysis in 15 years because they force the foot into joint-damaging biomechanics?? We need more studies??

They didn’t do the studies in humans and they can’t because they had to dissect the brains of the animals to discover the damage. Blood tests showed that humans concentrated it in their blood to levels 5 times higher than rodents and 40 times more than non-human primates — and these are manufacturer numbers published in a book they sponsored and republished at a FASEB hearing. Happy to share the chart/image.

Other substances can cause similar damage. This is one of many reasons why many animal studies of long-term exposure are crucial for drug approval and even with all of these studies serious adverse effect occur.

A veterinarian? Haha yo

Ain’t got nothing on Fauci

twoggle wrote:

They didn’t do the studies in humans and they can’t because they had to dissect the brains of the animals to discover the damage. Blood tests showed that humans concentrated it in their blood to levels 5 times higher than rodents and 40 times more than non-human primates — and these are manufacturer numbers published in a book they sponsored and republished at a FASEB hearing. Happy to share the chart/image.

Other substances can cause similar damage. This is one of many reasons why many animal studies of long-term exposure are crucial for drug approval and even with all of these studies serious adverse effect occur.

Everything I found showed that glutamate is metabolized much faster in humans than in rats. They have adult humans 10g (!) of glutamate and didn’t see blood levels approaching toxic limits.

AFAIK the manufacturers voluntarily withdrew MSG after the animal studies. Good precaution I suppose but i don’t think later work supported the risk. And as far as I know, there’s no documented human glutamate toxicity events, ever.

Would be interested in seeing sources if you have them.

And I disagree. If you feed rats grams of stuff/kg of body weight you can find all sorts of toxicity. That doesn’t mean it poses a risk to humans. Water has an attainable LD50, ya know?

Hidden toxicity is extremely rare. Most adverse events are near-term and long term effects have accompanying short term toxicity.

Dr Jill Biden wrote:

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

It is not that fringe....just fringe to the CNN "science" Nazi dogma. It is a reasonable thought process here. In the least the specificity of these vaccines and pressure from isolation could drive variants and the need for more and more new vaccines......they are already pushing upgrades and boosters. The shills here on Letsrun are dogmatic idiots who just need to feel empowered and superior. They are the real fringe, not scientists speaking up about reasonable concerns.

Isn't it amazing how liberals have become the biggest supporters of corporate pharma and corporate media, all funded by the mega-banks?

Their total obedience to the 'machine' is truly fascinating.

They aren't liberals. It's career oppotunism, that's all.

Opportunism to call out a guy fearmongering the vaccines so he can sell his own magic sera that works for all diseases!!

Literal snake oil and you guys will froth over him because you’re so angry the vaccines work

This PRECIOUS guy is a notorious narcissist who always posts with an authoritarian tone on many subjects he has no clue about. Best way, ignore him. It hurts narcissist like nothing else.

Harambe wrote:

Everything I found showed that glutamate is metabolized much faster in humans than in rats. They have adult humans 10g (!) of glutamate and didn’t see blood levels approaching toxic limits.

AFAIK the manufacturers voluntarily withdrew MSG after the animal studies. Good precaution I suppose but i don’t think later work supported the risk. And as far as I know, there’s no documented human glutamate toxicity events, ever.

Would be interested in seeing sources if you have them.

And I disagree. If you feed rats grams of stuff/kg of body weight you can find all sorts of toxicity. That doesn’t mean it poses a risk to humans. Water has an attainable LD50, ya know?

As you can see from the industry’s own chart (below), humans concentrate glutamate in the blood ~5 times more than rodents. They gave infant rodents approximately 5 times the dose and in that single dose it caused irreversible damage to the hypothalamus. Infants and children animals are highly susceptible from a single dose, adults might have consequences from regular, high intake, but I don’t know. No symptoms of the damage were seen until after the animals reached puberty — symptoms that seem to have become more prevelent in society over the decades.

A couple of good summaries:

“Excitatory neurotoxins as food additives: an evaluation of risk.” Neurotoxicology 2: 163-192, 1980.

“Excitotoxic Food Additives--Relevance of Animal Studies to Human Safety,” Neurobehavioral Toxicology and Teratology, Volume 6, page 455-462, 1984.

Since the early studies, and pulling MSG from infant formulas not much has been done (except from some scientic fraud by the industry related to non-human primate studies). But hundreds of studies have been conducted related to excitotoxins (like MSG) and adult neuological conditions.

But my original point was that without independent animal studies, it is impossible to know the long-term effects of a drug/vaccine on susceptible infants or young children.

TKTKTK wrote:

jamin wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gOBoapt3DE&ab_channel=GeertVandenBossche

Jamin, somehow your brain was immune to all the best efforts of the educators and people of decency in your life, and you ended up a nominal adult with the mental faculties of an idiotic gerbil. So I guess anything is possible.

Please stop. You're so, so embarrassing.

I mean, I know you never will, as your abject loneliness forces you to seek confirmation of your existence however you can get it, even in the form of others' opprobrium or contempt. But please know that the only purpose your ejaculations on this site serve is to show the rest of us of the possible lives we could be living if we had just started punching ourselves in the head repeatedly at an early age.

+1

Looks like this is Olney vs the world for glutamate toxicity and basically nobody has managed to reproduce his results in animals or humans (and not for lack of trying!).

It’s an interesting hypothesis but when this starts getting blamed for every affliction known to man (autism, cancer, ADHD, Alzheimer’s), one starts to get suspicious.

The fact that it’s not easily replicable seems to place this one in the firmly too good to be true category.

Lord knows we need more outside the box thinking on brain health, but the accusations of a coverup are always funny. Anyone in neuroscience academia would KILL to uncover a true mechanism for autism, etc.

Harambe wrote:

Looks like this is Olney vs the world for glutamate toxicity and basically nobody has managed to reproduce his results in animals or humans (and not for lack of trying!).

....

The fact that it’s not easily replicable seems to place this one in the firmly too good to be true category.

I’m afraid you are just not familiar with the research. Countless independent and industry scientists have reproduced his results. Olney was not the first scientist to discover the irreversible damage and was by no means the last.

No one has conducted human studies because dissecting the subjects to find the irreversible damage to the hypothalamus would be unethical.

Every review after 1980s or so that I found basically said “he found stuff but it wasn’t reproduced outside his lab.”

I found one or two ardent acolytes publishing in effectively opinion journals.

There are many scientists with interesting results who become convinced their mechanism explains an abundance of the worlds ills. If only it were so simple.

The pattern of “I have the solution to tons of tricky modern diseases” followed by “I’m being silenced by Big X/the academic establishment” has been repeated too many times for the skeptical eye.