Can anyone explain to me why this won't be an issue? I would appreciate it.

I read a lot of things. I try to debunk a lot of things. I have not really followed the coronavirus fear factory but I did know about this issue prior to the coronavirus due to my profession and when I heard that the vaccines do not prevent transmission, this issue is the first thought that jumped into my mind. I made a comment about this on another thread, expecting to immediately be debunked by the usuals on ATS, bot or not that have been extolling the virtues of these vaccines. I was not, so I am making this it's own post just because I want to this to be debunked. Please be polite in your debunking.

So. My concern and/or conspiracy theory about these vaccines is that because the vaccines do not stop transmission of the virus, it will continue to spread and mutate, becoming more and more deadly and killing unvaccinated people. We have seen this before in Marek’s disease, which is a virus that affects chickens. The vaccine for this virus only stops symptoms. It does not stop 100% of infections or transmission of the virus. Due to this, Marek’s has continued to spread and mutate and is now 100% fatal to unvaccinated birds.

I will post what I feel is the most clear, concise news article about this issue, which comes from PBS newshour. This is by no means the only article or information available on this subject. Several mainstream news organizations have reported on this in the past and studies have been done regarding this issue. I am again posting this information because I WANT someone to debunk it.

Here is the link and a couple quotes from the article.... www.pbs.org...

Chickens vaccinated against Marek’s disease rarely get sick. But the vaccine does not prevent them from spreading Marek’s to unvaccinated birds. “With the hottest strains, every unvaccinated bird dies within 10 days. There is no human virus that is that hot. Ebola, for example, doesn’t kill everything in 10 days.” In fact, rather than stop fowl from spreading the virus, the vaccine allows the disease to spread faster and longer than it normally would, a new study finds.

And

The reason this is a problem for Marek’s disease is because the vaccine is “leaky.” A leaky vaccine is one that keeps a microbe from doing serious harm to its host, but doesn’t stop the disease from replicating and spreading to another individual. On the other hand, a “perfect” vaccine is one that sets up lifelong immunity that never wanes and blocks both infection and transmission. It’s important to note childhood vaccines for polio, measles, mumps, rubella and smallpox aren’t leaky; they are considered “perfect” vaccines. As such, they are in no way in danger of falling prey to this phenomenon. But the results do raise the questions for some human vaccines that are leaky – such as malaria, and other agricultural vaccines, such as the one being used against avian influenza, or bird flu.

If you are going to debunk this by saying that Malaria has not become more deadly to unvaccinated people, and it's vaccine is leaky please do not bother. As someone who believes in science, I would have to read a study that says that and I can find none. If you can, please share.

What say you, ATS? Am I concerned over nothing? It would seem so because no mention of this is ever made when referring to the fact that transmission is still possible with the coronavirus vaccines.

a reply to: Chalcedony

Get the vax. Then you don't get sick.

Pretty easy.

Don't get the vax. You might get sick. Your fault.

a reply to: Chalcedony

Don't talk to us, talk to a trusted medical professional.

originally posted by: Havamal
a reply to: Chalcedony

Get the vax. Then you don't get sick.

Pretty easy.

Don't get the vax. You might get sick. Your fault.

Wrong again.

Pretty simple.

a reply to: Havamal

Not sure how many times you need reminded, but this isn't a vaccine. You can still get and give the rona after the jab.

originally posted by: Havamal
a reply to: Chalcedony

Get the vax. Then you don't get sick.

Pretty easy.

Don't get the vax. You might get sick. Your fault.

Hahahahaha.

You don’t ATS very well.

As to the OP. Like most things time will tell. I appreciate by the way how you are asking our opinion and not trying to dust up anything untoward like an accusatory tone here.

Thank you for your post and positing this question. This question seems to me pretty valid and worthwhile. I do not know the answer but would ask this;

If in fact what you are suggesting is possible, then why hasn’t everyone who has not taken a flu shot yearly (seasonally?) succumbed to a flu virus that replicates Marek’s trajectory and possibly the countermeasure too?

Maybe they aren’t the same I don’t know.

Is this an applicable comparison even?

a reply to: Chalcedony

Don't be, virus tend to die out eventually, when the natural immune system of people get used to the virus, mutations may or may not happen and will no be as strong in most instances.

But what is real is the fact that no vaccine kills viruses that is the biggest lie of big pharma in order to make money, example the yearly Flu shot.

a reply to: Chalcedony

Viruses don't tend to mutate to become more deadly, they usually mutate the opposite way, more virulent, but less deadly. Even the mutations and strains the media's been talking about tend to follow the trend of more infectious, less deadly.

If a virus kills its host before it spreads, it dies too. Life, even viruses, usually selects for survivability.

Wherever it came from, it's likely going to stick around much like other human spread coronaviruses and will likely end up mutating along the same way other coronaviruses do.

As in, seasonal variations that will cause coldlike symptoms.

I imagine, once all this bull# settles, the vaccines will be pushed every year like flu shots, the passports and crap will likely stay and the world will be pretty #ty.

Isn't Marek's a herpes-like virus?

Might be wrong but COVID is different,in corona viruses most mutations become less and less lethal over time. That is if we are really gonna believe the science

www.popsci.com...


All of this might sound unsettling. After all, we’re in the midst of a global crisis as the virus spreads around the world. Having it change on us unpredictably can seem scary. But just because the virus is mutating doesn’t mean that it’s suddenly going to become more dangerous. In fact, experts say, it’s very unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 (as the virus is officially known) will mutate in ways that change how the pandemic plays out.

a reply to: slatesteam

I have found that influenza deaths have increased over the past many years, (with the notable exception of 2020) a fact which JAMA attributes to

Influenza deaths have increased substantially in the last 2 decades, in part because of aging of the population, underscoring the need for better prevention measures, including more effective vaccines and vaccination programs for elderly persons.

jamanetwork.com...

So influenza deaths are increasing, but it is only because the population is aging and the vaccines aren't great? Or is it because influenza is mutating to become stronger? Sorry I am being conspiratorial. I am sure the experts would let us know that influenza was becoming more deadly, if only to get vaccination rates up.

a reply to: Chalcedony

There have definitely been folks rasing this specific concern ("leaky" vaccines, vaccine escape, etc.). Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche being one.

We are also talking about viral mutations though, and in that, we are talking about something that is rather unpredictable. Whether or not the concern is actually realized remains to be seen, but it certainly raises the probability of negative consequences in this respect.

With nearly all modern medicine, there are costs to the benefits. However, with vaccines in particular, adverse events have been minimized so completely for so many years that many dismiss them, outright dont believe they occur, or simply dont care. They are a corporate product, after all, and the marketing to instill Brand loyalty has been exceptionally effective. "Vaccines" are treated as some monolithic, magical elixir where its all benefits, all the time, for every vaccine in existence.

There are also concerns about aspects like virus interference and vaccine dependency. Both of which could lead to serious, serious issues down the line.

Aspects like cross immunity, innate immune response, etc. have been largely ignored by the "consensus factory" but are particularly salient when dealing with seasonal illnesses.

Where I come at it from is this: If we are going to do something where our goal is to impact as close to 100% of the population as possible.. We better be damn sure that we are competent enough to take the reins from whatever natural, organic process handled it previously. I dont believe we have reached that in (maybe) any arena, much less the human immune system.

Particularly when "we" have done little to nothing to improve baseline health in the population. Everything from lifestyle choices to dwindling nutrients in our food supply to the often tauted "high fructose corn syrup." Addressing these issues would likely save substantially more lives than any other popular measure, and would provide a solid foundation for actually moving forward. In this respect, vaccines would be a tool in the toolbox rather than the primary and only method to handle illness.

originally posted by: Chalcedony
a reply to: slatesteam

I have found that influenza deaths have increased over the past many years, (with the notable exception of 2020) a fact which JAMA attributes to

Influenza deaths have increased substantially in the last 2 decades, in part because of aging of the population, underscoring the need for better prevention measures, including more effective vaccines and vaccination programs for elderly persons.

jamanetwork.com...

So influenza deaths are increasing, but it is only because the population is aging and the vaccines aren't great? Or is it because influenza is mutating to become stronger? Sorry I am being conspiratorial. I am sure the experts would let us know that influenza was becoming more deadly, if only to get vaccination rates up.

Thank you for the reply!

Is the increase possibly because of the aging population? Don’t they get the flu shot. And why isn’t that shot called a flu vaccine if it works as a “leaky” one? Are deaths up to increase in population worldwide or is the actual case number increasing vs you use in said population?

Just more food for thought. Thank you again.

a reply to: putnam6

Yes it is related to Herpes group B. Yeah I know it is science that most viruses don't want to kill their hosts and mutate to become more transmissible and less deadly, but I thought since seeing some doctors posit that the vaccines might cause mutations, I would put this information out there and see if it could be debunked or if there was some concrete reason why this wouldn't happen with these vaccines.

originally posted by: Havamal
a reply to: Chalcedony

Get the vax. Then you don't get sick.

Pretty easy.

Here's at least nearly half a million people who might disagree with you:



www.openvaers.com...

a reply to: Chalcedony

I think since we are dealing with a not natural virus and an unknown created shot that we have no idea what it is really supposed to do, we just won't know until we do.

originally posted by: SeaWorthy
a reply to: Chalcedony

I think since we are dealing with a not natural virus and an unknown created shot that we have no idea what it is really supposed to do, we just won't know until we do.

“May you live in interesting times.”

a reply to: loam

I don't think you understand, 95% of the people who died last Wednesday were unvaccinated. (A random stat I saw posted the other day)

But in reference to the OP, I was under the impression that with novel viruses, they mutate and with each mutation become easier to transmit, and weaker, until the variants are diminished enough to be disregarded.

Natural immunity is supposed to be part of the heard immunity equation for those who have had covid and recovered. (though we don't talk about that)

And Flu was totally eradicated in 2020.

a reply to: slatesteam

The first bivalent influenza vaccine was introduced in 1942. I will have to go back and make a comparison of population vs. influenza deaths prior to the vaccine and post vaccine in order to see if there is a trend of increased deaths that is not due to population increase and also compare to the amount of unvaccinated people vs. vaccinated people that die from influenza and the demographics of the population then vs. now, which I am definitely going to do when I have more free time. Thank you for giving me more things to look into.