Topic: The vaccination issue is not bipolar (Read 440 times)

Jet Cash,
it seems like you come from a place of compassion to tell people to live a healthier more natural lifestyle, you seem like a genuinely decent human being but
that's a lot you just said there. There is also plenty of research available on JSTOR as well but you would have to pay for it---while "research on the net" is free; you're getting what you pay for.

I would not like to be unkind to you so this wouldn't be a topic we could engage on; it's polarized enough in real discussion.

Covid vaccines are the first particulate vaccines, and the effects of injecting nano-particles are untested in humans, but are carcinogenic in rats. The issue od injecting micro-devices to report on our activities is a planned red herring. Why would they need to do that when they can inject payment processing chips with the consent of the victim? DNA altering nano-particles have been under development for several years, and the research is documented on the net. That is the real risk in these vaccines.

When it's this obvious, it serves as scientific source material. Use your head. How does a scientist determine something? He observes it one way or another.

Skimmed it.  Pretty cringy/creepy.  The one funny thing that Z said was that in his _next_ career he wants to be a propagandist.


I don't want to be a GMO programmed by Jeff Epstein's pals and comrades.  And I certainly do not when ownership of a GMO is assigned to the intellectual property rights holder of the genetic modifications.

That's the way the laws could be interpreted now, particularly after massive lobbying money pumped by biotech over the last few decades.  How, exactly, such claims might be adjudicated in the future depends a bunch on who does the adjudication I suspect.  If it is a group who subscribes to the notion that the only reason that God put most humans on earth was to serve a different group as their slaves (e.g., the Kushner's Chabad-Lubavitch cult with their 'Noahide Laws'), then it's fairly easy to guess on which way things would go.

Re: The vaccination issue is not bipolar

Being in direct opposition to something makes your stance bipolar.
Making blanket statements about "the government's" intention regarding our health makes your view myopic when considering it's a global pandemic and btw you have a lot more faith in the ability of politicians to produce intentional outcomes than I do---which does put us at opposite poles on that issue.

Even well-reasoned lines of enquiry require base data to come to an understanding of a subject, if you are only willing to consider information outside of the mainstream, your data set is incomplete.
It’s easier to find and relate to information that confirms your bias.
For a Pro-Vax perspective try…

*cut and pasted from Wikipedia
Paul Allan Offit (born 27 March 1951) is an American pediatrician specializing in infectious diseases, vaccines, immunology, and virology. He is the co-inventor of a rotavirus vaccine. Offit is the Maurice R. Hilleman Professor of Vaccinology, professor of pediatrics at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, former chief of the Division of Infectious Diseases (1992–2014), and the director of the Vaccine Education Center at The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. He has been a member of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices
(anywhere besides the main news outlets)
https://www.c-span.org/video/?514731-5/washington-journal-dr-paul-offit-discusses-boosters-vaccines-children    ----boring

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3wJZ9zh5a8    ----Zdogg has better questions funnier, and speaks on Vaers reporting towards the end



You don't seem to mind posting polarizing concepts regarding vaccines
Are unvaccinated people purebloods?   --   https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/are-unvaccinated-people-purebloods-5365968

Personally, I prefer nature over anything else, I prefer leaving my body to carry out its defensive tasks by strengthening the immune system naturally without taking the vaccine or other medications, the problem is not in the effectiveness of the vaccine against the Corona virus or not, but in the side effects that it can cause to the human body after a while. I do not know if this is true, but there are many who say that this vaccine causes other diseases that are no less dangerous than Corona disease, so they refuse to take it.
I'm with the natural methods in everything and I'm sure the human body has the credentials to defend itself with some natural help but if the vaccine is forcibly imposed by the government I'll have to take it.

The vaccines are highly effective.


The DEVOLUTION of covid vaccine efficacy - https://www.brighteon.com/3ea4b0ea-be58-405e-ba9b-1c684d97b5d8


Short video, 2 minutes 11 seconds. Hint: Slow it down as you are watching.

That's what they're used for, yes. They're preventative. It's even in the official guidance: "Do not attend your vaccine appointment if you feel unwell with symptoms of coronavirus."



Where is this evidence, though?
The vaccines aren't 100% effective, and protection wanes over time... neither of these things are in dispute. But I've not seen any evidence that the vaccines don't protect most people. You need to give sources and numbers, otherwise it may as well be a BADecker post.

Most of you guys are missing the point of this thread. My postulation is that refusal to allow vaccination during a pandemic is not anti-vaccination, but it is simply a reluctance to support the misuse of vaccination. The Covid vaccination mania has probably done considerable damage to the future use of vaccines, as more and more evidence appears to confirm that it is not protecting most people. Vaccines should be used to prevent infection, and not as a cure. Using them in a pandemic without checking to see if the are needed just creates variants, but, of course, that means that Pharma companies can continue to push"booster shots" to protect people from last year's virus.

You may also like to reflect on the reasons for withholding information on the need to aspirate when vaccinating. This is such a simple process, and would probably prevent many of the vaccine induced heart problems.

Thats quite a silly thing to say. Just because vaccinations have been successful in the past does not mean that vaccinations based on new, genetic technologies against novel viruses that have never existed before, are anywhere near safe. You can't blame people for being afraid of something that is completely new. And we should become test subjects for what? A virus which is about 2-3x deadlier than the common flu? Do you take flue shots every year? If the answer is no, then youre a hypocrite.

I don't see any point in extending this discussion; we're not getting anywhere, and are unlikely to reach consensus on even the tiniest detail. When I read your posts, I just see misguided nonsense or outright idiocy, and I'm sure you feel the same way about facts mine.

Yes, math is simple, and tvbcof did the calculations for us - so don't fear and say that percentage number and think about it. And of course, Mr Obvious - number of died would always be higher and higher - I am sure you understand why.


This maybe solves our current problem in short-time and brings lots of more problems in the future. Just say it whole. But from some reason you cannot or don't want to see that.


No. I am suggesting that you are prejudiced, using dogmatic view on situation and do not accept that there are other issues then death, which are getting worse with restrictions.


Pro-vaxxers contribute to economical issues (not only to individuals but to whole nations), tightening political power, destroying psychological health and social coexistence. And (because they still can catch covid) they help to create new variants. These issues will exists for tens years with us. And yes, this is considered as controversial, but sad true.


Morally indefensible? Really? Some extremely low percent of population died and you stoically say that you do not care about:

• private bussiness which support living of families
• psychological health
• education
• healthcare

And of course not just today but tens of years in the future? You want to speak about morality? You don't care about others lives and you have some requirements to them? And of course I am sure that you have some data about that number which would be far higher without lockdowns. How can you know? You think or believe?


Oh please, just wake up from that dream you are living. You just don't accept any other issues linked to restrictions. Just go get shopping, maybe you will see how higher is the price of food in compare to last year. How should someone who lost bussiness do feed children without profit? You don't care? He/she doesn't care about gov restrictions. But of course they have to support these restrictions by paying taxes.


You find some data on the net a decided to believe. I decided to not believe. Neither of us has proof that data is not fake. Try to think about that. And thanks again to tvbcof who did the job and looked what sort of data sources you are using.

The maths is quite straightforward. If you're incapable of calculating, it's about 1 in 1,750 people globally. And rising.



This thing solves our current problem. But it might not solve future problems, so let's do nothing instead. Brilliant. 



Are you suggesting that you've won some argument? I can't see that you've even managed to make a valid point yet.



Anti-vaxxers contribute to the spread of the virus, help to keep it in circulation, and help to create new variants. Yes, of course. This is not controversial.



I'm irritated with you because I find your position morally indefensible. 4.5 million people have died, and this number would be far higher without lockdowns, and of course without vaccination. How many people have died because their business lost some profit? No need for exact figures, just give the answer to the nearest million.



You are outraged not that millions have died, but that some people have lost profit. And yet you won't accept data from anywhere, because you think it's all motivated by money. "Doesn't we call it hypocritical?"



Really? Because that's not coming across at all. 

How much is it in relative %? Not much, hm? A vaccine might not be a good idea, when we consider all cons, including fact, that nobody knows if it will work just a bit to future mutations.

Because of money and power like always.

So you are angry? I am so sorry for that - it must be very depressing, when someone shoot with your own weapon, isn't it? Let me show you some of your posts from another similar topic.

So you see it yourself. You are talking about consequences of inaction for anti-waxers, considering them as responsible, but you are angry when someone talk about consequences of action for pro-waxers and you considere discussion as finished. Isn't this behaviour strange? Doesn't we call it hypocritical? Do you even try to thing how could other people who lost their jobs and bussiness feel and live because of your action?

Yes of course. But it doesn't mean that it is enough to consider just one aspect of whole situation. And it doesn't matter that we have to participate on the political game.

On the fact that vaccine just cannot have job done on fast mutating RNA virus just like in the case of flu (similar virus). I have no data, because I didn't do any research - I am not scientist.

---

Thank you tvbcof for very good posts. I do not have any smerits to tell this right way.

Bitchute is just a generic video hosting platform which doesn't censor material as much some of the others.  Youtube, Facebook, etc don't allow material which could cause 'vaccine hesitance'.  For instance, you cannot report that a family member died following injection.  The validity or accuracy of the material in the vid is not a factor.

Many people, and especially people who have something to say which is unpopular with the current power structure, use multiple of these smaller hosting services.  Roll around n the floor laughing all you like, but the joke is kind of on you if you cannot get the concept here.

WOW you really know good scientific sources! Nature? naaaah! "bitchute"    

ROFL

     Being in a small city where the cases have been surging, I can testify how important it is to get vaccinated and to follow the health protocols along with all the other preventive measures. Of course I can sympathize on how much of a hassle it is to actually do and abide to all of the preventive measures but still, it is harder to be hospitalised and suffer severe effects of covid, specially in place such as here where the resources are limited. People are dying on the road outside hospitals and on its hallways. Still, I cannot persuade everyone but if at least I can save some by sharing my experiences, I'd be satisfied. Hope everyone is safe and healthy.

There is still the fact that millions more people than normal have been dying of something during the last 18 months, with a spike coinciding with the start of the pandemic.



I can't really comment on the specifics of a country I know nothing about. But these data are coming out of almost every country, with the same pattern again and again. Quite apart from anything else, I doubt that politicians are sufficiently competent to devise and maintain a cover-up on this scale, particularly one involving countries that are mutual antagonists.



I agree that the system is set up to favour the established elite, and to enrich and empower them at the expense of everyone else. They would have no reason to sabotage a system that is working perfectly for them, that has been fine-tuned over centuries. If a system is stable, established, and working exactly as you want it to, then you have no incentive to sabotage it by gambling that you can replace it with something even better. And even if a couple of people wanted to risk that, could you really imagine them obtaining a consensus, swearing everyone to secrecy, and this plan actually all holding together?

As do the people who took the experimental gene therapy under EUA.  Some of them still get to go to the hospital, but usually get kicked right out onto the curb when it becomes clear that there problems are a gene therapy injection adverse effect.

---

I really hope that what comes out of this mess is 'private' member-only certifying authorities for doctors and other health professionals so that the AMA has some competition.  Badecker talks about this in his soveign-citizen-ish way.  PMA I think he calls it, and there could be something to it.

It's a stone-cold fact that I select doctors specifically because they were kicked out of the corp/gov sponsored medical organizations (or will be when I need one.)  I simply would not trust any doctor who practiced in such a manner so as to maintain membership.  Or at least my trust would be greatly diminished.

A big problem is that the racketeering is such that one cannot write prescriptions without being a member of the racket.  Hopefully that will change.  A silver lining to the 'new normal' is that rich and connected people will have the same needs as I do, so maybe there is a chance to unroll some of the elements of the racket just enough so that they get what they want/need and I can tag along.  The AMA and other socialized medicine can then just manages the eugenic program swamp-doctors.

While I am strongly for vaccinations, I cannot condone forcing people to take a vaccination that was created on an asap basis with no long term studies. As long as you waiver your right to a hospital spot in the worst case scenario, whether or not you catch the disease should be left up to you. That is what I believe. Forcing people to take a medication is just plain wrong. And it goes against the democratic principle. We don't all live in communist China!