Sorry but those fact checking sites are worthless. It actually lists the likes of sky news and the north Korea times as being one of the least bias sources. Sky news is literally typical msm fake mockingbird news. What a joke.
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
Covid 19 mrna Vaccines...Yes/No?
- Thread starter gaiusmarius
- Start date
Sorry but those fact checking sites are worthless. It actually lists the likes of sky news and the north Korea times as being one of the least bias sources. Sky news is literally typical msm fake mockingbird news. What a joke.
It wasn't the only site to say the same. I am not sure what Sky news you are referring to? The Murdoch owned Australian Sky news is rated as having a right wing bias. Fairly spot on. British site fares better but worth noting it is no longer Murdoch owned.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/sky-news-australia/
Even Wiki says as much about Globalresearch
The Centre for Research on Globalization promotes conspiracy theories and falsehoods
A 2010 study categorized the website as a source of anti-vaccine misinformation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Chossudovsky#Centre_for_Research_on_Globalization
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch
.
But yer daily dose of corporate shill news is okey dokey,,,
Wheres Disney-Vice ?
LOL
Wheres Disney-Vice ?
LOL
It does not take much legitimate reading, especially with a bit of education to recognize the site in the OP as full of hyperbole and misinformation.
how about telling us whats wrong and why?
its always the same lame cancel culture attacks. attack the messenger when you dislike the message. again and again and again and again. never actually taking the content appart with documented facts.
btw no trolling here. trolling removed.
Last edited:
99% of scientist would consider this site disreputable, so everything you ever posted about microbiology must be trash then right?
F2F
Well-known member
Hello brothers and sisters,
Let me just touch on a couple points from the originating post to give folks an idea...Princeton should be ashamed to call this person an Alum.
mRNA gene-editing - there is no such thing known in the field as this and flags immediately to anyone knowledgeable in the field. You can create mRNA which will code for proteins to edit genes yes, but it is known only as “targeted gene editing”. It’s done with DNA, RNA, and some work has been done even by delivering proteins. This work started early 1990’s.
Bourla lied and denied to the Press that his company had received any funds from the Trump Administration to develop the vaccine when it came out they contracted in summer to deliver 100 million doses to the US Government. - Bourla didn’t lie. Funding for vaccine development came from Germany. Yes, the US gov’t signed a supply agreement with Pfizer IF the vaccine was approved [after being proven efficacious and safe in clinical trials]. Pfizer did not want to be in bed with the govt on development as they lose the ability to determine their own fate/speed to market, etc.
Notably, two year peer reviewed tests with mice fed genetically modified corn sprayed with Monsanto glyphosate-rich Roundup first showed cancer tumors after nine months as well as liver and other organ damage. Earlier Monsanto company tests ended at three months and claimed no harm. A similar situation exists with the gene edited mRNA vaccines that are being rushed out after less than 90 days human tests. - why is Roundup even relevant here? Again, no such thing as “gene edited mRNA vaccine”, and RNA has been used in human therapeutics since late 1990’s. This vaccine is a different RNA sequence than ever delivered before so yes it is novel and needs to be trialed in the clinic.
The experimental technology is based on a rather new gene manipulation known as gene editing. - the vaccine has nothing to do with gene editing already!!
In a major article in the 2018 New York Council on Foreign Relations magazine, Foreign Affairs, Bill Gates effusively promoted the novel gene editing CRISPR technology as being able to “transform global development.” He noted that his Gates Foundation had been financing gene editing developments for vaccines and other applications for a decade. - yep, Gates foundation, Michael J. Fox foundation, and others have been VERY active philanthropically in partnering with academic, biotech and pharma research for decades. You can decide conspiracy theory or betterment of human condition, or somewhere between. Do your homework and decide.
But is the technology for breaking and splicing of human genes so absolutely safe that it is worth risking on a novel experimental vaccine never before used on humans? Contrary to what Bill Gates claims, the scientific answer is no, it is not proven so safe. - although this has nothing to do with the vaccine, targeted gene editing tools have been going through clinical trials over the last 10 - 15yrs. Some are late stage and poised to hit the market not too long from now. Safety is priority and why these trials have taken so much time.
“among other dangers, the virus-vectored vaccines could undergo recombination with naturally occurring viruses and produce hybrid viruses that could have undesirable properties affecting transmission or virulence.” - why are talking about “virus-vectored”? Virus vectors use viral backbones (lenti, AV, aAV, etc) to facilitate packaging and/or delivery of therapeutics. The vaccine is mRNA and not even closely related to a viral-based vehicle.
“the danger that the vaccine might actually “enhance” the pathogenicity of the virus, or make it more aggressive possibly due to antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), as what happened with previous studies on test vaccines in animals. If that should happen in a major human trial the outcome could be disastrous. - yep, this is a real risk that is known and so steps must be taken to understand the risk. It is mitigated by experience (influenza vaccine strategy is same as COVID strategy - antibody against binding proteins, HA and “spike protein” respectively) and running clinical trials in humans, etc.
I only took the time on the above to encourage folks to pause for a moment, and think logically for yourself. Go talk to an expert or your doctor. Get the facts then make your choice.
Peace,
F2F
Let me just touch on a couple points from the originating post to give folks an idea...Princeton should be ashamed to call this person an Alum.
mRNA gene-editing - there is no such thing known in the field as this and flags immediately to anyone knowledgeable in the field. You can create mRNA which will code for proteins to edit genes yes, but it is known only as “targeted gene editing”. It’s done with DNA, RNA, and some work has been done even by delivering proteins. This work started early 1990’s.
Bourla lied and denied to the Press that his company had received any funds from the Trump Administration to develop the vaccine when it came out they contracted in summer to deliver 100 million doses to the US Government. - Bourla didn’t lie. Funding for vaccine development came from Germany. Yes, the US gov’t signed a supply agreement with Pfizer IF the vaccine was approved [after being proven efficacious and safe in clinical trials]. Pfizer did not want to be in bed with the govt on development as they lose the ability to determine their own fate/speed to market, etc.
Notably, two year peer reviewed tests with mice fed genetically modified corn sprayed with Monsanto glyphosate-rich Roundup first showed cancer tumors after nine months as well as liver and other organ damage. Earlier Monsanto company tests ended at three months and claimed no harm. A similar situation exists with the gene edited mRNA vaccines that are being rushed out after less than 90 days human tests. - why is Roundup even relevant here? Again, no such thing as “gene edited mRNA vaccine”, and RNA has been used in human therapeutics since late 1990’s. This vaccine is a different RNA sequence than ever delivered before so yes it is novel and needs to be trialed in the clinic.
The experimental technology is based on a rather new gene manipulation known as gene editing. - the vaccine has nothing to do with gene editing already!!
In a major article in the 2018 New York Council on Foreign Relations magazine, Foreign Affairs, Bill Gates effusively promoted the novel gene editing CRISPR technology as being able to “transform global development.” He noted that his Gates Foundation had been financing gene editing developments for vaccines and other applications for a decade. - yep, Gates foundation, Michael J. Fox foundation, and others have been VERY active philanthropically in partnering with academic, biotech and pharma research for decades. You can decide conspiracy theory or betterment of human condition, or somewhere between. Do your homework and decide.
But is the technology for breaking and splicing of human genes so absolutely safe that it is worth risking on a novel experimental vaccine never before used on humans? Contrary to what Bill Gates claims, the scientific answer is no, it is not proven so safe. - although this has nothing to do with the vaccine, targeted gene editing tools have been going through clinical trials over the last 10 - 15yrs. Some are late stage and poised to hit the market not too long from now. Safety is priority and why these trials have taken so much time.
“among other dangers, the virus-vectored vaccines could undergo recombination with naturally occurring viruses and produce hybrid viruses that could have undesirable properties affecting transmission or virulence.” - why are talking about “virus-vectored”? Virus vectors use viral backbones (lenti, AV, aAV, etc) to facilitate packaging and/or delivery of therapeutics. The vaccine is mRNA and not even closely related to a viral-based vehicle.
“the danger that the vaccine might actually “enhance” the pathogenicity of the virus, or make it more aggressive possibly due to antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), as what happened with previous studies on test vaccines in animals. If that should happen in a major human trial the outcome could be disastrous. - yep, this is a real risk that is known and so steps must be taken to understand the risk. It is mitigated by experience (influenza vaccine strategy is same as COVID strategy - antibody against binding proteins, HA and “spike protein” respectively) and running clinical trials in humans, etc.
I only took the time on the above to encourage folks to pause for a moment, and think logically for yourself. Go talk to an expert or your doctor. Get the facts then make your choice.
Peace,
F2F
file:///C:/Users/me/AppData/Local/Temp/s41467-020-19802-w.pdf
Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China
Stringent COVID-19 control measures were imposed in Wuhan between January 23 and April8, 2020. Estimates of the prevalence of infection following the release of restrictions could inform post-lockdown pandemic management. Here, we describe a city-wide SARS-CoV-2nucleic acid screening programme between May 14 and June 1, 2020 in Wuhan. All city residents aged six years or older were eligible and 9,899,828 (92.9%) participated. No new symptomatic cases and 300 asymptomatic cases (detection rate 0.303/10,000, 95% CI0.270–0.339/10,000) were identified. There were no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts of asymptomatic cases. 107 of 34,424 previously recovered COVID-19 patients tested positive again (re-positive rate 0.31%, 95% CI 0.423–0.574%). The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan was therefore very low five to eight weeks after the end of lockdown.
may sooth your fears...
Post-lockdown SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid screening in nearly ten million residents of Wuhan, China
Stringent COVID-19 control measures were imposed in Wuhan between January 23 and April8, 2020. Estimates of the prevalence of infection following the release of restrictions could inform post-lockdown pandemic management. Here, we describe a city-wide SARS-CoV-2nucleic acid screening programme between May 14 and June 1, 2020 in Wuhan. All city residents aged six years or older were eligible and 9,899,828 (92.9%) participated. No new symptomatic cases and 300 asymptomatic cases (detection rate 0.303/10,000, 95% CI0.270–0.339/10,000) were identified. There were no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts of asymptomatic cases. 107 of 34,424 previously recovered COVID-19 patients tested positive again (re-positive rate 0.31%, 95% CI 0.423–0.574%). The prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Wuhan was therefore very low five to eight weeks after the end of lockdown.
may sooth your fears...
Tell us what’s right and why.
It’s always the same lame conspiracies with just enough facts to distort the truth. Then we’re supposed to do the dissecting. Disprove what you can’t prove.
Presenting articles with no evidence, then trolling dissenters with the title of “counter culture”.
I thought I was attacking the article. Is there somewhere that I have attacked a member? I did post one link that was relevant to the point I made concerning my own testing combined with PCR and Australia.
I also posted a link re; DNA damage.
F2F has done a fine job of dismantling the OP article.
I stated that I've seen no evidence that CRISPR was used in the creation of the vaccine.
If this is trolling then I am guilty I guess.
isn't mRNA created from existing DNA?
if so, they had to use the virus to create the mRNA or did they use mRNA to create the virus?
Austrian Lawmaker Tests Coca Cola for COVID Infection Before His Colleagues and Drink Tests Positive
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...id-infection-colleagues-drink-tests-positive/
if so, they had to use the virus to create the mRNA or did they use mRNA to create the virus?
Austrian Lawmaker Tests Coca Cola for COVID Infection Before His Colleagues and Drink Tests Positive
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/20...id-infection-colleagues-drink-tests-positive/
My wife got the vaccine on day 3. I will get it when available.
Our son got covid and is on the mend. Our next door neighbor was killed by covid.
Covid will still be out there. Precautions will still be necessary but especially with the vaccine you are reasonably safe. The nonbelievers will likely get infected and many more will die before herd is reached by vaccine or antibodies. People who assume they are safe without the vaccine because they think people around them are herd, - It's just a matter of time before they get their asses kicked and it prolongs the final point where the virus goes away with no more to infect.
.
Our son got covid and is on the mend. Our next door neighbor was killed by covid.
Covid will still be out there. Precautions will still be necessary but especially with the vaccine you are reasonably safe. The nonbelievers will likely get infected and many more will die before herd is reached by vaccine or antibodies. People who assume they are safe without the vaccine because they think people around them are herd, - It's just a matter of time before they get their asses kicked and it prolongs the final point where the virus goes away with no more to infect.
.
Last edited:
'Boogieman'
Well-known member
Out of 38 people on a weed forum, only 6 people fully trust the vaccine. I'm proud of my fellow potheads to say the least.
i'll get it as soon as i can...by then millions of people will have gotten it so any problems should be apparent...
'Boogieman'
Well-known member
I'm worried about the long term effects. I would rather get the virus then the vaccine. I just don't trust the system on any level.
St. Phatty
Active member
the main goal with "herd immunity" is to reduce the virus count in public places so that transmission slows & stops.
that works very well if people start taking anti-viral meds & nutrients with their daily diet.
but Americans have not been able to figure it out.
so far it seems the possible long term effects of getting the virus are worse than the vaccine...
plus,i could use a third arm!
