PROvaxxer's... I need your help.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: nonspecific

Aye, COVID 19 don't have any political affiliations, nor does it give a rats arse as to those it infects that do.

The virus doesn't but the management of covid is political worldwide.

That's not how it works though is it?

Of my GP thinks I need an op he doesn't whip out his scalpel and start digging in or ring up and book me a slot??

My GP would refer me to a specialist who would then do an examination, question me, have me booked in for whatever tests I'd need and whatnot.

Then we would discuss the options.

.not sure how it's done where you live but that's how it's done here in the UK.


a reply to: shaemac

Why so angry and rude?

It's not my fault you live alone and don't trust your GP.

It's up to you what you do I couldn't care less how you choose to live your life.



a reply to: jerich0

That's a shame if it's what happened.

Look into the question of socialised medical care raises in the US on the early 1960's. One of the main points against it was not being able to choose and keep your own doctor as a GP.

More lies for the US population by the looks of it.

originally posted by: myselfaswell
a reply to: andy06shake

Its all been medi corped, no such thing as a family doc any more.

Before we had the vaccine we were told that only the very old and ill would be in danger if infected. Now we are basically being told that all are in danger unless they take the vaccine.

We have all these different mutations of the virus now, and we are bing told that one is more agressive then the other, But we are not being told that any of them are actually more deadly.

We are being told that if you are vaccinated you wont be infected or spead the virus. And all who are vaccinated bacically beleives that. People who are vaccinated dont have to go into quarantine. Dont have to be tested.. It is ridicules

Vaccinated people act as if they can't be carriers of the virus, and that with the blessing of the governments.

I've got plenty of valid reasons to choose vaccination.

It's pretty pointless sharing them though as the only ones that will listen share the same belief.





a reply to: Doctor Smith

It sounds like you've been told things very differently to me then.

At no point has anyone told me that I can't he infected or spread the virus if I've taken the vaccine shots.



a reply to: spy66

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Thats a pretty easy admission to make Itisnowagain, there cancer treatments do indeed leave a lot to be desired.

But Its not there magic bullet that's of concern but the fact that there never may be one that suits all cancers.

If people can prove there are other ways that actually work then I'm all for it.

Cant have people punting snake oil at all angles through as it would simply be counterproductive to the disease and any cure.

There has to be rules Itisnowagain, especially where people and the offer of hope false or otherwise is concerned.

a reply to: igloo

I certainly hope we can trust our Doctors igloo.

I trust mine.

And i don't think they are recommending the vaccines as of yet to anyone that suffers severe allergic reactions like anaphylactic shock for instance.

Now on the other hand my father has cancer stage 3 in the lungs and my brother a heart transplant and they have both received there vaccinations after consultation without any sort of reaction whatsoever.

It a choice mate, make it, dont make it, trust the doctors or not, and that's what it all comes down to.

Tell you one thing through, not here but in other places without an NHS, there is not much point in paying for them if you are unwilling to take or follow there advice.

a reply to: andy06shake

If people can prove there are other ways that actually work then I'm all for it.

How can they?
It's against the law.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

New cancer treatments are being developed all the time.

Take for instance the molecularly targeted therapies to exploit the particular genetic vulnerabilities of cancer cells which are underdevelopment, or the biotherapeutic approaches which include monoclonal antibodies.

You need to do your homework there if you imagine medical science is not developing new ways to fight cancer Itisnowagain.

a reply to: andy06shake
Oh....the new mRNA technology.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Its not exactly new that's the thing.

Been in development for about a decade before being appropriated where some of the COVID 19 vaccines are concerned as a delivery means.

My understanding being a lot of the work regarding the mRNA technology surrounded or was aimed towards developing an AIDS/HIV vaccine as well as other diseases cancers being one of them.

Nm.

a reply to: nonspecific

I would really like to hear your reasoning, and I am not being facetious. I will gladly give my reasons for not taking the shot(s):

• I am not a fan in general of trying new technology before it is proven to work without side effects, especially when it comes to medical procedures.
  
  
• The mRNA process, in theory, appears sound: trick the surrounding cells into creating a protein that is, in itself, not dangerous, but which will cause an immune response that would disable any actual virus particles should they be encountered. This, however, raises two questions in my mind:
  • Do we know for a definite fact that the protein replicated is not in itself hazardous?
    
  • Do we know that the protein replicated will produce antibodies which will effectively negate the virus?
  
  
• The fact that many of the people who have taken the vaccine have reported being "sick" from it tells me there is a reasonable probability that the protein replicated may not be completely benign.
  
  
• The fact that new variants are coming to light which seem to be resistant to the vaccine tells me there is a strong probability that the protein is not completely effective.
  
  
• The virus itself seems to have a very low fatality rate, and that low fatality rate seems to be emphasized via co-morbidity conditions and improper (or intentionally falsified!) reporting of fatalities.
  
  
• My own immunity is quite strong, primarily due to a life without many of the benefits of modern medicine (read: I can't afford a doctor every time I have a sniffle).
  
  
• There are multiple treatments now available for those who do catch the Chinese virus, many of which have a history of being quite effective.
  
  
• Politicization of the Chinese virus has already exceeded anything I have seen in my lifetime, by many fold. This, to the extent that it is nigh impossible to now obtain anything approaching accurate information. I am now seeing the same politicization concerning the vaccine. That makes me mistrust the agenda behind it.
  
  
• Those who are most actively promoting the vaccine are using that phrase "the science is settled." That is a red flag the size of Donald Trump's ego! Actual science is never... never... "settled." That is Scientism, not Science.
  
  
• The very nature of what the vaccine is to accomplish has been constantly changing since its introduction. A vaccine, by definition, prevents one from catching a virus. Yet, this "vaccine" is now claimed to only "make the virus less severe." That is a proactive treatment, not a vaccine. Calling it a vaccine is akin to acknowledging ineffectiveness.

There are my reasons. Now, would you care to reciprocate and explain your reasoning for taking the vaccine?

TheRedneck

I am curious. If you choose not to believe your doctor and do not get a Vax. If you get very ill, will you go to the hospital? Will you trust the docs with your treatment? Would you allow them to treat you with Regeneron?

This is not a trick question, I'm truly curious.

originally posted by: frogs453
I am curious. If you choose not to believe your doctor and do not get a Vax. If you get very ill, will you go to the hospital? Will you trust the docs with your treatment? Would you allow them to treat you with Regeneron?

This is not a trick question, I'm truly curious.

What about those of us that were advised, by our doctors, AGAINST taking the shot? 🤔