So....here is a picture book of WTF?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Okey dokey.

But it is a vaccine. Doesn't need any sort of approval to be called one.

Yeah...these days a boy can be a girl...a clinical trial can be a vaccine...

It's all about the Merriam-Webster definitions!

It should be described as a new test treatment. It surely couldnt pass real trials. So many families are losing loved ones right after the injection. Its not being reported in the news.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Language is fluid. Especially the English language and especially technical terms.

Check out "awesome" and "awful". Once upon a time they both meant the same thing. Now, most Americans would assume they meant the diametric opposites.

Didn't think I would say "neat" 3 times in one thread but ok....

Can you reference the exact year it changed and was it related to something you had to have injected in you to be accepted by your peers?

The change in the usage of the word "'awful" was very much one of American usage post 1809, so I'd go with that year.

It may have come from people describing a 'hellfire and fury' sermon as being awful. In the older generation, it was taken to mean that it inspired awe. In the younger, that it was just bad.



No one applies any word meanings by 'injection'.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

a clinical trial can be a vaccine.

Always been the case, as I showed you.

It's all about the Merriam-Webster definitions!

Language comes from culture, not vice versa.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Language is fluid. Especially the English language and especially technical terms.

Check out "awesome" and "awful". Once upon a time they both meant the same thing. Now, most Americans would assume they meant the diametric opposites.

Check out the word "strawman" while you are at it.

Once upon a time it meant nothing but a scarecrow in a field...

But nowadays it perfectly describes your post.

Which, BTW, has nothing to do with changing the definition of "vaccination" to mean something that it isn't for political purposes.

But you know that, don't you?

The definition of a vaccine changed several times since Jenner wrote up his Cowpox paper. You can see it changing year to year just since 2017 (from the OP).

The Coronavirus and mRNA vaccines were only really a political issue in the last half of 2020, well after the changes in definitions.

Fortunately, some of us have a memory slightly longer than that of a goldfish and an understanding of the march of progress. Nor do we buy into the inanity of the Qtard type politicized paranoias.

I mean, you seem to be proposing that dictionary writers across the globe are part of some great conspiracy to push a very particular political agenda. Get real! They are just typing up what words mean in an environment when technology and therefore definitions are bound to change.

Think of the children!!

Sure....tech and everything will change.

Do you buy the first iteration of a car, or any product for that matter? If so....you are just a mass consumer.

If you don't, you wait to see the next version that is tuned and ready for consumers.

As You Like It.....

It must be hard to keep maintaining that they are trying to brainwash you. Especially when they aren't, and when that isn't how you brainwash someone, anyway.



("She turned me into a newt... erm, I got better though...." - Monty Python from The Holy Grail movie).

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Language is fluid. Especially the English language and especially technical terms.

Check out "awesome" and "awful". Once upon a time they both meant the same thing. Now, most Americans would assume they meant the diametric opposites.

Check out the word "strawman" while you are at it.

Once upon a time it meant nothing but a scarecrow in a field...

But nowadays it perfectly describes your post.

Which, BTW, has nothing to do with changing the definition of "vaccination" to mean something that it isn't for political purposes.

But you know that, don't you?

The definition of a vaccine changed several times since Jenner wrote up his Cowpox paper. You can see it changing year to year just since 2017 (from the OP).

The Coronavirus and mRNA vaccines were only really a political issue in the last half of 2020, well after the changes in definitions.

Fortunately, some of us have a memory slightly longer than that of a goldfish and an understanding of the march of progress. Nor do we buy into the inanity of the Qtard type politicized paranoias.

I mean, you seem to be proposing that dictionary writers across the globe are part of some great conspiracy to push a very particular political agenda. Get real! They are just typing up what words mean in an environment when technology and therefore definitions are bound to change.

Think of the children!!

Sure....tech and everything will change.

Do you buy the first iteration of a car, or any product for that matter? If so....you are just a mass consumer.

If you don't, you wait to see the next version that is tuned and ready for consumers.

As You Like It.....

It must be hard to keep maintaining that they are trying to brainwash you. Especially when they aren't, and when that isn't how you brainwash someone, anyway.

Sorry...brainwashing ME? Have you gotten vaccinated?

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Language is fluid. Especially the English language and especially technical terms.

Check out "awesome" and "awful". Once upon a time they both meant the same thing. Now, most Americans would assume they meant the diametric opposites.

Check out the word "strawman" while you are at it.

Once upon a time it meant nothing but a scarecrow in a field...

But nowadays it perfectly describes your post.

Which, BTW, has nothing to do with changing the definition of "vaccination" to mean something that it isn't for political purposes.

But you know that, don't you?

The definition of a vaccine changed several times since Jenner wrote up his Cowpox paper. You can see it changing year to year just since 2017 (from the OP).

The Coronavirus and mRNA vaccines were only really a political issue in the last half of 2020, well after the changes in definitions.

Fortunately, some of us have a memory slightly longer than that of a goldfish and an understanding of the march of progress. Nor do we buy into the inanity of the Qtard type politicized paranoias.

I mean, you seem to be proposing that dictionary writers across the globe are part of some great conspiracy to push a very particular political agenda. Get real! They are just typing up what words mean in an environment when technology and therefore definitions are bound to change.

Think of the children!!

Sure....tech and everything will change.

Do you buy the first iteration of a car, or any product for that matter? If so....you are just a mass consumer.

If you don't, you wait to see the next version that is tuned and ready for consumers.

As You Like It.....

It must be hard to keep maintaining that they are trying to brainwash you. Especially when they aren't, and when that isn't how you brainwash someone, anyway.

Sorry...brainwashing ME? Have you gotten vaccinated?

Well what are they trying to achieve by "changing the meanings of words"? Spell out your conspiracy theory clearly.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Vasa Croe

a clinical trial can be a vaccine.

Always been the case, as I showed you.

It's all about the Merriam-Webster definitions!

Language comes from culture, not vice versa.

You didn't show me anything. I know the definitions of vaccines and the phases they go through for approval....this one is only emergency authorized.

Never, in history, has a non approved vaccine been administered to this many people. Not only that, but never in history has a mRNA vaccine been approved at all.

And yes, language does come from culture...changing the definition to fit the narrative is quite rampant throughout history.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Language is fluid. Especially the English language and especially technical terms.

Check out "awesome" and "awful". Once upon a time they both meant the same thing. Now, most Americans would assume they meant the diametric opposites.

Check out the word "strawman" while you are at it.

Once upon a time it meant nothing but a scarecrow in a field...

But nowadays it perfectly describes your post.

Which, BTW, has nothing to do with changing the definition of "vaccination" to mean something that it isn't for political purposes.

But you know that, don't you?

The definition of a vaccine changed several times since Jenner wrote up his Cowpox paper. You can see it changing year to year just since 2017 (from the OP).

The Coronavirus and mRNA vaccines were only really a political issue in the last half of 2020, well after the changes in definitions.

Fortunately, some of us have a memory slightly longer than that of a goldfish and an understanding of the march of progress. Nor do we buy into the inanity of the Qtard type politicized paranoias.

I mean, you seem to be proposing that dictionary writers across the globe are part of some great conspiracy to push a very particular political agenda. Get real! They are just typing up what words mean in an environment when technology and therefore definitions are bound to change.

Think of the children!!

Sure....tech and everything will change.

Do you buy the first iteration of a car, or any product for that matter? If so....you are just a mass consumer.

If you don't, you wait to see the next version that is tuned and ready for consumers.

As You Like It.....

It must be hard to keep maintaining that they are trying to brainwash you. Especially when they aren't, and when that isn't how you brainwash someone, anyway.

Sorry...brainwashing ME? Have you gotten vaccinated?

Well what are they trying to achieve by "changing the meanings of words"? Spell out your conspiracy theory clearly.

Read up on these new vaccines...

Couldn't care less if you do or not.

My conspiracy was spelled out in the original post. The definition of vaccine is being changed to allow for a new, unapproved, mRNA variant vaccine.....

Enjoy!

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I know the definitions of vaccines

Then why did you say this:

something called a vaccine would technically need FDA phase 4 approval to be called such

It is clearly incorrect.

this one is only emergency authorized.

Yes. After completing Phase III trials. And careful review of those trials.

Never, in history, has a non approved vaccine been administered to this many people.

Never has there been a pandemic caused by a novel virus while vaccines have existed. Times change, so does language.

Not only that, but never in history has a mRNA vaccine been approved at all.

It was bound to happen some time.

And yes, language does come from culture...changing the definition to fit the narrative is quite rampant throughout history.

Culture is what it is, it doesn't follow a narrative. Never has. Remember "Just say no?" Or maybe you don't.

originally posted by: rickymouse
We should be burning all the books so they can instantly change the definitions of things to alter reality to fit the desires of the people who are seizing control the world. The old definitions will soon disappear off of the net everywhere, and there will be no evidence left that will be accepted as real shortly. It is not real if they say it is not real.

That will cause enough Mandella-effects to make everyone over a certain age go insane.

a reply to: LordAhriman

indoctrinate
/ɪnˈdɒktrɪneɪt/
Learn to pronounce
verb
past tense: indoctrinated; past participle: indoctrinated
teach (a person or group) to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.
"broadcasting was a vehicle for indoctrinating the masses"

Baaaa....🐑

Check up the definition of herd immunity too. Up until recently it was defined as people passing infections from one another until 'herd immunity' was achieved.
This last 12 months they have added vaccines to gaining herd immunity.

Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Lumenari

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Language is fluid. Especially the English language and especially technical terms.

Check out "awesome" and "awful". Once upon a time they both meant the same thing. Now, most Americans would assume they meant the diametric opposites.

Check out the word "strawman" while you are at it.

Once upon a time it meant nothing but a scarecrow in a field...

But nowadays it perfectly describes your post.

Which, BTW, has nothing to do with changing the definition of "vaccination" to mean something that it isn't for political purposes.

But you know that, don't you?

The definition of a vaccine changed several times since Jenner wrote up his Cowpox paper. You can see it changing year to year just since 2017 (from the OP).

The Coronavirus and mRNA vaccines were only really a political issue in the last half of 2020, well after the changes in definitions.

Fortunately, some of us have a memory slightly longer than that of a goldfish and an understanding of the march of progress. Nor do we buy into the inanity of the Qtard type politicized paranoias.

I mean, you seem to be proposing that dictionary writers across the globe are part of some great conspiracy to push a very particular political agenda. Get real! They are just typing up what words mean in an environment when technology and therefore definitions are bound to change.

Think of the children!!

Sure....tech and everything will change.

Do you buy the first iteration of a car, or any product for that matter? If so....you are just a mass consumer.

If you don't, you wait to see the next version that is tuned and ready for consumers.

As You Like It.....

It must be hard to keep maintaining that they are trying to brainwash you. Especially when they aren't, and when that isn't how you brainwash someone, anyway.

Sorry...brainwashing ME? Have you gotten vaccinated?

Well what are they trying to achieve by "changing the meanings of words"? Spell out your conspiracy theory clearly.

Read up on these new vaccines...

Couldn't care less if you do or not.

My conspiracy was spelled out in the original post. The definition of vaccine is being changed to allow for a new, unapproved, mRNA variant vaccine.....

Enjoy!

Yes mRNA vaccines are fairly new. The thing is, they are safer than inactivated whole viruses, and often safer than chemicals used to promote particular immune responses. That's because they are so very specific. It's just the march of progress in action.

However, you seem to be now saying that the dictionary definition of the word "vaccine" somehow affects the FDA approval of vaccines? Do you think they go look up Websters and say "Yup, its in the dictionary, that looks legit to me!" and out comes the "Approved" rubber stamp.



Doesn't seem to matter to you that the FDA has actually approved most of the COVID-19 vaccines for 'emergency use'. Perhaps now that's the new approved use of the dictionary word "unapproved", I suppose?



And think about this; when there were hardly any doses of the vaccine delivered, it was almost legit to say that it wasn't tested enough, and was a risk. But now, months down the track, and nearly a billion doses later, that looks a little silly. Especially with so few adverse reactions.

It would appear now that the longer someone sticks to their vastly disproven opinion, the sillier they look. And there isn't going to be any turnaround in the data. So, they start to look a bit like kooks at this point in time, don't they?

Think about how things will look next year when hopefully we are nearly at herd immunity, and the virus, and its vaccines, are things of the past as far as everyone else in the world is concerned, and yet someone is prattling on about us 'all turning into 5G controlled infertile zombies')!

originally posted by: angelchemuel
Check up the definition of herd immunity too. Up until recently it was defined as people passing infections from one another until 'herd immunity' was achieved.
This last 12 months they have added vaccines to gaining herd immunity.

Rainbows
Jane

The term "Herd Immunity" was coined by A. W. Hedrich in 1923. He was doing research on Measles. The first sign that we had defeated the epidemic spread of Measles was due to vaccinations in the 1960's-70's. It was at this time that they established that herd immunity could be reached through vaccination, an extension of the concept of ring vaccination (vaccinating a group of people within a ring or border, to limit spread from outbreaks).

We've actually been using immunization as a way of establishing herd immunity for over 50 years, but it looks like you heard about it for the first time last year.

LOL.

a reply to: chr0naut
You have totally misunderstood what I was trying to explain....but meh....my bad I guess

a reply to: LordAhriman

Good on you for making an effort, but it's like showing card tricks to a dog with this lot.

Has anyone been able to figure out exactly why or what the purpose of us being played is for? I'm really curious...I'll hang up the phone and listen.

a reply to: slatesteam

Making up new words to accurately describe new things is so old, white male. English be hard, yo.