Getting vaccinated may create a tocking timebomb

Author: Wylted

Posts

Total: 25
Topic's author
#1
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Look, pleasenif you have not been vaccinated yet, consider holding off as long as possible until everyone is certain they are safe. Here is an article 


We spoke to one Infectious Disease specialist from a hospital in New Jersey this morning. We sent the actual autopsy findings to him and asked for his thoughts.

When he called back a while later, he was clearly shaken-up. He told us "You cannot quote me by name, I will get fired by the hospital if you do." We agreed to conceal his identity.

He then told us:

"People think that only a MINORITY of people get adverse effects from the vaccine.

Based on this new research, it means that everyone - EVENTUALLY -will have adverse effects, because those spike proteins will be binding to ACE2 receptors everywhere in the body.

That mRNA was supposed to stay in the injection site and it’s not. That means the spike proteins created by the mRNA will be in every organ as well, and we now know it is the spike proteins that do the damage.

Worse, the viral RNA being found in every organ despite a vaccine, indicates either:

1) The vaccine doesn't work at all, OR;

2) The virus is enjoying Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE), meaning it actually spreads FASTER in vaccinated people.

This is a GLOBAL TIMEBOMB."


#2
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
This has nothing to do with RM, I am not an anti-vaxxer, I just don't support dismissing anti-vaxxers purely based on one appealing to authority.

Get vaccinated but if you are skeptical about mRNA, I am all for going for the more oldschool vaccine types. I don't think you understand, Wylted, there is a reason you and I are blocking each other on here.
Topic's author
#3
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I was using RM to mean right wing male. I encourage everyone to create a tag for themself with such an identification 
Topic's author
#4
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
I am only blocking you because of you tagging me with insults and me feeling defenseless to respond. I was thinking of removing the block though.
#5
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
I don’t know who this infectious disease specialist is or where he’s getting his information, but he’s got some problems with his points, here.

Binding receptors is necessary but not sufficient for the spike protein does harm. It has to undergo a conformational change, one that is impossible given that the mRNA sequence used for vaccines produces a variant of the protein that lacks that capacity.  The fact that that mRNA also includes a moiety that anchors the spike protein to the cell also makes it pretty difficult to believe that it will spread beyond the location where the mRNA is expressed.

The mRNA has a known time limit, with most of it being entirely degraded in 24-72 hours. The notion that it can spread significantly beyond the infection site isn’t backed up by any data, whereas its elimination from the body is well-supported. It is not found in every organ, just the liver and spleen, both of which make a lot of sense given that they are used to help eliminate such sequences.

As for Antibody Dependent Enhancement, that’s a really fascinating phenomenon, but it is a phenomenon unique to Dengue viruses and has an important caveat: it only happens with viruses that have multiple serotypes. Being immunized against a single Dengue virus serotype results in enhancement of another serotype. SARS-CoV-2 only has one serotype, so you would have to assume that mutations would result in the production of a unique serotype, which would likely require many mutations in the spike protein without disrupting its other activities.

Topic's author
#6
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@whiteflame
don’t know who this infectious disease specialist is or where he’s getting his information, but he’s got some problems with his points, here.

Well he allegedly used the patient's autopsy findings to determine what happened and isn't basing it on anything other than observing the phenomenon through the autopsy report. 
#7
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
Every theory he’s suggesting for what happened to this person is based on incredibly specific molecular biology. If he has a work up for this person that is this detailed, then he should have ample evidence that this is what killed them, and a publication should be forthcoming because that amount of work would take months and contradict a great deal of existing publications.

It’s more likely that this person did the autopsy, gave the physical issues that caused the victim’s death, and then conjectured that they could be the result of one or more of these issues. My guess is that he has no evidence to support any of these claims.
Topic's author
#8
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@whiteflame
he should have ample evidence that this is what killed them, and a publication should be forthcoming because that amount of work would take months and contradict a great deal of existing publications.
Don't people get called quacks and lose their jobs for going up against the system like that? 

This seems like a thing, where you keep your mouth shut or lose your job. Let's say for example that tomorrow a scientist had ample evidence for the world being flat, he would pretty much have to keep that evidence to himself if he wanted to keep his source of income and reputation in tact wouldn't he? 
#9
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
...When you are actively presenting replicable results based on real data that contradicts what other scientists claim to know, no, that is not what gets you called a quack and makes you lose your job. If this was absolutely verifiable and anywhere near as widespread as this person claims, then the proof should be everywhere, and evidence should be plentiful. The same is true for a scientist with clear evidence that incorporates what we already know and better utilizes new findings to discover that the world is flat. If that happened and further data supported it, then eventually it would get to the point that no one could deny it. Getting pushback on a conclusion is literally what happens with almost every piece of research that exists, but that doesn’t mean that publishing it is a massive risk.
#10
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
But, honestly, this is besides the point. This person clearly didn’t do the massive amount of work required to find out the specific molecular basis for the death in question. Just reading through this quote, it’s pretty clear that he’s taking some known evidence (and surmising the existence of other evidence that runs contrary to established research), and spinning it to make the vaccine sound more dangerous by artificially inflating its meaning. He’s not an expert solely by virtue of his chosen field, and his claims don’t function as proof or support for these theories. 
Topic's author
#11
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@whiteflame
I met a guy once who claimed he cured cancer, but was threatened by pharmaceutical companies. How many billions are at stake if this individual is right? Many people kill to protect $100, imagine losing billions because of some doctor who can't keep his mouth shut. 
Topic's author
#12
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@whiteflame
How come there is so many people coming out saying that vaccines are unsafe?.these specific ones anyway. I was on one site and it showed pictures of people taking the J and J vaccine and having allergic reactions almost. That's the one I chose.  It seems more research is coming out to show heart problems associated with vaccines for a disease barely worse than the flu. My family has a history of heart disease,  sonit is scary for me. 
#13
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
Whoever this guy was, I don’t believe he cured cancer. Many, many labs have “cured cancer” in mice and rats only to be left with no significant effect in humans. If he really did cure cancer, I’m sure we would have heard from at least some of the patients he saved. Surely, a few of them would have gone to the press with such an amazing outcome.

Also, just generally, the idea of any pharmaceutical company burying a cure for cancer is absurd to me. If a company did stumble across a cure, they’d want it for themselves. Nothing would make a company more famous or profitable overnight, since they could sell that cure at basically any price they want. They would instantly corner the market and render all competitors obsolete. And the same applies here. If your point is that Pfizer and Moderna are holding any such research hostage, what about all the other companies, especially those developing different kinds of vaccines that wouldn’t be subject to the same potential problems? Why aren’t they shouting this research from the rooftops?
#14
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
Having lots of people saying that they’re concerned doesn’t mean their concerns are based in real issues with the vaccines. Yes, allergic responses happen. You’re injecting someone with something their body has never seen before, and it can be dangerous if it isn’t carefully monitored. It’s also a short term harm that is easily addressed.

As for heart disease, a lot of that correlation is disputed. What isn’t disputed is the ability of the virus to cause and/or exacerbate heart conditions. The claim that it’s “barely worse than the flu” only applies to people without preexisting conditions, some of which may be unknown to many of us, but it’s clearly on your mind. I don’t see why the vaccine makes you more fearful than the virus on that basis.
Topic's author
#15
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@whiteflame
I don’t see why the vaccine makes you more fearful than the virus on that basis.
Because the virus is a known risk. We know the approximate risks of it.  The vaccines seem way more mysterious. Any time you do something there are millions of possible new risks, some known some unknown. 

Even something like going to the store. You can get into a car wreck because you have a seizure, or because of a drunk driver or driver error. You can slip in the store and die, or get robbed on your way out. You can buy something that should be recalled but has not yet and give yourself food borne illness and die. You can leave a cat at home when you go out to the store and forget to turn off the stove and the place burns down with the cat inside. 

I'm drawn to looking at potential risks of everything. I also fear not waking up in the morning, because I could be attacked while sleeping or the sun could turn into a big red giant ahead of schedule or an asteroid could hit us or something can happen with the moon. 

It's why I am not asleep now. Until I feel safe tha th an asteroid is not coming at me, I can't close my eyes. Sometimes reading the NASA website makes.me feel safer. Sometimes I think they would not be honest if they knew an apocalyptic asteroid was hurtling towards us. So I don't feel safe enough to sleep. Every other day some news site reports that an asteroid is hurtling this way. It's scary. 

It seems like we know what to expect with covid. It exponentially spreads, so we will.all get it. It is typically just going g to make you sick for a bit and you will recover, some frail.90 year olds will die, along with fat people who think being fat is healthy. 

The vaccines seem like an unknown quantity, and they concern me more now that I took one. I knew I would not die if I hot covid. I am you g and healthy. I don't know if the vaccine will shorten my lifespan. 
#16
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Wylted
Do timebombs tock?

It all boils down to an individuals appreciation of sound, I suppose.


Everyone reacts to a vaccine...It's the nature of the beast.

And a  few people will react more than others.

The MMR Vaccine may well be a perfect example.

Covid is currently the popular conspiracy though.


If I explode, I will let you know.
Topic's author
#17
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Ragnar edited the post somewhere. It must have been to replace ticking with tocking.
#18
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
-->
@Wylted
Well, no one can fully alleviate your uncertainty. I’m sure even years down the line and billions vaccinated there will still be a large subset of the population that continues to argue that the harms of this vaccine just haven’t been seen yet, and the only way to fully disprove that is time and evidence.

That being said, what you’re doing here seems like a poor substitute to me. You’re latching onto claims of harm that also have yet to be proven, except in their cases, there’s no prior evidence to support them. These may be new vaccines, but their functions are very much in line with previous vaccines: they result in an antigen that is presented to the body to elicit an immune response that also targets the virus. There’s a track record that we can follow to make pretty good assumptions about how they’ll play out, and that track record is almost universally safe and effective.

Beyond that, it seems as though known risks always beat unknown risks for you, which is somewhat understandable, though difficult for me to apply in this situation when those known risks are very clear and establish the virus as particularly dangerous to people like you who may have a heart condition. That known risk outstrips the few the legitimate concerns I’ve heard regarding the vaccine in my eyes. The reason it apparently doesn’t for you is that you view every risk people claim as legitimate, despite the lack of evidence and despite existing barriers to those harms. And if we are talking about uncertainty, at least we know that the mRNA vaccines won’t mutate. The virus has and will continue to do so, resulting in changes to the various virulence factors it has on hand and, as a result, causing new and uncertain harms. It’s a known risk now (to some degree - despite extensive research into it, there’s still a lot we don’t know about how this virus behaves and why), but it likely won’t remain that way.
#19
whiteflame
whiteflame's avatar
Debates: 27
Posts: 4,820
4
6
10
whiteflame's avatar
whiteflame
4
6
10
Just noticed an error, meant to say that unknown risks always beat known risks for you.

9 days later

#20
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@zedvictor4
Covid is currently the popular conspiracy though.
Huh?    Zed, youve been feeding off lies, misinformation, chaos, disorder and  host of others that have come with the nutty Trumpeteer cult of nacrracissm and paranoid psychosis.

mRNA not only works extremmely well, it is the way of a new future for delivery system in fighting disease.


#21
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,067
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ebuc
I haven't exploded yet.

And I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
#22
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
I think while vaccines shouldn't be mandatory, they should be encouraged and I think they are very safe.
#23
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,597
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
Here is an interesting side note, mRNA vaccines have become a promising platform for cancer immunotherapy. During vaccination, naked or vehicle loaded mRNA vaccines efficiently express tumor antigens in antigen-presenting cells (APCs), facilitate APC activation and innate/adaptive immune stimulation.
#24
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,920
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@TheUnderdog
I think while vaccines shouldn't be mandatory, they should be encouraged and I think they are very safe.
I think they should be mandatory.  Idiots want liberties { freedom? } to unnecessarily kill other humans directly or indirectly with their every breath.


..."Aids criminal charges
..Under the criminal law, a person with HIV is criminally liable for prosecution if they have intentionally transmitted the virus to their partner without informing them of their status."....

H,mm, I wonder if this above is true?




#25
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@ebuc
Pretty much the only people who die of covid are unvaccinated.  Whether or not one recovers this protection is up to them.  If you are vaccinated, your still going to infect unvaccinated people.