Posted on 12/31/2020 5:06:16 PM PST by firebrand
I'll post the Focus on the Family link below.
Two remarkably similar videos, emphasizing the science, which is not a bad word but the factual basis of any discussion, or at least the start of it.
There is no way for the RNA to affect our DNA because it never enters the nucleus of the cell. There are side effects to everything, including the virus, but nothing nearly as bad as the disease itself. The whole process was overseen by the FDA and nothing that we weren't told about could possibly have been done.
And of course there is the spiritual approach to our challenges presented by the virus and and vaccine and the conclusions we may come to on our own if we listen to these learned and wise men.
Hope you can take some time to watch these.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
“Experts.”
One of them is head of a facility for the elderly and a church leader in Haifa.
The other is an American doctor whose specialization is childhood communicable diseases.
If their manner and presentation don’t convince you, along with what they say, then I guess there’s nothing that will.
That's not reassuring.
The organizations are pro-life and the doctor in the Focus video specifically discusses this issue.
Bump
Had about four months of testing. No animal tests. Completely new technology for viral vaccines. People in my age bracket have a 99.95% chance of survival - if we even get it. Think I will pass.
BIG PHARMA...you’re more healthy WITHOUT it.
- People in my age bracket have a 99.95% chance of survival - if we even get it.-
Survival might be OK, but there may be undesirable long term side effects to the ailment.
There are genuine experts and this one seems to fit the bill:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoeCB0MudgA&feature
Have soberly considered. Indeed - we will find out any side effects of a rushed vaccine (for an obviously politicized virus) in a year or two. Truly hope there are none.
Yes, Messenger RNA techniques had been used for medicines but not for vaccines before this.
Even though there were two similar diseases before this one.
Do watch the Amir one for the discussion of permanent damage to the body caused by the virus.
Yes, this is true, but both medical men I mentioned said there was no comparison between the risks, the risk of side effects of the vaccine being negligible compared with the risk of permanent damage to the organs of someone becomes infected.
There was a front-page story in a major newspaper a few days ago about someone who had been back to the hospital seven times with covid and felt he would always have it.
Thank you for giving the other side of the argument. He gives a lot of useful information.
This was before the surveys that found that the much-feared asymptomatic spreader was largely nonexistent and the discovery of the many causes for false positives.
Also, he stresses politicization, but that has occurred among those who want to treat the threat of this disease lightly. It has not occurred among those who simply want this treated as a public-health issue.
The man in Haifa was probably the most knowedgeable and seemed to be saying, about side effects, that everything has a side effect, but more important was that the MRNA design was specifically engineered to stay in the cell (not the nucleus) for a very short time, the shortest time possible to accomplish what it was made to do.
I appreciate the speaker and his knowledge, but the architects of the vaccine were aware of all the pitfalls, and public-health concerns were always on the other side of the balance sheet. It turned out, with this more contagious mutation headed our way, that they were right to rush the vaccine out for use, even with some of the issues not entirely solved, which may come in the near future.
As a side note, in case anyone was concerned about the ethics of the vaccine development, the two vaccines being used here in the United States were not derived in any manner from the cells of an aborted baby. Unfortunately, the testing process requires a solution that contains them. There are several new vaccines that are going to appear very shortly, and some of these are derived from fetal tissue.
I agree with some of what you are saying but to tell me that aborted baby cell lines were not a part of this is just not accurate. Whether they were from older cell lines or more recent cell lines does not affect my decision at all. I will refuse ANYTHING that has made use of those cell lines. Period. And I still haven’t heard anything that would dissuade me from the serious concerns of Dr.Lyons Weiler which he brought forth at the PA Medical Freedom Press Conference in October.
Thanks for your input FRiend. Cheers
I saw a video where a guy was claiming that there are nanoparticles of some form of aluminum to help it bond to cells...not necessarily a bad thing but they don’t know if they can end up in the brain - some tests with the particles have shown them to migrate to animal brains and they speculate it could cause long-term ‘issues’.
I plan to pass on it but my wife says she wants the vaccine.
Took my first dose of ivermectin this morning - for those who care, it doesn’t really taste like apples...
I saw the distinction between deriving the vaccine from fetal cells and using fetal cell solution to test the vaccine.
The first is much more disturbing than the second.
The Focus on the Family doctor is the best on the ethical issue, but no one in either of these videos tries to make a decision about what you should do.
A very minor observation, but both the Israeli and the American, independently, said the vaccine was developed with amazing speed, and that it was the bureaucracy, in the Israeli’s terms, that slowed it down, while the American called it the regulatory process.
I make my own decisions. ;-)
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.