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

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: McGinty

Like not having an experimental genetic vaccine?

At what point does one stop calling something extramental after first human testing? 5 years, 10 years, 50 years? Would 10 years form first human testing and 13 billion doses given still be experimental?

Good question!

And i'm guessing a little over 2 years is the wrong answer

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: McGinty

Glad to hear it. It's Common Sense that everyone should utilise in every choice, even if often times it's without us aware we're doing it. Sadly far too many folk seem to lack this from birth, or it gets neutralised by the msm - they're talked out of using it

We used to call it the Darwin awards.

I've probably been nominated a few times, but hopefully nothing to justify a win (though, the day's not over yet)

a reply to: chr0naut

So what do you think about kids getting it? A demographic in which the risk of vaccine damage is greater than the risk from covid

originally posted by: McGinty

And i'm guessing a little over 2 years is the wrong answer

But doesn't it seem to be a label more than anything else? Today everyone wants to label everything and everyone to somehow support their narrative instead of just allowing their narrative to stand on its own.

Well, it is obvious my narrative is correct because we are talking about an experimental gene therapy drug! As example...

I guess we can call all new meds experimental, but we didn't and so all of a sudden, we do now with the COVID vaccine. mRNA is not actually a drug... And mRNA is not gene therapy, that would actually be mDNA...

So what are people trying to do with this label? Are we doing to keep using it 5 years from now, I bet you a beer we do...lol

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: McGinty

And i'm guessing a little over 2 years is the wrong answer

But doesn't it seem to be a label more than anything else? Today everyone wants to label everything and everyone to somehow support their narrative instead of just allowing their narrative to stand on its own.

Well, it is obvious my narrative is correct because we are talking about an experimental gene therapy drug! As example...

I guess we can call all new meds experimental, but we didn't and so all of a sudden, we do now with the COVID vaccine. mRNA is not actually a drug... And mRNA is not gene therapy, that would actually be mDNA...

So what are people trying to do with this label? Are we doing to keep using it 5 years from now, I bet you a beer we do...lol

mRNA can be reverse transcribed back to DNA which was observed in a sweedish study using the mRNA vaccine. DNA creates proteins via mRNA, so no matter how you look at it its gene therapy.

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

mRNA can be reverse transcribed back to DNA which was observed in a sweedish study using the mRNA vaccine. DNA creates proteins via mRNA, so no matter how you look at it its gene therapy.

You keep saying this and keep trying to blend it with the vaccine, but the mRNA instructs your cells to make part of the virus that causes COVID-19 and that is it, a very limited role and it is also very unstable in the end to actually do what you suggest.

I know we can go back and forth for 100 posts, so don't bother...lol

originally posted by: Xtrozero
You keep saying this and keep trying to blend it with the vaccine, but the mRNA instructs your cells to make part of the virus that causes COVID-19 and that is it, a very limited role and it is also very unstable in the end to actually do what you suggest.

I know we can go back and forth for 100 posts, so don't bother...lol

The biggest hurdle in developing mRNA vaccines was making the mRNA last long enough to actually trigger an immune response. These folks act like it keeps working for years, when it's hours to a few days at best

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: Xtrozero
You keep saying this and keep trying to blend it with the vaccine, but the mRNA instructs your cells to make part of the virus that causes COVID-19 and that is it, a very limited role and it is also very unstable in the end to actually do what you suggest.

I know we can go back and forth for 100 posts, so don't bother...lol

The biggest hurdle in developing mRNA vaccines was making the mRNA last long enough to actually trigger an immune response. These folks act like it keeps working for years, when it's hours to a few days at best

You see the conversations are derailed with so much vaccine apology and denialism of reality. Look at the title of this thread.

Are you keep getting your boosters? Are you admitting you have been wrong? You think you are right?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

mRNA can be reverse transcribed back to DNA which was observed in a sweedish study using the mRNA vaccine. DNA creates proteins via mRNA, so no matter how you look at it its gene therapy.

You keep saying this and keep trying to blend it with the vaccine, but the mRNA instructs your cells to make part of the virus that causes COVID-19 and that is it, a very limited role and it is also very unstable in the end to actually do what you suggest.

I know we can go back and forth for 100 posts, so don't bother...lol

Likewise.

Do you keep getting your boosters?
If not, then why? Are you suspicious about the role of the spike protein in the countess episodes of cardiac conditions triggered post vaccinations, the strokes, deaths etc.

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: Xtrozero
You keep saying this and keep trying to blend it with the vaccine, but the mRNA instructs your cells to make part of the virus that causes COVID-19 and that is it, a very limited role and it is also very unstable in the end to actually do what you suggest.

I know we can go back and forth for 100 posts, so don't bother...lol

The biggest hurdle in developing mRNA vaccines was making the mRNA last long enough to actually trigger an immune response. These folks act like it keeps working for years, when it's hours to a few days at best

Ok, Pfizer. There's a study that shows its reverse transcribed into DNA in as little as 4 hours which means it can be transcribed from DNA again into spike protein forever. Another study showed vaccine spike appearing 9 months post injection, but probably longer because the study was cut off after 9 months. But keep regurgitating what Pfizer says.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Because in my case I am not known to be naive or stupid. Unknown, experimental, and untested products, that could be potentially hazardous resulting in debilitating conditions and death are not something that I will consider having. I even avoid caffeine and alcohol let alone a product which is known to cause disabilities and death. And still we don't know the medium and king term effects of these 'safe and effective' products.

a reply to: marg6043

this whole thing was daylight robbery anyway.
They spent billions globally with tax payers money used to order vaccines
pharma got the tax payers money for the vaccines everyone with shares got a nice payout
and now there's millions of shots sitting in warehouses unused.

Meanwhile the energy companies make billions from us during the energy crisis

its daylight robbery.

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: marg6043

this whole thing was daylight robbery anyway.
They spent billions globally with tax payers money used to order vaccines
pharma got the tax payers money for the vaccines everyone with shares got a nice payout
and now there's millions of shots sitting in warehouses unused.

Meanwhile the energy companies make billions from us during the energy crisis

its daylight robbery.

But if they see what happens around they start to limit the supply. For example in the UK they are not giving anymore these 'vaccines" i.e mRNA products to the under 50s. The campaign doesn't seem to go very well. In addition they have withdrawn the Astrazeneca vaccine as it caused strokes and subsequent deaths. Most countries that have used the AZ are not using it anymore.

Thailand is about to nullify their contract with Pfizer and asks their money back. Other countries will follow soon. Pfizer is in a very difficult position aster they have falsified data in the clinical phase trials deceiving the public and lately one of their members admitting on camera they were attempting to engineer the current variants for selling the appropriate vaccines. Directed evolution i.e gain of functions research.

I want to see for how long the US Government will be supporting them as they will go down and will take with them all others who supported them.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
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?!

If they are "anti" an approved vaccine, they are anti-vaxxers. It is that simple.

The original anti-vaxxers, prior to COVID, were mainly against the MMR vaccine.

There were very few who were against the smallpox vaccines, which were the most successful of all vaccines, despite having taken more than 100 years to eradicate smallpox. Specifically, most of those old-time anti-vaxxers peddled their own alternative medicine 'cures' and were being commercially marginalized by the successes of various vaccines.

Take a look at the loudest voices that oppose vaccines today. They are usually peddling alternative medicine and supplements. Mercola has published more than 700 articles opposing COVID-19 vaccines of all sorts. I doubt that there have been 700 peer reviewed papers that focus on the vaccines, so where is his invective and evidence coming from? Perhaps because he sells supplements that he claims are effective against COVID-19?

The same is true for those who oppose vaccines for political advantage, like Robert F. Kennedy, and numerous 'health freedom' and anti-government movements.

To ignore these self-obvious facts is probably wilful gullibility for anyone who has done the slightest bit of research of the subject.

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.

Herd immunity is where a sufficient portion of the population have a strong immune reaction against a disease and this results in sufficient reduction in effective hosts, and therefore transmission, of the disease to the extent that its numbers of cases will begin reducing over time, rather than increasing over time due to epidemic spread.

Herd immunity Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

We clearly both know what the term means. Your suggestion that I don't understand what it means is simply argumentative deflection of an argument that you have lost - an Ad Hominem logical fallacy.

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.

And these mentions of the points of view of others are introducing strawman arguments which have nothing to do with points I made in my posts.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

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.

Mortality from the viral disease is more than a factor of 10 higher than mortality from the vaccines.

Adverse reactions databases, when compared to the numbers of doses administered, show a tiny number of relative adverse reactions. We have no better or more credible statistics defining this than the official ones. Even nurse Campbell refers to these same statistics when drawing their conclusions.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

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.

Mortality from the viral disease is more than a factor of 10 higher than mortality from the vaccines.

Adverse reactions databases, when compared to the numbers of doses administered, show a tiny number of relative adverse reactions. We have no better or more credible statistics defining this than the official ones. Even nurse Campbell refers to these same statistics when drawing their conclusions.

Are you actually comparing diseases with vaccines?! The comparison should be made between diseases and diseases or vaccines and vaccines.

But all you do is to engage in vaccine apologetics, denialism of reality and defending of the pharmaceuticals.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

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.

Mortality from the viral disease is more than a factor of 10 higher than mortality from the vaccines.

Adverse reactions databases, when compared to the numbers of doses administered, show a tiny number of relative adverse reactions. We have no better or more credible statistics defining this than the official ones. Even nurse Campbell refers to these same statistics when drawing their conclusions.

Are you actually comparing diseases with vaccines?! The comparison should be made between diseases and diseases or vaccines and vaccines.

But all you do is to engage in vaccine apologetics, denialism of reality and defending of the pharmaceuticals.

Exactly. Plus all the numbers are government/pharma fabricated bs, and the vaxx has killed way more than the virus.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
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?!

If they are "anti" an approved vaccine, they are anti-vaxxers. It is that simple.

The original anti-vaxxers, prior to COVID, were mainly against the MMR vaccine.

There were very few who were against the smallpox vaccines, which were the most successful of all vaccines, despite having taken more than 100 years to eradicate smallpox. Specifically, most of those old-time anti-vaxxers peddled their own alternative medicine 'cures' and were being commercially marginalized by the successes of various vaccines.

Take a look at the loudest voices that oppose vaccines today. They are usually peddling alternative medicine and supplements. Mercola has published more than 700 articles opposing COVID-19 vaccines of all sorts. I doubt that there have been 700 peer reviewed papers that focus on the vaccines, so where is his invective and evidence coming from? Perhaps because he sells supplements that he claims are effective against COVID-19?

The same is true for those who oppose vaccines for political advantage, like Robert F. Kennedy, and numerous 'health freedom' and anti-government movements.

To ignore these self-obvious facts is probably wilful gullibility for anyone who has done the slightest bit of research of the subject.

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.

Herd immunity is where a sufficient portion of the population have a strong immune reaction against a disease and this results in sufficient reduction in effective hosts, and therefore transmission, of the disease to the extent that its numbers of cases will begin reducing over time, rather than increasing over time due to epidemic spread.

Herd immunity Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster

We clearly both know what the term means. Your suggestion that I don't understand what it means is simply argumentative deflection of an argument that you have lost - an Ad Hominem logical fallacy.

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.

And these mentions of the points of view of others are introducing strawman arguments which have nothing to do with points I made in my posts.

So any medicine or vaccine which has been approved cannot be challenged because it has already been approved?! What a flawed and preposterous argument.

This way no drug or vaccine will ever be challenged and none will ever be withdrawn from the market as nobody will ever dare to touch an already approved drug or vaccine. You have to be an anti-vaxxer to challenge approved vaccines.

According to you anyone who challenges or is against an already approved vaccine is by definition an anti-vaxxer. By this time it would be a significant proportion of the human population and most people here on ATS for sure. But the term anti-vaxxer is a pejorative and doesn't exist in the medical literature...

Your herd immunity argument via vaccination has already been debunked long time ago given that the 'vaccines' are crippled and cannot prevent transmission and infection and the new variants are highly transmissible and infectious.

From my to thread: The Myth of Herd Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 l. Links in the opening page



January 27, 2022
Kevin Kavanagh, MD

Those Who Believe in Herd Immunity Cannot Do the Math.

COVID-19 mutations are evading our immunity and at the same time our immunity is waning. Herd immunity to disease and the eradication of SARS-CoV-2 is no longer possible.

The developer of the AstraZeneca shot says the Delta variant has made herd immunity impossible because vaccinated people can still transmit the virus

Prof Devi Sridhar is chair of global public health at the University of Edinburgh

Herd immunity now seems impossible. Welcome to the age of Covid reinfection

The virus is now embedded in our world. But there are steps we can take to keep it at bay while we continue to live our lives

Professor David Goldblatt
Consultant Paediatric Immunologist at Great Ormond Street Hospital, University College London

Herd immunity, where a pathogen can no longer efficiently spread in a population, is achieved when a large proportion of the population becomes immune, making the spread of infection from person to person unlikely and protecting those without immunity. Despite the global spread of SARS-CoV-2, the failure of virus- and vaccine-induced immunity to prevent transmission, combined with the emergence of antigenically distinct variants, has made herd immunity to SARS-CoV-2 unachievable thus far

It is clear you don't know what you are talking about.

Stop engaging in vaccine apologetics, denialism of reality, and stop the defending of the pharmaceuticals and the peddling of the official narratives that have collapsed long time ago.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Do you keep getting your boosters?
If not, then why? Are you suspicious about the role of the spike protein in the countess episodes of cardiac conditions triggered post vaccinations, the strokes, deaths etc.

I think you remember what I told you about 10 times now. I weigh the risk of the virus to the risk of the vaccine and right now I see both small, so no I don't get boosters and I don't get the flu shot either. If some new variant came a long and started to kick ass then I would, but it seems the latest boosters suck against omicron, so why bother unless you got one foot in the grave and you need everything you can get, but even then, I would most likely go with monoclonal antibodies/Z-Pak as I can afford them, but not sure how many people can.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Because in my case I am not known to be naive or stupid. Unknown, experimental, and untested products, that could be potentially hazardous resulting in debilitating conditions and death are not something that I will consider having. I even avoid caffeine and alcohol let alone a product which is known to cause disabilities and death. And still we don't know the medium and king term effects of these 'safe and effective' products.

Welcome to the world of every drug known to man....