Posted on 03/20/2021 7:11:03 PM PDT by ransomnote
I've been collecting links and information and posting it, along with many others, all over FR. It's important to save this information because content on the CDC's website and other websites is rewritten and removed soon after people start to reference it in debates. I've begun to collect and update it in one place.
I didn't keep track of where I obtained the links and some of the contents. I provide credit for exerpts of user comments wherever I can. ThankQ to all FReepers who are sharing information and working against the unprecedented level of medical censorship we're facing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Covid-19 'vaccines' are mis-classified. They are gene therapies which have been classified as 'vaccines' in order to protect manufacturers from liability, and to lure people into wanting them. They do not prevent disease or stop you from transmitting the illnesses to others - which is what vaccines do.
On 3/4/2021, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) displayed the definition of the term vaccine on its website:
"A vaccine is a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease. Immunity is the protection from an infectious disease. If you are immune to a disease, you can be exposed to it without becoming infected."
In several instances I read or watched videos featuring Physicians and other experts pointing out that the vaccine companies have defined their Covid-19 treatments as gene therapies in their own marketing information. The above definition of a vaccine was compatible with standard medical practice so the physicians didn't quote the CDC, they put it in laymans terms but it meant the same thing.
Fauci has stressed a tiny portion of the true nature of these gene therapies by explaining to the public that you’d still be able to transmit the virus to others, you’d still be able to get the illness yourself, but it’s hoped that the vaccine will reduce the severity of the disease.
When the public started waking up to the fact that we were again being lied to, the CDC watered down and reformatted their definitions to mean whatever it had to mean. I think the modification is recent because the trolls on FR once again began sneering that they really are vaccines. The watered-down, deceptive definition of vaccine is located at the link below.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/imz-basics.htm.
The CDC lies on demand - they were slow enough to rewrite their website this time that I got the text from it first.
The gene therapies are not specifically designed to attack Covid's version of the corona virus. Since the Covid-19 virus was not available in isolated form when the gene therapies were developed (Covid-19 has still not been isolated), the therapies were designed to respond to viruses similar, but not the same as Covid-19. So if you have had other illneses, you've probably already developed the anti-bodies you'd get from the experimental gene therapy.
The Covid-19 vaccines are actually experimental gene therapies. They are based on mRNA technology invented in 2005. Since that time no illness was successfully treated with that technology.
As this information emerges into the public forum, the 'experts' are beginning to say that they appear to inhibit transmission after all. I think they are citing the decline in Covid-19 deaths, 'cases' (false positives?). But Corona viruses burn themselves out in a year anyway, like Sars 1 did. There are other reasons for reductions (growing herd immunity, the public is now accessing OTC remedies by Dr. Zelenko.
Here's the website and image from Zelenko's website:
Doctor | Vladimir Zev Zelenko M.D. | United States (vladimirzelenkomd.com)
Here's Dr. Zelenko's protocol, which can be comprised of either prescription medications or from OTC remedies. NOte that he offers prevention protocol and a treatment protocol
Zelenko Treatment Protocol - Google Docs
Zelenko Covid-19 Prophylaxis Protocol - Google Docs
Deaths severe illnesses are also decreasing because people are simply purchasing both an online medical appointment and the HCQ/AZ/zinc protocol medications at the following link. I don't think the price is firm (may vary) but one FReeper said they paid about $150 total).
https://speakwithanmd.com/americasfrontlinedoctors/
Those who obtained prescription for the Zelenko protocol or Ivermectin, but can't get a pharmacy to fill it because bureaucrats have seized control of our medical system can still purchess both Ivermectin and the HCQ medications at this online pharmacy.
Buy Prescription Medicines From Online Pharmacy Store | AllDayChemist
Those who can't get a prescription for Ivermectin tablets have shared their experiences and dose amounts using Ivermectin paste used with horses. They do this because they feel betrayed by the FAUCI fiasco. Both Ivermecting and the Zelenko Protocol drugs have all completed challenging FDA approval process and have been used for many years (60 years for HCQ for those who have Lupus). If the FDA wanted to, it could have let physicians write prescriptions for Ivermectin 'off label' as is common practice.
At the start of Covid-19, NO MEDICATIONS were permitted to treat the illness. If the FDA wanted to, it could have awarded Ivermectin/HCQ the Emergency Use Authorization it too quickly gave the Covid-19 vaccines. This EUA would have allowed early victims of the illness receive the 'right to try' because the benefits outweighed the risks, a criteria for EUA. But the captured medical industry insisted people go without treatment to fan the claims of an unmanageable 'pandemic'. Many illnesses could be similarly fanned into fake pandemic if all treatments were denied them. Once hospitalized, early WHO/CDC recommendations for ventilators were too agressive and damaged diseased lung tissue, and still the patient couldn't recieve available FDA drugs (HCQ/Ivermecting). They did this to force the EUA authoriztaion of the Covid-19 drugs that could never make it to the public any other way.
The mRNA in the Covid19 vaccines is technology previously used to try to create a vaccine for HIV and other Corona Viruses in the past. They never could get it to work for HIV or any other disease-it never cured anybody because it never made it past the animal trials in 2005 and 2012 ( all the animals died). After injection, the animals displayed elevated antibodies as expected. But when the animals were exposed to the actual Corona Viruses they were testing, their immune system overeacted (i.e. Antibody Enhancement Reaction).
Note that the Covid-19 manufacturers are claiming they are 95% effective, but effective at what? The Covid-19 vaccine are supposedly 95% effective at triggering the production of antibodies - the percentage is unrelated to their actual impact on the disease itself. The manufacturers wouldn't release their data when they received Emergency Use Authorization (NOT FDA approval).
In a British medical journal, an associate editor (Dr. Doshie? (sp)) said that, based on the data, the vaccines are likely about 19% effective instead of manufactuers and MSM claims that they are 95% effective. At this low rate, they never would have been approved for use. With the current data comparisons of the covid-19 vaccines with 91 other vaccines in the CDC's VAERs database, they will likely be recognized as too hazardous for use.
The Covid vaccines were not developed specifically for the Covid virus because there are still no isolated samples of Covid-19 for the researchers to use. The fact that no sample of Covid-19 is available anywhere is 'of concern'. The PCR tests were created without the Covid-19 virus samples too - they don't detect the pressence of Covid-19 viruses specifically, they detect the presence of fragments of proteins found in numerous other viruses and other materials. The following link discusses the fact that the Covid tests do not indicate the presence of the disease
The current Covid-19 gene therapies were never sufficiently tested, skipped the rigorous testing period required for FDA approval and after a few months of testing on volunteers starting in July of 2020, was given an "Emergency Use Authorization", so it's not FDA approved. It's EUA or 'Authorized' on the (false) belief that no other safe medications or treatments are available; that's why they have to prevent HCQ and Ivermectin from being available to the public - otherwise these gene therapies would have to go through rigorous testing in addition, which they know will fail as mRNA has been failing to treat illness or obtain FDA approval for 15 years.
In the video below, I think he's too general when he uses the term "approved" re the FDA because he shows elsewhere he knows they are experimental, therefore not FDA approved but "authorized". At the 8 minute mark, he's talking about side-effects etc. E.g., it seems likely that there is no way to turn off the spike proteins the Covid-19 therapies tell the cells to make so they are theoretically always churning out new ones, driving the body to fight and likely to trigger long term autoimune issues.
Video By Dr. Steve Hotze (h/t greeneyes)
https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/068/967/505/original/8da6bfe9c4627687.mp4
I'll add another video below of an interview with pro-vaccine industry, Geert Vanden Bossche, PhD, DVM He is a vaccine research expert who has worked for a long list of companies and organizations on vaccine discovery and preclinical research, including GSK, Novartis, Solvay Biologicals, and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Dr Vanden Bossche also coordinated the Ebola vaccine program at GAVI (Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization).
A FReeper riciduled Vanden Bossche because he is a DVM. A FReeper clarified Vanden Bossche's expert knowledge regarding vaccines in a post on a prior thread. I'll put an excerpt of that post below. If not interested in Vanden Bossche's credentials, skip down to second row of dotted lines.
====================
My spouse, a PhD who works on clinical trials, was not all that impressed until I provided a more complete resume...You seemed to question a DVM, but I have been told it has been more difficult to get in to Vet school than Med school.
Video has Vanden Bossche employment history at 3:13 minute mark—numerous senior roles, all vaccine related at GSK Biologicals, Novartis, Solvay Biologicals, Bill Linda Gates Foundation, GAVI, Univac, and Vareco.
Vanden Bossche studied at Ghent University for his M.D. in Veterinary Medicine from 1980 to 1983. He then obtained his Postdoctoral training in Equine Medicine and Surgery at the Free University of Berlin (1984-1987).
From 1990, Vanden Bossche underwent a Postdoctoral Fellowship in Virology at James A. Baker Institute for Animal Health, Cornell University in New York.
He was board certified in Veterinary Virology in 1990. Two years later he was Board certified in Veterinary Microbiology and Animal Hygiene. What boards? Well likely in Europe.
Some of the other universities where Geert Vanden Bossche has worked as an academic include the Robert Koch Institute in Berlin, the University of Hohenheim in Stuttgart, the REGA Institute, KU Leuven in Belgium.
Open letter? Not written by him? Uh I think it was...Yes, he tweeted it but he wrote it too...(search is your friend), and I think it was on Linked-in, which you, having such credentials, can probably verify.
The schedule for the summit you provided was labeled tentative, so perhaps he changed the subject? Don’t know...
If you want to check out some voluntary reports to the CDC's VAERs database, I provide some examples and instructions on how to use the database in the thread below.
As a head's up, the videos I've reviewed indicate that the AztraZeneca vaccine may be worse, with one doctor suggesting that it may cause spread to persons who don't get the vaccine. Many countries in the EU paused the administration of Aztrazeneca's vaccine for observed medical reactions in patients. 2 days ago bureaucrats over ruled them and said, 'nothing to see here, move along'.
The following video shows a comedian asking Fauci questions that 'journalists' just won't ask. It's great:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ransomnote: Experimental Gene Therapy? That gets a big response from trolls. One lashed me for my ignorance saying it is not a Gene Therapy. I'll put two of their posts at the bottom.
For the record, I've never asserted that it alters DNA because the experts/physicians I've watched/read say it doesn't.
Someone on the Suppressed Covid Information thread says it is and we should call it that. There may be in some sense a way to defend that, but I think the doctors didn't think it was valid or worth the battle to make that point.
Some people are trying to make that point:
I get the impression that doctors are saying it is not because there is no evidence - they'd be expected to prove what they say. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. It may be no one has studied it because they don't want the answer. It may be that it has been proven in proprietary documents not available to the public. But a physician has no report or study solid enough to invest there.
I kind of understand why some say it does. There's some research suggestign a particular type of mRNA folds onto DNA and can make a loop. Researchers say they want to study that more.
Functionally, it may not make much difference. At the link, a nature.com article describes how your DNA transcribes a strand of your RNA which then translates instructions to tell the cell what kind of protein to make.
The Covid gene therapies (experimental) enter your cells and provide instructions to make a specific kind of protein (not specific to Covid-19 since none was available when the therpies were developed).
Vanden Bossche is worried that the vaccine could your cells to stop making the variety of proteins they make and instead, start making the one protein specified by the mRNA in the Covid gene therapies. (one manufacturer has a single protein that can fold itself many different ways, and this matters, but the protein iteslf doesn't change).
So the false vaccine can blind your cells to other pathogen/proteins/diseases that they should defeat; they are focused on finding the gene thereapy spike protein. Your cells have that instruction from mRNA. There's no way for you to tell your cells to go back to producing the wide range or to stop producing the Covid spike protein.
I've seen casual assertions on the pro-vaccine side that say the treatment only lasts a few months. Oddly enough, the doctors I'm watching say we have no way of knowing how long they will last. The Covid mRna could focus your immune system on the Covid Gene Therapy's spike protein forever. If you're allergic to it - your body will still produce it whether you like it or not.
The mRNA technology found an ingenious way to deliver mRNA to your cells (slips past the guard). Odd that we would take the risk of defeating your immune system's basic capacity to identify a foreign substance in the body (mRNA) during a supposed world-wide pandemic.
I think the primary concern Vanden Bossche expressed was that the covid therapy (he called them vaccines) should never be given during a pandemic or time when the population is dealing with an active transmission of Covid-19. This gene therapy can silence the natural immune response to a broad range of illnesses including Covid (this therapy is not specific to Covid). People who get or were fighting covid can stop fighting it all together.
Others have said the deception of your immune system to allow mRNA into your cells can backfire. Your body's immune system 'saw' that spike protein 'hanging out' with your natural body proteins and can decide that all must be foreign substances which are pathogens to be destroyed. The result could be auto-immune diseases. Again, with no way to halt the attacks because it's in your cells.
So DNA normally tells your mRNA what to produce (proteins in the body are the work horses). Injecting mRNA may not change your DNA but it certain tells you mRNA to stop making the proteins your body was making and start making the ones for which it carries instructions.
For this reason, I don't think it matters if the Covid mRNA therapy can or can not change your DNA if it simply takes over the critical job of the DNA in directing the body to make proteins the body needs and the immune system recognizes. All of the above are quick laymen's efforst so no doubt I've got bugs to correct up there.
The fact that people insist the Covid gene therapies are not gene therapies is another form of information suppression.
For more about DNA/RNA, I liked this nature.com page for the description (and the graphic) showing how your body's DNA directs (through transcription) your mRNA to develop (through transcripton) specifiied proteins, via mRNA)
Translation: DNA to mRNA to Protein | Learn Science at Scitable (nature.com)
Below, are two responses to the issue of whether a vaccine is a gene therapy or not.
PS: mRNA vaccines are not gene therapy and do not change or effect your DNA. Big scientific gaffes like that lose credibility instantly.
~~~~~~~~~~
No, his concerns are more complex.
Vaccine companies and Fauci started pushing their products by stating they do not stop transmission or infection therefore we must continue to wear masks and social distance. As people held off getting the vaccine, the lies grew to say that SOME people may experience reduced transmission.
Well reduction in transmission was happening before the vaccines kicked off. Testing is down, the tests are being altered (they were always cycling too high at 40 cycles are more and now are being lowered). So the vaccine industry is....lying again.
As to your instant loss of credibility re mRNA, please read and learn and stop childing others for knowing more than you do.
mRNA can be used for gene therapy. That is not what or how it is being used in vaccines. Some tools can be used in more than one way.
Confusing a tool with the job in can be used for is a category error.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
The vaccine companies stated upon introduction that there products would not stop transmission or infection.
By definition, vaccines top transmission and infection. The vaccine companies are calling these gene therapies ‘vaccines’ because doing so allows them freedom from liability afforded standard vaccines. They get to experiment on the public without incurring liability for death/disability/injury for their products.
Also, calling them vaccines helps them avoid the comparison with other treatments which are safer, cheaper and time tested (e.g., HCQ, Ivermectin).
On the one hand, he's a flubro (good), and on the other he's a (vaxxer).
Make that make sense. The two do not comport.
Government bad vs. Government good.
From the Nature article on pfizer/biontec phase 1/2 trials:
"The RNA vaccine platform has enabled rapid vaccine development in response to this pandemic. RNA vaccines provide flexibility in the design and expression of vaccine antigens that can mimic the structure and expression of the antigen during natural infection. RNA is required for protein synthesis, does not integrate into the genome, is transiently expressed, is metabolized and eliminated by the natural mechanisms of the body and is therefore considered safe" (emphasis mine)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2639-4
You are playing semantic games to prove something that doesn't exist for the mRNA vaccines.
I'm not saying these vaccines are 100% safe (nothing is). They aren't 100% effective, nothing is. But you are spreading FUD on a decent therapy that people should discuss with their doctors to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks for their individual case.
From the same journal article:
Titers in the study from patients given the vaccine were compared with patients who recovered from PCR confirmed COVID-19:
"These RBD-binding antibody concentrations were 5,880–16,166 U ml−1 compared to 602 U ml−1 in the panel of human convalescent sera."
So you get a higher titer than in measurements on people who recovered from the disease on their own. The take away here is thet isolating the virus is a red herring. They have isolated an antibody titer from the disease and the vaccine is able to induce it in patient's that have not been exposed.
The article goes on with some technical information of other antibody responses that are more indicative of possible protective effect and again the vaccine provided more of these antibodies than in people recovered from natural infection.
I hate to defend Fauci but the reason he says we may not be protected even with the vaccine has to do some limitations in our knowledge. Again from the Phase 1/2 article:
"Our study had several limitations. Although we used convalescent sera as a comparator, the kind of immunity (T cells versus B cells or both) and level of immunity needed to protect from COVID-19 are unknown"
The point here is we don't even know if you are protected if you catch SARS-COV-2 and recover. At this point in time we believe you have at least 3 months of immunity (maybe 6 months) but we don't know. We are still collecting data. Another reason for this is that Phase 1/2 trials don't test for efficacy, that comes in phase 3 of a trial. That phase 3 trial reports a 95% efficacy substantially higher than the 30% efficacy needed to gain FDA approval. Out of about 45000 participants there were 8 cases of COVID-19 in the vaccine group and 162 cases in the placebo group. The study goes on to say that due to the exceptional statistics it would be unethical to maintain a placebo group for 2 years and that the placebo group would need to be offered the vaccine going forward.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577?query=featured_home
I never even started spreading lies. Wish I could say the same for the pharma/Covid mafia.
From the Nature article on pfizer/biontec phase 1/2 trials:
"The RNA vaccine platform has enabled rapid vaccine development in response to this pandemic.
For 15 years that RNA vaccine platform has failed to cure HIV, Hep C, and other corona virus types, and it DID kill all the animals in the trials.
RNA vaccines provide flexibility in the design and expression of vaccine antigens that can mimic the structure and expression of the antigen during natural infection.
The flexibility of the vaccine antigen designs goes away in the Covid-19 therapies. I think it's Moderna that has one articulation of one spike protein. The PFizer can provide 16 different articulations of one specific spike protein.
The Covid mRNA therapies will not mimic the antigen specific for the Covid virus because no one has isolated the virus. The manufacturers produced their products without the availability of isolated Covid virus samples.
The Covid therapy will mimic one protein common among prior Corona Viruses and other illnesses. That's why there's no real benefit to the Covid mRNA therapies - most of us have already encountered similar viruses that caused our bodies to produce the antigen that the Covid therapy plans to give us. This non-existant benefit, giving us an antigen most of us likely already have, does not begain to warrant the risks.
Even the more flexible of the two vaccines immiediately loses it's flexibility as the host cells (body) select one of those articulations and that one articulation is then expressed throughout the body. The mRNA platform is believed to be flexible, but the companies narrow it down by selecting the antigen they want their product to make the body express, and then the body selects the articulation of that one proten even if the Covid therapy supplies more than one articulation.
RNA is required for protein synthesis, does not integrate into the genome, is transiently expressed, is metabolized and eliminated by the natural mechanisms of the body and is therefore considered safe" (emphasis mine)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2639-4
I never said the mRNA integrates into the genome (DNA), nor will I. I've shared this graphic elsewhere wherein the NIH refers to mRNA as gene therapy.
I believe that presently there is no evidence that it integrates into the genome (DNA). That may also be because no one is willing to study it and the fact that the companies don't release their research. It's considered safe by those incentivized to declare it safe. Researchers and scientists who raise concerns are fired, stripped of their labls and funding and ostracized. Abusing countering medical and pharaceutical opinion is not the same as saying the product is safe.
It's largely unknown what the Covid mRNA therapies will do because prior versions have never succeeded there are no long-term studies to say what it will do, and the same is even more true for the Covid therapies as they have been tested on 46 people initially and then tested on 50K volunteers starting in July. Then they decided to use it and needed time to manufacture it - so really in between the kick off in July and the start of production there was probably 2 - 4 months (I've been seeing 2 months but I haven't completed reading the materials yet).
You are relaying guesswork and optimism when you say, "is transiently expressed, is metabolized and eliminated by the natural mechanisms of the body"
Research is needed to prove what you say. There are no long-term studies and even the Covid mRNA human trials lasted a few months. No evidence they are transient and eliminated. In the case of cats, the cats all died before the natural mechanisms of the body halted the production of anti-bodies.
You are playing semantic games to prove something that doesn't exist for the mRNA vaccines.
I've explained my reasoning and was never claiming that mRNA changes the genome. I've seen an area proposed for future study wherein initial observation indicates the mRNA attached to a genome and formed a loop (Have no idea what that means or if it's real - it warrants study based onobservation).
Your rebutting something I never said does look like the game is in motion on your side.
I'm not saying these vaccines are 100% safe (nothing is). They aren't 100% effective, nothing is.
NO ONE, and I do mean no one, I have read/watched has ever said these vaccines are 100% safe or any drug or vaccine is ever 100% safe. All refer to the cost/benefit analysis. The problem is the only voices permitted in the public sphere are those exaggerating benefits. All those daring to mention risks historically faced by this mRNA platform are ridiculted as incompetent or knuckle dragging thoughtless beasts willing to kill others on personal whims and beliefs.
But you are spreading FUD on a decent therapy that people should discuss with their doctors to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks for their individual case.
This 'decent therapy' platform was patented in 2005 and failed to obtain FDA approval (it still has EUA) because it a) killed all the animals in the trials in 2005 and again in 2012 and b) has never cured the illnesses for which is was designed to treat. Never produced immunity, never worked. "She's dead, Jim."
From the same journal article:
Titers in the study from patients given the vaccine were compared with patients who recovered from PCR confirmed COVID-19:
It would really help if you read the post before you objected to it. Here's an article about the PCR, since you're avoiding the actual thread post.
"These RBD-binding antibody concentrations were 5,880–16,166 U ml−1 compared to 602 U ml−1 in the panel of human convalescent sera."
So you get a higher titer than in measurements on people who recovered from the disease on their own. The take away here is thet isolating the virus is a red herring. They have isolated an antibody titer from the disease and the vaccine is able to induce it in patient's that have not been exposed.
That's a crucial part in which the companies are lying to the public. They are saying that their products are up to 95% effective. They are intentionally leading the public to think their statement means 95% effective against Covid-19. It does not mean that. The products are actually 95% percent effective in triggering the production of the antibodies specified by the companies.
The effectiveness of Covid gene therapies in actually mitigating severity of Covid in patients (the claim Fauci, Moderna, Pfizer and others make for these products) is uknown because the companies won't release the rest of their data and it has not been sufficiently studied. A physician who's an editor at a British medical publication has been evaluating the portions of the research that have been released and so far, the effecitveness in mitigating illness is around 19%. Plug that into the ol' cost/benefit analysis.
The thing to remember is the mRNA platform that's been around for 15 years was about 100% effective in triggering the production of antibodies in their test animals (cats). However, when these cats were then exposed to the actual illness, 100% of the animals died.
So you can see this information decimates your happy report that the identity of the virus doesn't matter, it's how many antibodies are produced. 100% wrong.
The article goes on with some technical information of other antibody responses that are more indicative of possible protective effect and again the vaccine provided more of these antibodies than in people recovered from natural infection.
That's nothing to celebrate. It is overproduction of antibodies that many believe is behind the death of 100% of the cats in the mRNA platform trials. Their immune systems over heated.
In reading negative reactions to the Covid-19 vaccine, many people talk about physically overheating etc. Both hyper-immunity and hypo-immunity side-effects can and have resulted from the mRNA platform trials because of the inaibility to manage the production of antibodies once the gene therapy is released in the body and tells cells to crank out this new spike protein.
The DNA is no longer in charge. Normally the body would control the mRNA but technology has step in and ordered the cells to produce the Covid therapy antigen without brakes.
I hate to defend Fauci but the reason he says we may not be protected even with the vaccine has to do some limitations in our knowledge. Again from the Phase 1/2 article:
"Our study had several limitations. Although we used convalescent sera as a comparator, the kind of immunity (T cells versus B cells or both) and level of immunity needed to protect from COVID-19 are unknown"
Fauci is indefensible.
Ironically, Fauci won't listen to experts, researchers, doctors who say that T-cell immunity is little understood (one called it the dark side), and has no track record of success with mRNA technolgies because we seem to be missing one or more pieces of the puzzle. Like how we were ever to control the experssion of the spike protein after the mRNA was released in the body.
The point here is we don't even know if you are protected if you catch SARS-COV-2 and recover.
So just blast away at it with risky, failed technology? I know t-cell immunity holds great promise, but all agree it's little understood, so how can we insist it's safe?
For Sars-1, the population emerged with sufficient immunity after a year, as is often the case. The viruses burn out in a population. The only way you get increasingly virulent, dangerous 'variants' is to lie or release stronger bioweapons.
The real point here is Ivermecting and HCQ/AZ/Zinc have far better histories, are FDA approved, are well tolerated, effective and don't require the assumption of extremes of risks inherent in mRNA gene therapy nor the concomitant risks.
At this point in time we believe you have at least 3 months of immunity (maybe 6 months) but we don't know. We are still collecting data.
True of many illnesses. When did we decided to outsource immunity to companies who test on humans for about 3 months technology that has failed to serve any benefit to human health for 15 years?
Another reason for this is that Phase 1/2 trials don't test for efficacy, that comes in phase 3 of a trial. That phase 3 trial reports a 95% efficacy substantially higher than the 30% efficacy needed to gain FDA approval. Out of about 45000 participants there were 8 cases of COVID-19 in the vaccine group and 162 cases in the placebo group.
Remember, they were using the PCR test which is not accurate. Most of the asymptomatic postive PCR tests are simply healthy people. The test can also render false negatives.
Since the PCR test can identify Covid in fruit, Coca Cola and in the case of the vaccine produced by WHO, a sequence found in the human genome because it doesn't identify a virus, it identifies a string of molecules, the 'results' of the fake vaccines are meaningless.
The side effects and risks are meaningful and are not based on fake tests.
The study goes on to say that due to the exceptional statistics it would be unethical to maintain a placebo group for 2 years and that the placebo group would need to be offered the vaccine going forward.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577?query=featured_home
Unethical, they name is Moderna, Fauci, Pfizer, Moderna, Cuomo, Newsom....I'm tired. I'm not going to list all the establishements and people compromised and lying to us.
(From Ransomnote's post)
So the false vaccine can blind your cells to other pathogen/proteins/diseases that they should defeat; they are focused on finding the gene thereapy spike protein. Your cells have that instruction from mRNA. There's no way for you to tell your cells to go back to producing the wide range or to stop producing the Covid spike protein.
From my basic understanding of what was written, the 'vaccine' changes they body's ability to produce proteins that fight any enemy cells to the ability to fight the specific (covid) cells. The body then loses the ability to create proteins to fight other invasive stuff and makes the change permament.
Is that why your guy Fauci (who you hate to defend) says the vaccine' will only be effective for a short time and then you'll have to keep on getting them? Will they have to design a new vaccine each time a new strain is released by the Chinese?
Serious question.
What I read above tells me, a layman, that this so-called 'vaccine' is like sticking your finger in a dyke (the kind in Holland, not in Rosie O'Donnell's bedroom) when leaks will spring up over and over.
Doesn't sound good to me.
Moderna Fact Sheet:
HAS THE MODERNA COVID-19 VACCINE BEEN USED BEFORE?
The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine is an unapproved vaccine. In clinical trials, approximately
15,400 individuals 18 years of age and older have received at least 1 dose of the Moderna
COVID-19 Vaccine.
WHAT IS THE COUNTERMEASURES INJURY COMPENSATION PROGRAM?
The Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) is a federal program that may help
pay for costs of medical care and other specific expenses of certain people who have been
seriously injured by certain medicines or vaccines, including this vaccine. Generally, a claim
must be submitted to the CICP within one (1) year from the date of receiving the vaccine. To
learn more about this program, visit www.hrsa.gov/cicp/ or call 1-855-266-2427.
BKMRK
After responding to your post, I went to cross post it on another thread and ended up making corrections to it before posting the revision. You may find it easier to read. Here’s the link:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3942345/posts?page=2038#2038
Too late. I already read the whole thing.
(not usually my cup of tea, but fascinating)
Thx
Btw - the AZ and JnJ vaccines without a doubt create human GMO’s.
- They both use recombinant DNA technology to get human cells to express viral genes.
This is the very definition of a gmo.
The recipients are trans-genetic humans - literally.
Threaded this for mass distribution.
60+ reasons not to get the vaccine.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1373661285372551175.html
60+ reasons not to get the vaccine.
https://twitter.com/NunyaBi34683710/status/1373661285372551175
Search my Twitter for vaccine related info.
https://twitter.com/search?q=%40NunyaBi34683710%20noVaccine&src=typed_query&f=live
Thank you for posting this stuff on its own thread and not vomiting it forth all over other threads. You’re doing a favor to both the “pro” and “con” folks.
Let's just hope you learned something, Harkonnen.
bkmk
Lol
The JnJ and AZ ‘vaccines’ are absolutely gene therapy. They use the adenovirus vector gene therapy approach.
The mRNA vaccines are in more of a gray area, as far as being labeled gene therapy. It is new technology. And the approach basically starts a couple steps down the gene therapy path, reaching the same end, which is getting human cells to express viral genes. (So you body can develop antibodies to these viral proteins.
The adenovirus vector approach adds recombinant DNA from a virus and some engineering to human cells.
I've read several articles from pro-Covid vaccine activists bragging that they were delighted he was stripped of his license to pratice medicine.
The article attackin him (not a recommendation) linked below is particularly rabid in it's bias. The HATRED is strong in them.
I wondered what else he did to make them angrier than usual. Whatever it was, it appears he's still doing it.
I want to find the video he mentions in the one I'll link here. The video is 10 minutes in length and is hosted in NewTube.app, so I didn't realize the timing track is above the video. You can start and stop the video by clicking within the video image.
Dr. Wakefield warns=”This is not a Vax, it is irreversible genetic modification” - NewTube
"Andrew Wakefield, the godfather of the modern anti-vaccine movement, is spreading disinformation about the COVID vaccine, falsely claiming that the mRNA vaccines made by Pfizer and Moderna are a form of genetic engineering. Like all good liars, he mixes a tiny bit of truth into a sea of lies."
Alex Berezow, PhD — December 27, 2020
Here's an excerpt of the "Fraud Doctor" article:
As if he hasn't done enough damage already, he's back, this time spreading blatant disinformation about the COVID vaccines that utilize mRNA. (As a reminder, here's how an mRNA vaccine works.) A video of an interview with him on NewTube was circulating on Twitter. Let's dissect the lies. Like all good liars, he starts off well enough:
"Messenger RNA is an intermediary between the gene and the product, the protein. It's the protein that ultimately elicits the immune response."
So far, so good. Wakefield demonstrates a baseline understanding of Biology 101, namely that genes encode proteins via messenger RNA. But he quickly goes off the rails.
"By definition, an RNA vaccine isn't a vaccine at all because it doesn't elicit an immune response. It has to be turned into protein, and it's the protein in turn that creates the immune response."
Huh? Wakefield just said (correctly) that the RNA vaccine makes the cell produce a protein that elicits an immune response. Now, he says that the RNA vaccine isn't a real vaccine because it elicits an immune response indirectly rather than directly. This is nonsensical and self-contradictory. Regardless of mechanism, anything that intentionally elicits an immune response can be thought of as a vaccine.
"A messenger RNA vaccine is actually genetic engineering. That's what it is."
No, it's not. This is a gigantic lie. Wakefield is purposefully misusing the term "genetic engineering," which involves the permanent alteration of an organism's genetic material. That is accomplished by changing the DNA. Messenger RNA vaccines do not do that. Furthermore, there is no biologically plausible way for them to do that.
"What could possibly go wrong? You have cells in your own body that are producing protein to which your immune system is going to mount an immune response. That's called an autoimmune disease."
~~~~~
I don't know much about Wakefield, but so far he has the right enemies and he rang the alarm early, was canceled (med license) as a result, and returned in December to sound the alarm again.
FYI....an alternate link to the excellent Dr Steven Hotze video (in case some cannot open, on GAB)...
DR. STEVEN HOTZE ON THE POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF THE “VACCINES”/Gene Therapy.....
https://www.bitchute.com/video/VlIf91sf5Oc0/
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.