You Either Keep Getting Your Booster Shots Or Admit You Were Wrong

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Asmodeus3
It isn't my opinion that someone said phase 3 trials usually take from 1 to 4 years.

It also isn't just my opinion that someone said and showed that accelerated clinical phase trials exist.

Whether you remember any or not has no bearing on how long phase 3 trials take or of the existence accelerated clinical phase trials.

I was referring to this

My personal position is that anyone harmed by the jabs, because of the spike, were more than likely to be harmed by the spike from natural infection. So, vax or don't vax, these people were SOL either way.

And this is an unsubstantiated opinion with no evidence attached to it but full of vaccine apologetics.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

15.3 deaths per 100,000 not from each one but from all together. It doesn't say just aspirin there.

Up to one-third of all NSAID/aspirin deaths can be attributed to low-dose aspirin use

You have 325mg normal dose aspirin and you have the 87mg low dose. What they are saying is 1/3 of the deaths from all the NSAID class is actually the low dose 87mg aspirin, and that makes sense since the low dose is part of a long-term procedure to thin blood. / means and/or

Yes indeed. But the number 15.3 is not deaths from Aspirin only but from all NSAID and Aspirin.

There are several non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs that are used. If each one had 15.3 deaths per 100,000 then the combine effect would have been catastrophic!

Now imagine what harm could be caused by the mRNA products. And it is true that the free spike protein is pathogenic and travels everywhere in the body creating a range of inflammations and diseases.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Now imagine what harm could be caused by the mRNA products.

This all goes back to your statement that 1 per 100,000 is enough to remove a drug from use and then we see common drugs 75 per 100,000 deaths that are not removed. So, when you and other say OMG 12.5 per 10,000 adverse effects is criminal, we need to understand no one died in that trial to be a part of that 12.5 per 10,000 adverse effects that are scaled from 1 to 5 with one being very mild and 5 death. That 12.5 represents zero death and mostly 1 to 3 on the scale.

mRNA by itself isn't even a drug, With COVID its mostly about the spike protein, so no I can't imagine.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Now imagine what harm could be caused by the mRNA products.

This all goes back to your statement that 1 per 100,000 is enough to remove a drug from use and then we see common drugs 75 per 100,000 deaths that are not removed. So, when you and other say OMG 12.5 per 10,000 adverse effects is criminal, we need to understand no one died in that trial to be a part of that 12.5 per 10,000 adverse effects that are scaled from 1 to 5 with one being very mild and 5 death. That 12.5 represents zero death and mostly 1 to 3 on the scale.

mRNA by itself isn't even a drug, With COVID its mostly about the spike protein, so no I can't imagine.

Yes I know that mRNA isn't a drug itself.
But the 12.5 serious adverse reactions per 10,000 vaccinees is a huge number by all standards.

And this is not a drug that will be used in let's say 100,000 to 200,000 people. It is a 'vaccine' that will be given repeatedly to billions of people all over the world and according to this figure it would cause a massive amount of serious adverse reactions that we are actually seeing, and death which we are also seeing. As a result there is a call by several scientists to suspend this product. Just as the AZ vaccine was quitely withdrawn by most countries.

Nobody has died in that trial but that a statistic that won't be reflected in the real world. Given that absence of any evidence the mRNA products were promoted as safe and effective when in reality the serious adverse reactions could be much higher in the real world.

I still don't know on what basis they released this product? 12.5 in 10,000 is a very high number and the scientists who who have written this paper have written the following

Results

Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95 % CI −0.4 to 20.6 and −3.6 to 33.8), respectively.


Discussion

The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. These analyses will require public release of participant level datasets.

In a few words they are discussing for a formal harm benefit analysis given the excess risks. Others have asked for complete suspension.


In addition

Full transparency of the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trial data is needed to properly evaluate these questions. Unfortunately, as we approach 2 years after release of COVID-19 vaccines, participant level data remain inaccessible.

Pointing to the deception and possible fraud by the pharmaceutical companies. It is known by make that Pfizer falsified data

A regional director who was employed at the research organisation Ventavia Research Group has told The BMJ that the company falsified data, unblinded patients, employed inadequately trained vaccinators, and was slow to follow up on adverse events reported in Pfizer's pivotal phase III trial

It looks like in the real world the number of serious adverse reactions would be much higher than in the clinical trials. But even if it wasn't the only way to go about it, is to use the data to have any to pray to God that the serious adverse reactions and deaths will be lower.

a reply to: Asmodeus3
Maybe you need to ask yourself why you felt the need to reply with 'it is just your opinion" to something I clearly said was just my opinion?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Asmodeus3
They got EUAs but the point made was that even using the normal speed SOP won't necessarily give much mid and no long term data.

You are free to shake your fist at the sky as hard as you like.

Emergency authorisation does not establish safety and effectiveness.

Those who have claimed emergency authorisations as proving safety and effectiveness have had their arguments refuted.

the vaccine apologetics

The majority of your refutations depend on distrust of anything official. While there have been cases of the official narrative being incorrect, there have also been far more cases of it being true. The truth is that human beings are not perfect at the best of times, and even with the best of intent.

What you feel about the authorities, is just your feelings, and has no evidential weight at all.

the anti-vax apologetics. There are no megadeaths happening. The vast majority have no adverse reactions at all.

Don't try to apologise for the official narratives and on behalf of the pharmaceuticals.

You are on record for making the most unsubstantiated claims including herd immunity via vaccinations

Where is the alpha strain now? Why is the alpha strain now extinct? Could it be that there are now no more hosts who can carry and transmit the strain? Isn't that the operation of herd immunity, which you are denying is happening? What other reason would a successfully infectious viral strain go extinct for?

, presenting the mRNA products as safe and effective

Yes. Please read the results of the Cleveland study (What it says in the study, not nurse Campbell's reinterpretation).

, claiming that the Cambrian Explosion disproves evolution

As I have said before, the Cambrian Explosion does not disprove evolution. But evolution cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. Even Darwin admitted to that. Therefore, there must be other things that are not evolutionary theory, that along with evolutionary theory, provide explanation. You keep misquoting me, and I must assume it is malicious and you are intentionally lying.

and many other things.

the vaccine apologetics

I am not apologizing for the vaccines.

Herd immunity is a debunked claim which is made by vaccine apologists and those who want to argue in favour of mass vaccinations.

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

It reminds me in another thread where another vaccine apologist claimed that Covid-19 has come from SARS-CoV-2, both being virus.

But COVID-19 is a disease, not a virus, and it is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is a virus, and not a disease.

And another one who has said that the Spanish Flu Pandemic lasted for a decade and was ended by the use of vaccines...

The 1918 "Spanish" flu pandemic was mostly over by 1920. There was no flu vaccine back then.

The other claims were made in my other thread

BREAKING: MIT Professor calls for the immediate suspension of all mRNA vaccines

I wonder why the good Professor wants the suspension of all mRNA products. He must be an 'anti-vaxxer'

Possibly he is an anti-vaxxer because he is suggesting the withdrawal of some specific vaccines?

Even the original anti-vax lobby weren't against every vaccine (the smallpox one was spectacularly successful and no-one really opposed it, and it had done its job by the time anti-vax was a 'thing'). The original anti-vaxxers were against the MMR vaccine, specifically.

RNA exists in nature and is the primary mechanism of cell function. The mRNA technologies currently utilize small snippets of existing naturally occurring RNA and, as a technology, it is unlikely that there will be a halt to the use, as it holds much promise in a number of areas.

But it would make sense that each instance of use should be wrapped up in a coherent regime of testing, evaluation and then approval, before allowing the tech to 'go to market'.

In the case of vaccines, there exists such a framework of safety and testing. But not so in other areas of technology such as food, agriculture, or in industrial process.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: chr0naut

Where is the alpha strain now? Why is the alpha strain now extinct? Could it be that there are now no more hosts who can carry and transmit the strain? Isn't that the operation of herd immunity, which you are denying is happening? What other reason would a successfully infectious viral strain go extinct for?

All RNA viruses mutate over time, some more than others..

Variants of viruses occur when there is a change — or mutation — to the virus's genes.

Taken from JohnHopkinsmedicine.org
(Covid variants: What you should know)

Basically......they don't change because of herd immunity.

Change causes the rise of new strains, but it doesn't cause the extinction of existing ones.

Currently the Delta and Omicron strains still exist and there have been even newer strains that are recombinant of those, but they still exist at this time, alongside the new strains.

However, it is likely that they, too will go extinct as the number of potential hosts reduces.

What caused the extinction of the alpha strain?

Hint, it reduced in population because it's population of natural hosts developed immune resistance to it - that's the mechanism of 'herd immunity', right there, in your face!

That immunity was either from people getting the virus and getting over it, or from people being vaccinated and getting their immunity that way.

Yes, there were breakthrough cases. There are, and have been, breakthrough cases with all vaccines.

Even people who had gotten over COVID-19 once, still occasionally got it again, because the immunity (no matter where it comes from) is not a perfect barrier.

But we do have as evidence that the alpha strain appears to be gone.Think about what may have killed a highly infectious and successful variant of the virus.

a reply to: Xtrozero
My point is really about those that will die from the vaccine.

If, and I understand it is an "if", the vaccine, with it's capped spike production, ends up killing someone then the virus with it's uncapped production, given that it is creating more viruses on top of just creating the spikes in the infected cells, is going to kill them just as dead.

Unless they are going to be treated like the boy in the plastic bubble, they are SOL. There is no increased risk.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: Asmodeus3
They got EUAs but the point made was that even using the normal speed SOP won't necessarily give much mid and no long term data.

You are free to shake your fist at the sky as hard as you like.

Emergency authorisation does not establish safety and effectiveness.

Those who have claimed emergency authorisations as proving safety and effectiveness have had their arguments refuted.

the vaccine apologetics

The majority of your refutations depend on distrust of anything official. While there have been cases of the official narrative being incorrect, there have also been far more cases of it being true. The truth is that human beings are not perfect at the best of times, and even with the best of intent.

What you feel about the authorities, is just your feelings, and has no evidential weight at all.

the anti-vax apologetics. There are no megadeaths happening. The vast majority have no adverse reactions at all.

Don't try to apologise for the official narratives and on behalf of the pharmaceuticals.

You are on record for making the most unsubstantiated claims including herd immunity via vaccinations

Where is the alpha strain now? Why is the alpha strain now extinct? Could it be that there are now no more hosts who can carry and transmit the strain? Isn't that the operation of herd immunity, which you are denying is happening? What other reason would a successfully infectious viral strain go extinct for?

, presenting the mRNA products as safe and effective

Yes. Please read the results of the Cleveland study (What it says in the study, not nurse Campbell's reinterpretation).

, claiming that the Cambrian Explosion disproves evolution

As I have said before, the Cambrian Explosion does not disprove evolution. But evolution cannot explain the Cambrian Explosion. Even Darwin admitted to that. Therefore, there must be other things that are not evolutionary theory, that along with evolutionary theory, provide explanation. You keep misquoting me, and I must assume it is malicious and you are intentionally lying.

and many other things.

the vaccine apologetics

I am not apologizing for the vaccines.

Herd immunity is a debunked claim which is made by vaccine apologists and those who want to argue in favour of mass vaccinations.

You clearly don't know what you are talking about.

It reminds me in another thread where another vaccine apologist claimed that Covid-19 has come from SARS-CoV-2, both being virus.

But COVID-19 is a disease, not a virus, and it is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is a virus, and not a disease.

And another one who has said that the Spanish Flu Pandemic lasted for a decade and was ended by the use of vaccines...

The 1918 "Spanish" flu pandemic was mostly over by 1920. There was no flu vaccine back then.

The other claims were made in my other thread

BREAKING: MIT Professor calls for the immediate suspension of all mRNA vaccines

I wonder why the good Professor wants the suspension of all mRNA products. He must be an 'anti-vaxxer'

Possibly he is an anti-vaxxer because he is suggesting the withdrawal of some specific vaccines?

Even the original anti-vax lobby weren't against every vaccine (the smallpox one was spectacularly successful and no-one really opposed it, and it had done its job by the time anti-vax was a 'thing'). The original anti-vaxxers were against the MMR vaccine, specifically.

RNA exists in nature and is the primary mechanism of cell function. The mRNA technologies currently utilize small snippets of existing naturally occurring RNA and, as a technology, it is unlikely that there will be a halt to the use, as it holds much promise in a number of areas.

But it would make sense that each instance of use should be wrapped up in a coherent regime of testing, evaluation and then approval, before allowing the tech to 'go to market'.

In the case of vaccines, there exists such a framework of safety and testing. But not so in other areas of technology such as food, agriculture, or in industrial process.

Word salad 🥗 and a lot of nonsense in relation to a Professor who is probably an 'anti-vaxxer' according to you.

originally posted by: daskakik

Unless they are going to be treated like the boy in the plastic bubble, they are SOL. There is no increased risk.

I can understand your point, but I see too many variables to suggest this. You are saying for those who the vaccine kills will then have had zero chance against the virus too and I'm not willing to go to that length since humans are a wired creature in the end. What kills one person does nothing to another. It is so crazy how we can all be so damn close in DNA but can have 100 adverse effects from nothing at all to death. In my profession we do risk analyst, and one needs to eliminate unneeded risk and if the virus is nothing for your age group, then why even take the vaccine in the first place. There are subtle differences that will affect people differently.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Word salad 🥗

You seem to say this frequently when you do not want to understand a point being made.

Considering the vax according to VEARS has wildly different reported adverse reaction/deaths from lot to lot one could conclude getting vaxxed is like playing Russian Roulette. Some pokes are probably the placebo and some are the real deal. Personally Mom get doubled vaxxed and died 1 year later from from massive sudden onset Bowel and liver cancer. Dad got double vaxxed and 2 x boosted and had major kidney and lung issues after the 2 nd jab. I have several friends who where very health get very ill and are having health issues post their double vax. I say to each there own. Want to trust a hardly vetted vaccine against a virus that even at it's worst had a less then 1% chance of killing you then go right ahead.

originally posted by: sirlancelot
Considering the vax according to VEARS has wildly different reported adverse reaction/deaths from lot to lot one could conclude getting vaxxed is like playing Russian Roulette.

Even now, more than two years after the general availability of the COVID vaccines, and with 664,375,896 doses administered in the US, VAERS only has 734,971 adverse events classified as severe or fatal.

Some pokes are probably the placebo and some are the real deal.

Then the USA is being ripped off if it paid for the vaccines and got water. Not only that, but the fake vaccines would never have had a chance to achieve anything if they were placebo's. The Cleveland study showed 30% effectiveness of the bivalent vaccines against the Delta and Omicron strains that were the predominant ones during the study.

Personally Mom get doubled vaxxed and died 1 year later from from massive sudden onset Bowel and liver cancer.

Or, she had normal onset of bowel cancer, but was only diagnosed later, when symptoms became apparent. Highly carcinogenic substances, like tobacco tar, usually take years to manifest. Yet you are suggesting that a cancer that has no high correlation with cancers in any database, is more deadly, and more rapidly so? Honestly?

Dad got double vaxxed and 2 x boosted and had major kidney and lung issues after the 2 nd jab.

Again, where is the correlation in adverse event databases?

Everyone that has died, also breathed prior to death. Every - singe - one!

I have several friends who where very health get very ill and are having health issues post their double vax. I say to each there own. Want to trust a hardly vetted vaccine against a virus that even at it's worst had a less then 1% chance of killing you then go right ahead.

Overall, across the world, COVID-19 has killed around 2% of confirmed cases (although that seems to be reducing, now).

And of my close community, I know that the majority have been triple vaxxed. I don't know of anyone directly who has had an adverse reaction.

I do know of two who have been hospitalized after getting COVID, though (but they bounced back faster than even if they had the flu.

Could your parents have been old and have caught COVID, because those are apparently strong co-factors in COVID mortality.

a reply to: chr0naut
You have said several times in the past that other scientists who couldn't agree with the unsubstantiated official narratives are somehow 'anti-vaxxers'. You understand how flawed this argument is?!

Or when you are arguing about herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 through vaccination and then ask on the top of this why the Alpha or Delta variant have dissapeared. Clearly you show no understanding of what herd immunity is.

It reminds me of another two members, one claiming Covid cane from SARS-CoV-2, both being virus... He was also going about harm immunity.
And the other arguing the Spanish Flu lasted for a decade and ended because of vaccination. Despite the fact that it only lasted for a maximum of two years and there were no vaccines at that time.

a reply to: chr0naut

The infection fatality rate of SARS-CoV-2 was around 0.15% which is a global average.

At the moment is probably as low or lower than that of the flu.

There rest is just vaccine apologetics and denialism of reality. Unless you don't want to see what is going on around.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
massive amount of serious adverse reactions that we are actually seeing, and death which we are also seeing.

Lol, no we're not.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
massive amount of serious adverse reactions that we are actually seeing, and death which we are also seeing.

Lol, no we're not.

You may not have informed yourself adequately. Take a look around. They many not be advertised in the MSM but they do exist and there are many.

originally posted by: chr0naut
Even now, more than two years after the general availability of the COVID vaccines, and with 664,375,896 doses administered in the US, VAERS only has 734,971 adverse events classified as severe or fatal.

People also do not want to understand that VAERS is a passive reporting system. I could go into there today and input 100 reports if I cared to. After the CDC investigates these cases less than 5% are seen even remotely labeled as a possible causation. The real numbers just don't fit people's narratives though.

Then the USA is being ripped off if it paid for the vaccines and got water. Not only that, but the fake vaccines would never have had a chance to achieve anything if they were placebo's. The Cleveland study showed 30% effectiveness of the bivalent vaccines against the Delta and Omicron strains that were the predominant ones during the study.

People keep saying this and in any conspiracy I look at the logistics for it to be possible. In this case think of the massive number of people from the lab, to the manufacturing, to the Government at many levels, to the distribution so on and so forth all in on it and all perfectly secret. 10,000+ people all in on it...lol Jeez...

Now think of how many originations would LOVE to get their hands on a batch of placebos to blow this wide open, and yet all we have is people suggesting it happened.

Or, she had normal onset of bowel cancer, but was only diagnosed later, when symptoms became apparent. Highly carcinogenic substances, like tobacco tar, usually take years to manifest. Yet you are suggesting that a cancer that has no high correlation with cancers in any database, is more deadly, and more rapidly so? Honestly?

My dad had a massive heart attack and died in 1993...I think it was the COVID vaccine that did it...

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

The infection fatality rate of SARS-CoV-2 was around 0.15% which is a global average.

You just keep wearing out that percentage like it is the only thing out there. What is the percentage of people over 65%, what is the percentage of different countries. Here you keep using like the same 3 numbers over and over never even thinking from leaning an inch from some narrative that will never change and is tattooed on your brain. Do some actual investigations and get away from repeating what is repeated a million times on Twitter.

The world death rate is about 85 per 100,000 people, and that is with China saying they have had only 85k total deaths from the get-go so they are like 5 per 100,000... geez

America is 330 per 100,000 as example of like many other countries in what we call the 1st world, and with 19 other countries worse than that and as high as 600 per 100,000.

We also need to remember the vast majority of these deaths were with Delta, so Omicron is really skewing the numbers now too being like 15x more infectious and a lot weaker in illness.

a reply to: Xtrozero
I agree 100 percent with what you are saying. Take 2 people give them the same amount of poison and one dies and one pulls through.

That isn't what I am saying. I'm saying that if you have one person who will die because of X amount of spike protein created by a vaccine then they were also going to die from the virus because it was going to create 2X the amount of spike protein.

2X is also throwing a softball. From what I have read, a jab contains around 15M nano particles, a viral load from a covid infection is 1B to 100B virions. That would be 50X+.

So, unless the virus produces something to mitigate the effects of the spike, not ruling it out but we don't know, and given the fact that the majority of the world's human population will come in contact with the virus, the whole avoid the jab movement, while it may come from a good place, isn't going to save anyone.