Covid: Dr John Campbell: the horrible danger of mrna vaccination

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Asmodeus3

What is the difference here is that immunological, microbiological and virological experts are continually learning as this virus mutates, many here stay stagnant on their one and only bias.

I'd rather listen to a uni health major's understanding of the stats than anyone here, or anyone's non-health source picks.

But not everyone is a layman and you don't have to listen to anyone specifically as there are several articles as well as scientific publications that are linked within the threads that you can have a look at.

And there are several scientists who have clear doubts about the Covid vaccines and others who are asking for the vaccination program to be paused or at least for the benefit to risk ratio to be re-evaluated given the evidence.

If you were listening to the 'science' you would have come to the realisation that herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 through vaccination can never be achieved. Although you were arguing a few days ago we were 'close' or it can be achieved and so on. You don't even need studies but some common sense will do. Are we immune to SARS-CoV-2 infections? The answer is No. So no herd immunity with these vaccines. The absurdity is that they are calling people to get a booster every 3-4 months...

a reply to: quintessentone
You might like to check out some videos on yt by Norman Fenton if you like maths and statistics. In fact, he was on a John Campbell video just 3 weeks ago.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Using one's common sense when not understanding the complexities of immunology, virology and microbiology lends one to fall back on one's fears and emotions when seeking out unique cases where the vaccine may be suspected in deaths. This can lead to misinformation and fear-mongering, such as the recent case on Twitter when an account had to be closed due to misinformation that, allegedly, vaccines cause cancer. See how it can escalate without research on both sides of the fence?

Not that I am saying the vaccines never caused responses that cause deaths, only that it has always been the case where the healthcare field has warned us that vaccines can and do cause some severe reactions that can lead to death, or immediate death as in anaphylactic shock cases. Another question I have, why aren't pharmaceutical staff monitoring us during that 15 minute wait time?

Another good reason to do your own research - pro and con - is that you might find gems of hope for anti-vaxxers and vaxxers alike because both sides can still be infected, like I have found here. This doctor's study is fantastic, please watch at least up to the 10 minute mark, you won't be sorry.

I believe he has found another treatment for Covid-19 within the body (non-obese bodies) where he uses Near Infrared Light (Radiation) Therapy along with conventional therapy to kill the virus and his results (in a single-blind, randomized study), again, are fantastic.

You see, I would like to see people who are fearful or for other health reasons do not want to get the vaccine have other options of getting over the severe illness of Covid that may land them in the ICU.

a reply to: Ksihkehe

Apparently there are experts on this forum after all. Exceptions that don't feel too superior to read the opinion of us - so-called conspiracy thinkers-. I am surprised. But the vaccines were SAFE AND EFFECTIVE. That's what almost all experts said in the beginning. There wasn't any contradiction. (Of course there was ... but it was scandalously censored all over the world) Ordinary people really had no choice. Saying that viruses mutate and evolve, but that 'we' would catch that with new mRNA vaccines, which are oh so easy to produce, seems a bit too simplistic to me. Who do they think they are? Their new (bivalent) vaccines would eliminate the mutations? No way. That is now clear (30 percent active while 50 percent really should be the minimum).
We've been lied to. We are, as it were, forced to get vaccinated with 100 percent safe and effective vaccines. My daughter works in healthcare. Mandatory vaccination or job loss. That's not free will (for sure not if you have a huge mortgage).
I am not vaccinated. My whole family is vaccinated. Always the same story'My doctor said I needed it').
Now all seem chronically ill. Two or more times vaccinated and still infected (more than once). Explanation of the doctor: ('Be glad you are vaccinated or you would be death now'). I informed them with the critical information that was available in the beginning (Dr Dolores Cahill, Dr Mallone, Dr Cole, ... the French Nobel prize winner who's name I cannot come up to at this very moment). You think everyone is as smart as you? How can you be so mistaken. Peeple are sheeple. It's that simple. That counts for my family too. I've been labeled as wayward all my life. So be it.
I have so much more to say, but I'll stop with what I've said at the top of this thread: Stop the mRNA vaccination now and use the massive funding of the vaccines for cancer research. Mrna will certainly be a breakthrough .. for cancer ... a domain where it doesn't come down to a dead person more or less (sorry if this comes across as inappropriate). At least give cancer patients HOPE.

I'm done trusting the "experts" when it comes to the so-called "vaccines".

Violating basic ethics and the Hippocratic oath for profit is exactly what they are doing - and no one has the power to stop them, it seems.

Until everyone wakes up and takes a stand, things will only get worse.

At this point, anyone who is still defending the "vaccines" are probably doing so because they are making money from the deceit.

a reply to: zandra

Along with that saying 'safe and effective' were warnings of severe adverse reactions in some people as with ALL vaccines.

Risk is everywhere because we are all different and our immune systems may or may not react differently - that is 'common sense'.

My elderly mother just got her 4th bivalent vaccine and she tells me something has changed, that she feels different - not quite right. I am concerned for her because we don't know what her immune system is doing and we don't have the technology to monitor it. She now tells me that she is not so sure it was the right decision to get the 4th shot and so now I'm thinking that maybe she should not have. I, on the other hand, do not have her experiences, yet(?), with getting the shots.

I can understand the concerns here, but I still urge everyone to try and research for yourself and not play into misinformation without looking at all the data. I don't feel we've been lied to, I feel they just don't have all the answers yet and are still learning about the 'new' and ever-changing virus threat, as well as how it adapts to evade our immune responses.

a reply to: zandra

BTW, any rebuff to non-expert anti-vaxx information is coming from experts in the fields that actually know something about it, and for that reason, yes, they are superior to CT opinions.

a reply to: quintessentone
Have you taken the bivalent vaccine?

a reply to: zandra

My former boss and I don't talk anymore. After 40 years in public health, many of them as director and with a degree in microbiology, his consumption of nightly news 7 days a week made him forget basic public health. Like masks for the general public not ever being proven to be much more than a psychological crutch. He was there during several occasions where I made press releases specifically recommending people from the public not engage in mask use because of lack of fit testing and potential to make the situation worse for those most at risk. Avoidance of exposure was always the goal. He became violently angry at people not wearing masks suddenly.

When he ran out to get vaccinated and wanted me to get one, after we both agreed when warp speed started that there would be no effective lasting immunity, I kinda knew it was over.

Fear, constant propagandized messaging, implicit trust in government agencies operating ethically, and listening to people paid to be on TV over consuming data, does a real number on otherwise competent people.

It was wise to be skeptical and cautious two years ago based on the history of mRNA and general coronavirus vaccine failures. Now, with more information, it takes a special dedication to remaining blind not to recognize that criminal fraud has occurred. Even without the dozens of lies and attempts to violate human rights, just the EUAs being legally loopholed by discrediting other safe drugs and approvals without any critical review of the trial data is criminal. The approval and promotion of mass vaccinating young people with no chance of ever gaining community immunity was the point where I decided it wasn't an error, but a criminal act. There is no data that even comes close to supporting it and, because their risk was so low, it would be impossible for any size trial to ever do it.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: quintessentone
Have you taken the bivalent vaccine?

Not yet because from my research it is believed that once a person caught the virus, which I did 2 months ago, that my immune system will protect me for 6 months, so that is where I am right now - along with long Covid symptoms.

In reading more about the bivalent shot as not being any better than the other vaccines, I'm not sure what to do at this point. I will discuss it with my medical team and do more research, who knows what new data will be forthcoming in 4 months time. I do know one thing though, it would be nice to not have to have vaccines and have effective therapies to treat the virus infection, like the Infrared Light study claims it can do.

The current COVID booster contains two versions of the virus’s spike protein: one from the original virus (now extinct) and another from the BA5 omicron variant, which was dominant in the United States earlier this fall.

The booster’s efficacy in people had not been studied before the booster was approved by the FDA, though animal studies have found it generates better protection against widely circulating omicron variants.

Statements in the past weeks from vaccine manufacturers maintain that the bivalent booster is better than the original booster at increasing antibodies. But an unpublished study conducted by David Ho, MD, director of the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, suggests that the new bivalent booster generates the same level of antibodies against omicron variants as the original booster. Harvard researchers have reported similar results. (The Columbia(link is external and opens in a new window) and Harvard(link is external and opens in a new window) studies are available as preprints on BioRxiv).

This wasn't a total shock. There’s a phenomenon known in vaccinology called immunological imprinting, which means your immune memory preferentially sees what it has seen before. So when a vaccine contains two different spike proteins, one that the immune system has seen before and one that it hasn’t, your immune system is going to react most strongly against the known variant, not omicron.

In retrospect, it may have been better to have created a booster that targets a single variant, the BA5 omicron variant.

www.cuimc.columbia.edu...

a reply to: quintessentone

So that's the non-expert anti-vaxx information being rebuffed by experts.
But what about the Expert anti-vaxx information, is that just swept under the rug or are they not Expert enough?

Who classifies Experts?

Some extremely well qualified experts in 2019 suddenly became fringe nobodies in 2020.

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: quintessentone

So that's the non-expert anti-vaxx information being rebuffed by experts.
But what about the Expert anti-vaxx information, is that just swept under the rug or are they not Expert enough?

Who classifies Experts?

Some extremely well qualified experts in 2019 suddenly became fringe nobodies in 2020.

I haven't seen any anti-vaxx studies from microbiologists, immunologists and virologists yet. If you did, please provide the sources so I can catch up.

The experts classify the experts, it's called peer review.

Also, there is the Dunning-Kruger effect happening here, IMO.

Let’s take a look at the Dunning-Kruger effect and some research that shows us just how prevalent it is among the anti-vaccine zealots.

The effect can be summarized by the well-known phrase, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” That is, a small amount of expertise or knowledge can mislead a person into thinking that they’re an expert because it is often easy to get a small amount of knowledge. They think that it’s all it takes.

They also think that those that have actual superior knowledge and experience are only marginally different than themselves. They underrate or even dismiss, the amount of work and effort it takes to be an expert in a field of biomedical science.

I’ve often made this comparison – someone who has a college degree in art history is very well educated, but it’s arrogant of them to think they can grasp all the fields of biology that contribute to the knowledge of someone who is an expert in immunology, public health, epidemiology, or a large number of other areas that are important to understanding vaccines.

When I write here, I don’t claim to be an expert in anything but a few, very narrow fields of biomedical science. That’s why I rely on evidence exclusively – I give weight to the quantity and quality of published, peer-reviewed data. I try not to cherry-pick that data, I try to look at it all, though I am strongly biased toward systematic reviews, the platinum standard of published research.

I don’t know how or when we can reverse this anti-science trend that is prevalent across the political spectrum. This tendency by individuals to be overconfident in their expertise in biomedical science is damaging to public health. Just look back on this COVID-19 pandemic — we have all kinds of vaccine misinformation, the pushing of fake medicines like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and pushback on face masks.

Of course, someone will surely state that I am the one with the Dunning-Kruger effect with a dose of Big Pharma shill dollars. That’s why I only rely upon published evidence.

www.skepticalraptor.com...

a reply to: quintessentone
I know risc is everywhere. But if they give us a vaccine, we may expect that this vaccine is as safe as the other vaccines they are still giving us (and our children). That is not the case. And you know that.

a reply to: quintessentone

Sorry I don't know what CT opinions are, but never mind.
I say they don't FEEL superior. I don't say that they not ARE (sometimes) superior ... A big difference, don't you think so?

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Using one's common sense when not understanding the complexities of immunology, virology and microbiology lends one to fall back on one's fears and emotions when seeking out unique cases where the vaccine may be suspected in deaths. This can lead to misinformation and fear-mongering, such as the recent case on Twitter when an account had to be closed due to misinformation that, allegedly, vaccines cause cancer. See how it can escalate without research on both sides of the fence?

Not that I am saying the vaccines never caused responses that cause deaths, only that it has always been the case where the healthcare field has warned us that vaccines can and do cause some severe reactions that can lead to death, or immediate death as in anaphylactic shock cases. Another question I have, why aren't pharmaceutical staff monitoring us during that 15 minute wait time?

Another good reason to do your own research - pro and con - is that you might find gems of hope for anti-vaxxers and vaxxers alike because both sides can still be infected, like I have found here. This doctor's study is fantastic, please watch at least up to the 10 minute mark, you won't be sorry.

I believe he has found another treatment for Covid-19 within the body (non-obese bodies) where he uses Near Infrared Light (Radiation) Therapy along with conventional therapy to kill the virus and his results (in a single-blind, randomized study), again, are fantastic.

You see, I would like to see people who are fearful or for other health reasons do not want to get the vaccine have other options of getting over the severe illness of Covid that may land them in the ICU.

Common sense and a bit of reading can always serve anyone. You don't have to be an expert to understand that herd immunity isn't achievable or that by frequent and unnecessary immune responses your immune system may go south.

You are using politically driven words. There are no pro and anti. There are political positions which have nothing to do with science. Every medicine must be judged on its own merits.

The swine flu vaccine was withdrawn for a lower rate of servers adverse reactions. The Rotavirus vaccine was withdrawn for a lower rate as well. It's time for re-evaluation of the harm to benefit ratio for the Covid vaccines. One is already out i.e the Astrazeneca as it has harmed people as it seems.

I have already been vaccinated the best possible way: SARS-CoV-2
Natural immunity is superior and not comparable to the crippled vaccines by Pfizer, Moderna and whoever else.

You still haven't understood the benefit to risk harm and how these vaccines can land you in hospital or kill you instead of COVID itself. You still believe they are safe and effective but this is only a belief. The vaccines have harmed many young people who are in no risk from Covid. You confuse the elderly and clinically vulnerable with the young and healthy.

It was SOOO complex to make the COVID vaccine, yep... In an interview, Ugur Sahin even said he was drinking wine while doing it...

But perhaps most remarkably, BioNTech co-founder Ugur Sahin designed the vaccine in just a few hours in mid-January

www.businessinsider.com...

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: puzzled2
a reply to: quintessentone

So that's the non-expert anti-vaxx information being rebuffed by experts.
But what about the Expert anti-vaxx information, is that just swept under the rug or are they not Expert enough?

Who classifies Experts?

Some extremely well qualified experts in 2019 suddenly became fringe nobodies in 2020.

I haven't seen any anti-vaxx studies from microbiologists, immunologists and virologists yet. If you did, please provide the sources so I can catch up.

The experts classify the experts, it's called peer review.

Also, there is the Dunning-Kruger effect happening here, IMO.

Let’s take a look at the Dunning-Kruger effect and some research that shows us just how prevalent it is among the anti-vaccine zealots.

The effect can be summarized by the well-known phrase, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” That is, a small amount of expertise or knowledge can mislead a person into thinking that they’re an expert because it is often easy to get a small amount of knowledge. They think that it’s all it takes.

They also think that those that have actual superior knowledge and experience are only marginally different than themselves. They underrate or even dismiss, the amount of work and effort it takes to be an expert in a field of biomedical science.

I’ve often made this comparison – someone who has a college degree in art history is very well educated, but it’s arrogant of them to think they can grasp all the fields of biology that contribute to the knowledge of someone who is an expert in immunology, public health, epidemiology, or a large number of other areas that are important to understanding vaccines.

When I write here, I don’t claim to be an expert in anything but a few, very narrow fields of biomedical science. That’s why I rely on evidence exclusively – I give weight to the quantity and quality of published, peer-reviewed data. I try not to cherry-pick that data, I try to look at it all, though I am strongly biased toward systematic reviews, the platinum standard of published research.

I don’t know how or when we can reverse this anti-science trend that is prevalent across the political spectrum. This tendency by individuals to be overconfident in their expertise in biomedical science is damaging to public health. Just look back on this COVID-19 pandemic — we have all kinds of vaccine misinformation, the pushing of fake medicines like ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, and pushback on face masks.

Of course, someone will surely state that I am the one with the Dunning-Kruger effect with a dose of Big Pharma shill dollars. That’s why I only rely upon published evidence.

www.skepticalraptor.com...

You are not reading the literature on the serious adverse reactions and the benefit to risk ratio for different age groups. If you want to learn you need to start the reading and abandon the official narrative which has been shown to be false in every aspect. Plenty of information exists only in these threads with several scientific publications showing the vaccines not to be safe and effective.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: quintessentone
Have you taken the bivalent vaccine?

Not yet because from my research it is believed that once a person caught the virus, which I did 2 months ago, that my immune system will protect me for 6 months, so that is where I am right now - along with long Covid symptoms.

In reading more about the bivalent shot as not being any better than the other vaccines, I'm not sure what to do at this point. I will discuss it with my medical team and do more research, who knows what new data will be forthcoming in 4 months time. I do know one thing though, it would be nice to not have to have vaccines and have effective therapies to treat the virus infection, like the Infrared Light study claims it can do.

The current COVID booster contains two versions of the virus’s spike protein: one from the original virus (now extinct) and another from the BA5 omicron variant, which was dominant in the United States earlier this fall.

The booster’s efficacy in people had not been studied before the booster was approved by the FDA, though animal studies have found it generates better protection against widely circulating omicron variants.

Statements in the past weeks from vaccine manufacturers maintain that the bivalent booster is better than the original booster at increasing antibodies. But an unpublished study conducted by David Ho, MD, director of the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center at Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, suggests that the new bivalent booster generates the same level of antibodies against omicron variants as the original booster. Harvard researchers have reported similar results. (The Columbia(link is external and opens in a new window) and Harvard(link is external and opens in a new window) studies are available as preprints on BioRxiv).

This wasn't a total shock. There’s a phenomenon known in vaccinology called immunological imprinting, which means your immune memory preferentially sees what it has seen before. So when a vaccine contains two different spike proteins, one that the immune system has seen before and one that it hasn’t, your immune system is going to react most strongly against the known variant, not omicron.

In retrospect, it may have been better to have created a booster that targets a single variant, the BA5 omicron variant.

www.cuimc.columbia.edu...

What you are saying in this reply is just not correct. You don't understand how natural infection works and how much protection it gives you and for hour long and then you conflate this with the bivalent shots. This is absolute confusion I am afraid just as the other time you were arguing herd Immunity can be achieved or we are 'close' to it. A bit of reading will help.

If you had the virus already you shouldn't be worrying about anything. Can you find me cases in the entire world when people survived primary infection and subsequently were re-infected and died? If you exclude the immunosuppressed and those elderly with several comorbidities, I don't think you will find much.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

I have been reading what you and others post here and either the people/doctors are anti-vaxx to begin with and most of the time they aren't even researchers in the fields of immunology, virology or microbiology. Where are the peer-reviewed papers from those that are expert in these fields?

I invite you to do the same, read some pro-vaccine literature and especially the risk/reward stats with evidence to back up the stats.

Posting of unique tragic death events without a certificate of death which would prove cause of death just isn't proof of anything.

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I have been reading what you and others post here and either the people/doctors are anti-vaxx to begin with and most of the time they aren't even researchers in the fields of immunology, virology or microbiology. Where are the peer-reviewed papers from those that are expert in these fields?

I invite you to do the same, read some pro-vaccine literature and especially the risk/reward stats with evidence to back up the stats.

Posting of unique tragic death events without a certificate of death which would prove cause of death just isn't proof of anything.

I am sorry but you are engaging again in vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality. What you call pro vaccine literature most times is propaganda and the propagation of the official narratives.

Earlier you were arguing that herd immunity can be achieved and used some articles actually for this. But these articles and the official narrative was proven wrong. Likewise much of what you are trying to reference are either proven false or have been exaggerated.

There are several articles and peer reviewed publications which show greeter risks from the vaccine than from Covid. We have posted them here. If you are not reading that not my problem.

The last paragraph of yours is just a massive strawman. There are several deaths and injuries from the vaccines. I have made a series of threads about vaccine induced deaths certified by the coroners and medical examiners and other threads where the victims have received compensation. So what you are saying is completely false just as when you were arguing about herd immunity.