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

Here is another discussion of even greater scientistic goodness:

http://branemrys.blogspot.com/2011/10/water-is-not-h2o.html#:~:text=An%20individual%20molecule%20of%20H2O,properties%20we%20associate%20with%20water.&text=of%20water%20then%20we%20have,molecule%20but%20in%20macroscopic%20quantities

.

Yes, it is always possible some substance will wreak long-term havoc on the body. Vaccines are extremely safe in comparison to any number of daily activities such as driving to work, going on a run through a neighborhood where you're forced to cross intersections with cars, getting caught in a thunderstorm, eating bacon, taking the pill (much higher chance of blood clots than the 1/6 of a million chance of women 18 to 50 taking the J and J vaccine so far), asbestos, lead poisoning, and of course the 125/million risk that young people had of dying of COVID last year or the 1800/million overall societal risk of dying of COVID in the past year in the U.S.

Harambe wrote:

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?

John Maynard Keynes once quipped, "When the facts change, I change my mind." It's not clear whether he actually ever said that, but the message is clear. We need to keep an open mind in debate. So to address your second point first, I'm not fully convinced that my decision is the right one. I'm constantly weighing my personal risk of getting COVID (again) and spreading it to others with the risk of taking a vaccine with unknown long-term consequences.

Posting my concerns here often results in new information that supports or refutes my position. I like that. Sometimes, I'm wrong, but I wouldn't know it unless I read the opposing position.

I don't like the personal attacks (not that you are making a personal attack... I don't think you are), but it comes with the territory when posting on LetsRun.

As far as convincing others to join me, that is not my objective whatsoever. I'd just prefer that everyone gather data and make an informed decision rather than blindly following "expert" advice.

That said, my personal preference would be for everyone else to get vaccinated. One of my primary life goals for the past twenty years has been to slow my personal aging process as much as possible. This virus is a risk to that health. I'm taking vitamin D3 daily, plus about two dozen other supplements. I think I had COVID back in June and sailed through it with only a couple of significant symptoms that lingered for 3-4 months. I think my supplement approach helped, especially since I'm well within the age group risk category for COVID. I also exercise daily. I keep my weight under control. I would prefer to see everyone do what I do to stay healthy, but they don't. I'd love to hear our public health experts say, "For goodness sakes people, try to take care of your own health! Lose weight. Exercise. Take supplements, at least until this pandemic is over. Take vitamin D3, zinc, melatonin, C, and a strong multivitamin!" But... they refuse to do so. It's sad because it could have saved a few lives.

I think the most likely outcome of the vaccine will be long-term side effects that will only affect a few hundred thousand people and most of those side effects will be treatable with prescription drugs. For the masses that 1) totally ignore their own health and 2) are content with being "not sick" versus being in optimal health, that's an acceptable risk. For me, as an elite age group athlete, that risk is not acceptable.

My critics will say I'm selfish. So be it. This is what I believe. I've admitted to being wrong before and I've done so in this thread. If I'm wrong and there are no side effects in five years. I'll admit that my concerns were unwarranted. If I'm right, I'll probably say I told you so. /insert a smiley face here.

Dr Jill Biden wrote:

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

Like practically everything, its not a binary choice. Being supporters of the scientific method, and being against quackery doesn't make us fans of big pharma. I'd recommend reading books by people like Ben Goldacre, "Bad Science" is a well written book against the kind of quackery supported by The Unkle, "Bad Pharma" is a well written book against big pharma.

Do I trust the pharmaceutical companies more than the random internet "experts", yes. Do I trust them implicitly, no. I want more control over the pharmaceutical industry, I want stricter rules on testing and trialling, I want more rules over marketing. AND I want the same rules to apply to the alternative medicine industry. I want unfounded claims to be investigated and taken to court, regardless of if its big pharma or self-professed alternative "doctors".

Yes, I have worked against the influence of the pharmaceutical companies on doctors, while simultaneously pushing for more vaccine access. I didn’t see such an uproar when we pushed for the clinical trials registry, or getting pharmaceutical companies out of medicine conferences. I see the uproar when there is a push to invest in public health.

How can Covid spread further if it doesn't really exist as a problem? The OP trumps himself yet again.

Harambe wrote:

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

There are numerous corrupt reviewers who will fabricate statements for manufacturers such as that statements above. At the end of this post, I will include a small sampling of both independent and manufacturer researchers who duplicated his results or irreversible damage to the brain. Once caught in a falsification, the manufacturer (or reviewer paid directly or indirectly by the manufacturer) will jump to their next convincing-sounding, public relations statement.

Now this manufacturer happens to be the “Lance Armstrong” of decades of scientific fraud (IMO) and is probably more responsible for people mistrusting science than many companies (e.g., getting caught hiding active chemicals in “placebo” mixtures). But it brings me back to my original point to wait for extensive and independent human and animal studies before giving experimental drugs to infants and children.

=====================

Brain damage in the

male domestic fowl treated with monosodium glutamate. Poult Sci

50: 1511-1514, 1971.

318 Arees, E.A., and Mayer, J. Monosodium glutamate-induced brain

lesions: electron microscopic examination. Science 170: 549-550,

1970.

Light microscopy examination of monosodium

glutamate induced lesions in the brain of fetal and neonatal rats.

Anat Rec 169: 312, 1971.

The effects of neonatally-admin-

istered monosodium glutamate on the reproductive system of adult

hamsters. Biol Reprod 14: 362-369, 1976.

Studies on brain lesion by administration of

monosodium L-glutamate to mice. I. Brain lesions in infant mice

caused by administration of monosodium L-glutamate. Toxicology 9:

293-305, 1978.

Monosodium glutamate induced lesions of the arcuate nucleus. I.

Endocrine deficiency and ultrastructure of the median eminence.

Anat Rec 186: 185-196, 1976.

The median eminence of mice with a

MSG induced arcuate lesion. Anat Rec 180: 436, 1974.

Monosodium glutamate induced lesions of the arcuate nucleus. II

Fluorescence histochemistry of catecholamines. Anat Rec 186: 197-

205, 1976.

Age dependent sensi-

tivity to monosodium glutamate inducing brain damage in the

chicken. Poult Sci 53: 1539-1942, 1974.

Effects of monosodium glutamate on the neuro-

endocrine axis of the hamster. Anat Rec 184: 543-544, 1976.

333 Coulston, F. In: Report of NAS,NRC, Food Protection

Brain lesions and obesity in mouse

offspring caused by maternal administration of monosodium

glutamate during pregnancy. Congenital Anomalies 14: 77-83, 1974.

Nature and extent of

brain lesions in mice related to ingestion of monosodium gluta-

mate: a light and electron microscope study. J Neuropath Exp

Neurol 33: 74-97, 1974.

fisky wrote:

I think the most likely outcome of the vaccine will be long-term side effects that will only affect a few hundred thousand people and most of those side effects will be treatable with prescription drugs. For the masses that 1) totally ignore their own health and 2) are content with being "not sick" versus being in optimal health, that's an acceptable risk. For me, as an elite age group athlete, that risk is not acceptable.

My critics will say I'm selfish. So be it. This is what I believe. I've admitted to being wrong before and I've done so in this thread. If I'm wrong and there are no side effects in five years. I'll admit that my concerns were unwarranted. If I'm right, I'll probably say I told you so. /insert a smiley face here.

If you are going to post things that have helped change your mind or new data and such, please don’t post denier-blogs that repeat stuff like “deaths counts from COVID are very exaggerated” and the like. It’s impossible to trust someone who still holds this view given all the data we have seen (and belabored many times in this board).

I find it a bit incredulous that you think the -most likely- outcome of vaccination is >0.1% long term effects in the US population.

Given we have seen 0 safety events right now with the mRNA vaccines (and very very rare events with J&J), I’m not sure what evidence you have to support this.

Never has a vaccine had a delayed onset toxicity that appeared longer than ~8 weeks. And vaccines have been far safer in the last few decades than before.

The only way, I think, to come to the conclusion is to assume a priori the vaccine is secretly toxic, thus treating the lack of 5 year safety studies as failure to disprove this. Given the excellent safety profile of modern vaccines and the rigorous testing the current vaccines went though (phase 3 with 30k +), assuming they are toxic is basically untenable.

Depends on which vaccine. The mRNA vaccines seem to work pretty well. The traditional vaccines like those put out by the Chinese are pretty dodgy. Take a look at the UAE, the Seychelles and Chile to see how well the Sinopharm / Sinovac vaccines have worked in those countries.

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/seychelles/

The most concerning thing about these Covid threads is that they show science education has failed Americans - and the OP is truly the dunce in the corner.

You write very well and present your position in a mature fashion, in my opinion. That is refreshing on this site. I just wonder, if you are so healthy and are careful about being exposed to Covid and take lots of supplements that you think will benefit your health, why did you get Covid in the first place. I haven't read previous posts you might have logged, so maybe you explained that.

I tend to believe that healthy people are at risk, because this virus is very contagious. As someone who is over 70, I try to not take any risks and tend to anticipate people who are sloppy that I encounter when shopping. I stay as far away from them as possible. I did not get Covid in over a year, living in two different locations, one semi-locked down, the other open. I have taken the first vaccine as a precaution of getting Covid and the vaccine helping to reduce the possibility of death. I take responsibility for my life and stay away from others who seem less concerned. I think as an older person who is at greater risk of dying from Covid, this approach seems to work best.

As to taking D3 and other vitamins and minerals, I did that for a while, but that affected my intestines a bit too much. I spent a lot of time outside walking . My blood tests have all come back within the normal range.

Bob Cummings, an old time actor for the 40's and 50's was a huge believer in taking all sorts of vitamins, minerals, etc. He died at the age of 80, nothing spectacular when you consider many people can make it into their 90's if they don't smoke.

So, I would prefer to think that being active, both physically and mentally, being outside as much as possible and being responsible for staying out of harms way is the best approach to this virus.

I completely missed that you think you had COVID with 3-4 months of lingering symptoms, yet you are afraid of long term effects from a vaccine with a toxicity profile many,many orders of magnitude smaller than the COVID virus.

I cannot understand the position here. You are terrified of hypothetical toxicity from the vaccine yet seem to be unconcerned about the virus that made you sick for 4 months.

How was your training effected? As an elite age group runner I would not be happy about 4 months of altered training! If a vaccine could have given you those months back....?

There is some evidence that new strains of the virus can re-infect people with infection-driven immunity. Would you be concerned about getting COVID again?

COViD's not going away by itself bros.

If you don't want the vaccine that's your business bro, but remember that you could spread it to a morbidly obese person (they're everywhere in the USA) who could then end up on a vent in the ICU for 3 weeks, then with a trach in an LTAC. You'll be paying the bill for that w/ your premium.

I got Pfizer vaccine for my job brahs, it was fine and now I'm invincible (joke). In fact it' s on my Bumble profile, has definitely helped.

Vitamin D/Zinc/supplement etc is placebo but harmless so if it makes you feel better bro go for it. If you go out and exercise, you'll get Vit D and sleep better.

Agree people should get exercise, sunshine, fresh air and get off their fat a@@es. Need more laps in gym class. Especially those fat kids you see at the park who've been playing X-Box for most of their lives. Can't say that explicitly though bros, people are too easily offended these days. 'you could stand to lose weight', 'BMI is too high' etc.

masterofdisaster wrote:

Lead Foil Hat wrote:

How about we make fun of you for being a childish idiot. Your views are the pseudo science. Real science allows people to propose reasonable ideas and theories in a public space. The guy is not a quack, you are the quack on Letsrun who thinks he is important. This dude has the balls to speak out against media/"science" Nazis who are the true quacks and morons of 2020. Yes, Fauci is a scientific hand-waving quack-job politician, not a credible opinion on anything.

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.

Antivaxxers: Hey! Look!!! Here is some guy on the internet with something he made up about vaccines!!!

Science: No. That is wrong. Here is why.

Antivaxxers: Whaaaa!!!!! Not fair. How dare you try to refute our internet guy with science. You are a bad person!!! Whaaaa!!!!

Not a single person in this thread has been able to defend the quack veterinarian. As usual, the thread just devolves into a bunch of non-sequiturs because the COVID denier/anti-vaxxers can't bring it when someone challenges their internet quack of the week.