Posted on 02/15/2021 4:41:57 AM PST by MtnClimber
It’s important to know both what we know about the new vaccines and what we don’t know.
I’ve practiced for 35 years. I am always honest with my patients, even if conversations are difficult or confrontational. I will also be honest about saying “I don’t know.”
SNIP
What do we know about the new TYPE of vaccine being given?
Pfizer and Moderna were the first COVID-19 vaccines to be approved. Both use a new technology called mRNA vaccine, which has never been broadly given to a human population to prevent any disease.
Let that sink in for a moment.
All previous vaccines take a weakened virus or a piece of the virus and inject it into humans to induce an immune response sufficient to prevent a disease. Pfizer’s and Moderna’s vaccines inject mRNA, which is a protein code that instructs the body to make a part of COVID-19’s spike protein that will then induce an immune response.
Our bodies daily use our own mRNA to carry instructions from DNA to make various proteins the body uses. While this new vaccine science sounds intriguing, it has never been tried in humans in this scope. It may be a breathtaking scientific advancement heralding a new path for all vaccines. It may also be less effective or have currently unknown side effects.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Should we be concerned about other long term side effects from mRNA vaccines?
A concern that deserves mention is the possibility that a cross-reaction and immunity to other parts of the spike protein could cause auto-immune disease or other problems.
A former Pfizer VP, Dr. Michael Yeadon, who has over 30 years of experience in immunology and drug research, filed a Stay of Action petition with the European Medicine Agency (like our FDA) to halt the trials of mRNA vaccines over concerns it might affect sterility in women.
Yeadon is worried that the mRNA vaccine was coded for a region of the spike protein that was similar to Syncytin-1, which is a protein that is essential for the development of the placenta. If a woman’s body makes antibodies to this protein, she could become sterile when vaccinated for COVID-19. This is a theory, not a proven fact, and no one has studied it. Yeadon’s insistence on more studies to make sure this will not happen seems reasonable.
Can it later on trigger the cells to become cancerous?
Get this at your own risk.
Oh this will bring out the big pharma pro vax FR shills, in particular Dr Gas(lighter).
Masters degrees in nursing right here with 24 years of practice. I will not receive this vaccine for the same reasons. No one, NO ONE, can tell you for certain these vaccines are safe. The studies are not there, so if they tell you the jab is safe, they’re speculating (at best).
Sorry. I’ll roll the dice on my own immune system, which I supplement with Vitamin C, Zinc, and Vitamin D3 every day. Hard pass on this unknown witches’ brew.
Xactly. Well-stated, Dio. NLM is the primary goal of EUGENICISTS.
Georgia Girl 2 wrote: “Get this at your own risk.”
Or, you can also not get it and run the risk of catching the virus. And, the fewer who get the vaccine, the longer we stay in virus mitigation mode, ie, masks, quarantines, social distancing, etc,.
^ posts
What is your opinion on the J&J vaccine? I’ve read that it is significantly different from the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
The powers that be have already stated that getting the vaccine does not alleviate any of the mitigation requirements, nor does the vaccine mean you cannot catch and transmit the virus.
So, your point is...?
Never been tried on such a large scale before. Great. I hope that in 5 or 10 years we're congratulating ourselves as a people for defeating the virus. I hope those of us that did not take it are not struggling to support and care for those who did as they die a horrible lingering death. Right now there is no medical nor mathematical/statistical reason to say either outcome absolutely will or will not happen.
The drug pushers from Pfizer and Moderna have already stated that the "vaccine" doesn't give you immunity and that we will have to mitigate (masks/quarantines) forever regardless.
So...the "vaccine" is, at best, rather pointless.
The doctor that treated my 95 year old father who in December was diagnosed (by 2nd of 2 tests, the amplified version) with Covid19, in confidence, told me exactly what you said.
She was not trying to talk people out of taking the vaccine, but after 2 minutes of conversation she closed the door and told me what you did.
She prescribed (3x) 3 day dose) Ivermectin, Zinc, and heavy D-3. My father was very sick, but not suffering heavy chest infection. He recovered from Covid. He still has lots of health issues, but he did recover from what was diagnosed as Covid19.
He will not be taking the vaccine.
J&J is a viral-vector based vaccine...which is the traditional (“old-fashioned”) way of making vaccines using a small portion of a similar virus to make it. J&J also uses aborted fetal cells from design, development, research and the actual vaccine. (In case that is a factor for you)
What concerns me is potential for ADE or cytokine issues down road with vaccine. Had virus, so the issue is trying to point out unknowns to family. Vaccine may be a low risk, but carries high consequence if risk is realized. For something that would not kill a single one of them as they are young and healthy I find it absurd they consider it. But everyone wants to return to normal state...
Family believes I’ve gone nuts for my questioning.
Usually you ping people when you bring their name up.
Second I am glad you have a masters degree jn nursing. It would seem to me they you would take a more scientific and less emotional approach to the data but to each their own
I appreciate knowing that. I am predictable enough to answer the lies spread by people seeking their 24 hours of fame
Please feel free to disparage me and call me names as it does not bother me. I am millions of other physicians know the truth snd wish to see people safe. Those in the medical profession who don’t want people safe I suppose should take a long hard look at themselves
But there is no point again repeating the facts. It is an echo chamber. But it is clear that an echo chamber exists within a small minority of the medical community to spread false information for whatever reason. It appears to be that you are projecting what gas lighting is as I quote data and evidence based medicine while you quote opinion
However the majority of Americans are lining up to the the vaccine and happy to do so while you and your peers continue to argue things that simply are not true in and attempt to prevent this disease from ending
Finally I took an oath. As a nurse you did not. At the end of the day and I know this will draw sharp criticism but you will not be able to refute it, my degree as a physician establishes a superior expertise to yours as a nurse. I am sure you are a fine nurse. I am sure you mean well. But your attacks are like a third grader telling a professor they are equal. They are not
I appreciate learning your opinion even in the vitriol as it tells quite a story about you and your confidence in your opinion. Perhaps you should stick to the debate instead of the personal attacks
Blessings on your day.
What concerns me is the author is advocating elderly get the vaccine, but news reports seem to point to the elderly as having more side effects from the vaccine and more related deaths? Why encourage those over 60 when the vaccine is risky for them? I am over 60, had COVID, it was not the virus so much as it's after effects that bothered me. It was like 10 days of a bad flu. But, weeks after you can still feel the effects. I am not interested in an mRNA vaccine.
Well gas doc, my wife’s doctor agrees with the Nurse. He saw the same data as you and he is also a Doctor. This is America, my body, my choice works both ways.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.