ADHD meds for VAIDS

a reply to: jos23

LOL he called them "Portugalians"

Wow! I'm seriously impressed with all the "scientists" and "qualified doctors" in this thread trying to tear this poor person down for posting an "idea" and "opinion" that does not agree with "Folliow The Science". I expected better from the ATS crowd. Some have forgotten ATS' roots in exchange for base insults.

originally posted by: Elvicious1
Wow! I'm seriously impressed with all the "scientists" and "qualified doctors" in this thread trying to tear this poor person down for posting an "idea" and "opinion" that does not agree with "Folliow The Science". I expected better from the ATS crowd. Some have forgotten ATS' roots in exchange for base insults.

It's one thing to have an idea, and it's another to deliberately try to misrepresent science in order to cause fear and doubt among people who don't realize that they are being mislead.

Incidentally, yes, there are scientists and academics on this forum who do speak up and do try to get people to follow the real science.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep better at night.

The person set forth a proposition and was resoundingly negated. The person supplied their resource and left it to debate, not insult. Intelligent discourse never entered the thread.
I stand by my words.
Prove otherwise.

a reply to: andy06shake

It is, it's just hidden in plain sight

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Elvicious1
Wow! I'm seriously impressed with all the "scientists" and "qualified doctors" in this thread trying to tear this poor person down for posting an "idea" and "opinion" that does not agree with "Folliow The Science". I expected better from the ATS crowd. Some have forgotten ATS' roots in exchange for base insults.

It's one thing to have an idea, and it's another to deliberately try to misrepresent science in order to cause fear and doubt among people who don't realize that they are being mislead.

Incidentally, yes, there are scientists and academics on this forum who do speak up and do try to get people to follow the real science.

Then explain how it can be scientific to mass vaccinate with this "vaccine"? How will it not guarantee you end up with more dangerous variants? Why would it be different from using antiviral drugs that do not eradicate the virus?

According to Vanden Bossche (and the studies he refer to) more dangerous variants may become dominant because the virus is now largely resistant to the neutralizing antibodies.

Then the non neutralizing antibodies will bind to the virus instead. Those abs increase infection at the upper respiratory tract. The non neutralizing abs also protect against severe disease in the lower respiratory tract. Something called transinfection.

So Bossche says the virus is now because of the mass "vaccination" under great immune pressure from these non neutralizing abs that prevent severe disease.

So there is a high risk that more dangerous variants will spread.

He recommend large scale antiviral drug campaigns for the vaxxed.

originally posted by: Elvicious1
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Whatever you need to tell yourself to sleep better at night.

The person set forth a proposition and was resoundingly negated. The person supplied their resource and left it to debate, not insult. Intelligent discourse never entered the thread.
I stand by my words.
Prove otherwise.

They didn't leave the debate, they're well known for this, they aren't familiar enough with the subject to contribute once people start talking about science or math.

originally posted by: jos23

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Elvicious1
Wow! I'm seriously impressed with all the "scientists" and "qualified doctors" in this thread trying to tear this poor person down for posting an "idea" and "opinion" that does not agree with "Folliow The Science". I expected better from the ATS crowd. Some have forgotten ATS' roots in exchange for base insults.

It's one thing to have an idea, and it's another to deliberately try to misrepresent science in order to cause fear and doubt among people who don't realize that they are being mislead.

Incidentally, yes, there are scientists and academics on this forum who do speak up and do try to get people to follow the real science.

Then explain how it can be scientific to mass vaccinate with this "vaccine"? How will it not guarantee you end up with more dangerous variants? Why would it be different from using antiviral drugs that do not eradicate the virus?

Because this literally has never happened in the entire history of human vaccination.

You're confusing virus and bacteria. Virus don't mutate in response to environmental stimulus like this.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Because this literally has never happened in the entire history of human vaccination.

It may not have been reported that it's happened in humans....but it happened in the experiment with leaky vaccines with chickens. I don't imagine that pathogens know the difference between chickens and humans.

Go to google....insert the sentence:
Can a leaky vaccine make pathogens stronger?

Maybe you could also have look and find out how many vaccines used in humans are considered leaky.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Because this literally has never happened in the entire history of human vaccination.

It may not have been reported that it's happened in humans....but it happened in the experiment with leaky vaccines with chickens. I don't imagine that pathogens know the difference between chickens and humans.

Go to google....insert the sentence:
Can a leaky vaccine make pathogens stronger?

Maybe you could also have look and find out how many vaccines used in humans are considered leaky.

Have you ever wondered why all of these things about "leaky" vaccines always go back to that exact same incident involving chickens, decades ago?

In the entire history of vaccination, thousands of different types of vaxxes given to billions of people, how many incidents of what you are suggesting are actually known to exist?

Even if what you were suggesting was possible wouldn't it be considerably worse with unvaxxed people who had more than one variant of covid?

You're talking about something that is completely hypothetical, based on a case study with a different virus, and a different vaccine, in a different species of animal.

That's the equivalent of somebody looking at violence surrounding rap music, then suggesting that classical music could trigger the next holocaust because it involves more instruments and therefore could cause more violence.

a reply to: AaarghZombies



If you use a drug that do not eradicate the virus a resistant variant may become dominant. It´s just because that this variant has an advantage against the others.

It happens all the time.
www.who.int...

edition.cnn.com...

"The goal, they say, should be "to reduce infection of and transmission from vaccinated individuals," and to "reduce the possibility of variant selection in vaccinated individuals."


This mass "vaccination" should increase the risk for more dangerous variants to become dominant i suppose.
Because they overcame immune pressure and can spread easier because of the shorter distance between "vaccinated".

No?

a reply to: igloo

Are people wrong to be concerned?

The concern is one thing punting doom porn a whole norther matter.

Cant teach pork all the same.

a reply to: AaarghZombies
Please supply a link to all the vaccines that have been used in humans globally that are considered leaky/imperfect.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AaarghZombies
Please supply a link to all the vaccines that have been used in humans globally that are considered leaky/imperfect.

Sure, here's a Link to a video that details every one so far confirmed by a peer review paper, and every one so far pending peer review as of June 2022.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Please supply a link to all the vaccines that have been used in humans globally that are considered leaky/imperfect.

But seriously, if you read this, it will explain that the concept is both hypothetical and highlight controversial, and is largely based on a single case study of a different virus and a different vaccine, and a different species, from decades ago.

You'll also not that the problem is actually worse in unvaxxed people.

a reply to: AaarghZombies
2015 wasn't decades ago.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

But seriously, if you read this, it will explain that the concept is both hypothetical and highlight controversial, and is largely based on a single case study of a different virus and a different vaccine, and a different species, from decades ago.

Is this where you read the words 'decades ago'?
You might want to read your link again.
I have bolded the bit you really need to read, to assist you, as I don't think you understood it, according to your post.

When vaccines prevent transmission, as is the case for nearly all vaccines used in humans, this type of evolution towards increased virulence is blocked. But when vaccines leak, allowing at least some pathogen transmission, they could create the ecological conditions that would allow hot strains to emerge and persist. This theory proved highly controversial when it was first proposed over a decade ago, but here we report experiments with Marek’s disease virus in poultry that show that modern commercial leaky vaccines can have precisely this effect: they allow the onward transmission of strains otherwise too lethal to persist.

Copied and pasted directly from your link.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: jos23
Goddess Kali have told me many times that some ADHD medication will help people who get AIDS from the Covid vaxx. VAIDS.

Don´t know if it´s some specific medication. It may seem strange but scientist now and then find that a drug can help for other problems than what they were first approved for.

There are some studies that seem to indicate some ADHD drugs can make the immune system stronger.

When i know more i post it here.

Do you have a source for this?

ROFL

My dude, did you not read the OP?

Goddess Kali have told me

What are you looking for here? You want historical epics or scriptural text? I think we're past sources and you can let this one bit of misinformation slip by. I think the savvy readers will get that this isn't exactly coming from the New England Journal of Medicine.

See this link: Here

When one is so prone to outlandish behavior you have to spell out when "this time" it's intentional.

I'll assume all you future posts are sarcasm. It will make a lot more sense that way.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: AaarghZombies
2015 wasn't decades ago.

Given that you're rehashing an old conspiracy, it seemed appropriate.