How Dangerous Was The Covid - 19 Vaccine

[Hans Blaster]

Syllogisms? Wow, Hans, you really haven't been paying attention all this time. And here I thought you had me pegged.

I had to put in some philosophy nonsense I remembered the name of.

As for my apparent "confusion" (or questioning, really), I'll just say that my son's initial symptoms from the vaccine didn't leave me and my wife feeling overly .............. eh.............how do I say this diplomatically?

I'll have to think on it a while.

My second dose of the mRNA vaccine knocked me out the next afternoon for the rest of the day. "Flu-like symptoms", but then I was fine.

 

[A New Dawn]

Not skipped -- compressed. All of the normal clinical trials were executed. The use of mRNA as a vaccine had been researched generally for many years. I believe one of the two companies was working on an HIV vaccine using the technology.

The responsiveness of a vaccine to the virus it protects against is about the virus' activity, the nature of the disease, and the immune response, not the type of vaccine. As I recall, there were "traditional" vaccines that eventually hit the market (J&J? Russia/China?) which were *less* effective. Not all vaccines stop their diseases completely, not all prevent transmission. Sometimes it is enough to lessen the impact of the viral infection (or all that can be achieved).


None of which is credible.

Robert Malone was the creator of a small part of the technology. He is not a virologist or a vaccine maker. His "expertise" is not relevant.

And they did. The answer is very little to no side effects. The mRNA vaccine can only induce the cells to make a small amount of the spike protein within a few days of the injection. Then the immune system responds to the "alien proteins" an makes a memory of it for future detection. (An immune response) After a couple days there are no mRNA remaining nor spike proteins, only the immune response ready for an actual viral infection. Any "bad reaction" from the immune system would occur in the same people whose immune system would attack them if actually infected with a larger dose of thoe proteins over a longer period of time.

We have the info we need and anything Robert Kennedy cooks up will likely be distorted given how he is stacking the deck against the actual scientific results.

I'm sorry, what kind of degree do you have? I am a nurse and I was on the clinical trials for the vaccine. They explained everything in the 25 page consent form. You can't compress 7 years of research and response collection into less than a year. It's physically impossible. My ex-husband worked for a major pharmaceutical (Pfizer) on a cancer drug, and I am totally aware, both from him and from being a nurse, what the procedure is for the process of bringing a new drug to the market. There was precisely ZERO time for the long-term effects to be recognized and monitored. And you are quite naive to suggest that there is ANY drug on the market without side effect or long-term implications. Your condescension in an area you are not qualified to speak on speaks volumes to your very obvious biases.

 

[bèlla]

And you are quite naive to suggest that there is ANY drug on the market without side effect or long-term implications.

There were several drugs on the market that were popular in the past that resulted in litigation later on. The latest is depo-provera. It was a popular solution for birth control administered through a shot. Now we’re hearing it’s connected to brain tumors and lawsuits are underway.

You have to exercise commonsense and remember we’re dealing with profitable entities. Whether it goes well with us or not. They’re making a profit either way and we have to our advocate. I refuse to be their guinea pig and insist on alternatives. I don’t limit myself to western medicine and explore others equally.

If we’re vigilant about diet, environment and movement we’ll eliminate a lot of problems. They’re not going to tell us that and we must be willing to educate ourselves.

~bella

 

[Hans Blaster]

I'm sorry, what kind of degree do you have?

A doctoral degree.

I am a nurse and I was on the clinical trials for the vaccine. They explained everything in the 25 page consent form.

Very cool.

You can't compress 7 years of research and response collection into less than a year. It's physically impossible.

They didn't. They had a "draft vaccine" in a weekend because they'd already been working on the general concept of an mRNA vaccine for years. And we should note that at the end of that year. At the end of that year, they had an emergency use vaccine, not a fully approved product.

My ex-husband worked for a major pharmaceutical (Pfizer) on a cancer drug, and I am totally aware, both from him and from being a nurse, what the procedure is for the process of bringing a new drug to the market.

Aren't most cancer drugs basically poisons? Not exactly a brief puff of proteins.

There was precisely ZERO time for the long-term effects to be recognized and monitored.

What "long term effect" (other than immunity) can arise from a small amount of protein generated to induce an immune response? How would it be any different than a dead virus, an attenuated virus, a vector delivering the sequence to generate the protein, or a bit of the spike protein itself? What is the mechanism for a "long term effect"?

And you are quite naive to suggest that there is ANY drug on the market without side effect or long-term implications.
Your condescension in an area you are not qualified to speak on speaks volumes to your very obvious biases.

I don't know who you are. I don't think I've seen you before. I accept your statements about your experiences and knowledge. This thread has been filled with conspiratorial nonsense from several posters.

 

[A New Dawn]

A doctoral degree.

In what area?

Aren't most cancer drugs basically poisons? Not exactly a brief puff of proteins.

What is your point? Some things deserve longer research than others?

What "long term effect" (other than immunity) can arise from a small amount of protein generated to induce an immune response? How would it be any different than a dead virus, an attenuated virus, a vector delivering the sequence to generate the protein, or a bit of the spike protein itself? What is the mechanism for a "long term effect"?

Again, speaking about an area you know nothing about? Just out of curiosity, when they were doing the research for the mRNA vaccine base, and they found it was unstable when testing it on mice, what did the mice die from. I find it interesting that that is not mentioned in the relatively few articles regarding the vaccine history. Aren't you curious?

 

[Tuur]

MRNA isn't particularly stable and breaks down quickly. To contain it long enough, mRNA vaccines enclose it in lipids. Lipid breaks, down, body reacts to the protein.

The question is really what components of the vaccine are novel compared to other vaccines and medication. Novel components are the open question, but the effect of others should be well known.

Here's a link to the ingredients:

What are the ingredients of Pfizer’s covid-19 vaccine?

Now, the mRNA doesn't hang around in the body long. But the spike protein is found on the virus, and the immune system's reaction to that should be identical to the virus itself. There seems to be an issue of the amount in the vaccine producing a stronger response. But since it's based on spike protein, it's the same thing the body encounters on the entire virus.

The break-down of the lipids in the vaccine is thought to be understood, That said, I couldn't find where the principle lipid, ALC-0315, is used in other medications. Polyethylene glycol, AKA PEG, shows up in a lot of things. I seem to recall PEG being in a certain soft drink, but it's not on the current ingredient list.

The question then seems to be whether there's a long term effect with the lipids. If there is with the spike protein, since the body's going to encounter that anyway, that seems to be a wash.

Whether you're more likely to contract the virus N months after the vaccine is a question. Given the emergency, special emergency approval was rushed through. The average clinical trial for a vaccine takes five to ten years, without emergency approval, it's likely that it would only now be available.

What I do know is that in my demographic, there was a significant decrease in mortality between those vaccinated and those who weren't. This was prior to Omicron.

 

[Hans Blaster]

In what area?

Physics. I am working on several research projects as we speak.

What is your point? Some things deserve longer research than others?

No. Cancer drugs are nasty and many can cause direct damage to other systems. Additionally courses of treatment are much longer than a single (or pair) immunization injection. A dose is injected, immune response happens over a few days, then it is over. As for the immediate reactions you were personally there to observe it.

Again, speaking about an area you know nothing about?

I was responding to common disinformation about the vaccines that has been repeated here (and elsewhere) dozens of times in the last 5 years. I was clear what those were in the initial response.

Just out of curiosity, when they were doing the research for the mRNA vaccine base, and they found it was unstable when testing it on mice, what did the mice die from. I find it interesting that that is not mentioned in the relatively few articles regarding the vaccine history. Aren't you curious?

I don't know what you are talking about.

 

[A New Dawn]

I don't know what you are talking about.

How can you speak to the efficacy or lack-thereof if you don’t know the outcomes of the research supporting the vaccine? The vaccine base was tested on mice, what did the mice die from? It is a significant question. The vaccine base was unstable. How did they fix it and what problems did the instability cause? I mean, you are a scientist, why should I have to be telling you what kinds of questions need to be asked and answered? This is part of the research process.

 

[Tuur]

How can you speak to the efficacy or lack-thereof if you don’t know the outcomes of the research supporting the vaccine? The vaccine base was tested on mice, what did the mice die from? It is a significant question. The vaccine base was unstable. How did they fix it and what problems did the instability cause? I mean, you are a scientist, why should I have to be telling you what kinds of questions need to be asked and answered? This is part of the research process.

I simply used a dataset I trusted since I knew one of the ones collecting the data and compared morality rate from the virus in my demographic of the vaccinated and the unvaccinated. That was sufficient to see that, at least for my demographic, the vaccine gave significant protection from death. This was back with the original strain, BTW.

Pfizer stabilized its vaccine by distributing it at low temperatures. I'm assuming dry ice was used since it's common and in the temperature range. At that temperature, the vaccine had a shelf life measured in months. Once it's raised to standard refrigerated vaccine temperature of a little above freezing, the stability shrank to about five days. That's why some places were insisting on scheduling appointments for vaccinations, so that they could be sure to use most or all of a vial of vaccine while it was still stable.

Moderna's has a stability at temperatures higher than Pfizers. No, I don't know how they pulled that off.