mRNA vaccines have been researched for over 30 years. And every vaccine approved for humans has never shown any adverse side effect 90 days after inoculation.

And the 90 days inoculation is false as Guillian- Barre’ is becoming increasing in occurrence, as are stokes, blood clots and heart issues

He won't.

But he gonna tell you what to do though.

Typical.

In August, the state launched a post-vaccination infections dashboard that is updated every Wednesday. There have been 25,476 total cases among fully vaccinated Marylanders as of last Wednesday, October 13.

Less than 0.71% of fully vaccinated Marylanders have later tested positive.

Of those cases, 1,842 vaccinated Marylanders were hospitalized, representing 10.8% of all Covid cases hospitalized in the state. 233 fully vaccinated Marylanders have died, representing 8.36% of lab-confirmed Covid deaths in the state.

Idk if there was some misunderstanding. But the person I wasn’t mentioning lives in Alabama and thinks that people should be refused healthcare and kicked out into the streets if they turn down a vaccination.

No parts of mRNA have been researched for 30 years, the flu mRNA was actually stoped because of issues. 2020 marked the first time an mRNA vaccination was actually used on wide scale or give authorization to be used.

Soon you will see first hand and then cry like a baby.

If those do actually become proven side affects, it will be interesting if we ever learn the mechanism about how those side affects occur from the shot.

Big pharma and their political pawns are too invested in this to report the known negative effects.

Big pharma and their political pawns are too invested in this to report the known negative effects.

Big pharma and their political pawns are too invested in this to report the known negative effects.

Exactly.

mRNA vaccines have been researched for over 30 years. And every vaccine approved for humans has never shown any adverse side effect 90 days after inoculation.

16 isn't much of a number for the percentage to accurately reflect anything. I know the two largest hospitals in Tarrant County were having the unvaccinated make up more than 90% of their covid admittance rate. That was 2-3 months ago, but I doubt there's been much of a change. If I talk with the administrators there anytime soon, and there's some drastic change, I'll be sure and post up a thread about it.

mRNA history... https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w

Charlie

mRNA history... https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w

Charlie

If those do actually become proven side affects, it will be interesting if we ever learn the mechanism about how those side affects occur from the shot.

i.e. COVID vaccine- > affects ???? in our body -> which causes ????? -> resulting in some cardiovascular issue

The data worldwide (yes this is in effect a worldwide experiment with the largest sample size in history), is showing the vaccines are relatively safe. What it is also showing, is that they have a piss poor, horrible long term efficacy.

UK has one of the highest vaccination rates on the planet, and yet their infections are still on the rise.



What the worldwide experimental data is also proving, is that implementing vaccines during a pandemic (before natural herd immunity has been reached) renders the vaccines leaky because they offer more paths to variation than simple effective natural human immunity. As the virologists have warned, we are seeing more and more frequent variants now than with any past virus. UK’s infection rate is due to a new variant that is just now reaching our population.

It’s my opinion then that a more correct description is that this has now morphed into a “pandemic of the vaccinated”. As the best virologists have warned.

You get your vaccines if you want. But no way should you be able to tell me to destroy my personal immune system to protect your foolish and false sense of security.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...of-delta-variant-detected-in-the-us/amp/

A middle of the road comment -- I'd agree that the vaccines are relatively safe given how quickly they were put to market. Nothing is without risk, however the risk is LOW with the vaccines (note I didn't say there was no risk). That said, the risk of COVID is LOW in certain age groups, populations with little/no health issues, and those with natural immunity. The objection should be why take an unnecessary risk, albeit low, if you are in a low risk group for little to no long term efficacy.

This is where there is a fallacy with boosters. Do boosters improve efficacy? Likely just using common sense. That said, LOW risk vaccines increase in risk profile the more times you take them. This is what isn't being talked about.

There have been almost 7 billion vaccine doses given in the world and over 400 million in the US - all with no major risks shown above and beyond the normal incidence of side effects with any medication (even OTC meds like aspirin, ibuprofen, and acetomenaphine have side effects in some people under some conditions).

Yet many still say “it’s unproven”, “we don’t know”, blah, blah, blah. Every credible epidemiologist and infectious disease specialist in the world says it’s a no-brainer that these vaccines are both safe and effective because the most extensive proof in the world exists to back that up. (See above.)

All this despite the fact that every so-called conservative news outlet seeks to latch on to any real evidence that they are unsafe. They can’t, so they just make up chit and proffer idiotic crap that it’s obvious many of you latch onto. Just like you have the “election was stolen” crap, the “insurrectionists were Antifa or just tourists” crap, and about 99,000 other piles of crap. And then call others stupid and weak-minded. There are two approaches to the anti-vaccine movement: 1)just believing straight up BS conspiracy theories like the “tracking” nonsense or 2)wordsmithing misconstruing and/or overblowing potential side effects (or just making them up). In other words, just being bamboozled by a punch of crap from folks with an agenda who have probably been vaccinated themselves. Either way, it’s BS.

Again, the height of irony to see folks so weak-minded that they are willfully putting themselves, their families, and everyone else at risk call others out as somehow lacking.
So what if you’re low risk? If you’re not vaccinated, you’re keeping the disease vector moving forward. So while you may be low-risk, you may also be killing someone else. None of this is hard. Please get vaccinated.

Maybe you missed the past page of posts. I'd encourage you to re-read. There is a rational argument going on, but you're using selective reasoning. Would you take blood thinners if you didn't have high blood pressure, as an example?

That leads me back to the root of the issue -- do you feel that the risk profile for most people warrants a vaccine in the first place, or would you suggest that those resources, funds, and efforts should be focused on those with an actual risk? There will be outliers to the standard deviation risk profiles, but, as you say, those are normal for any other disease or medication.

ETA -- this virus is not the same as the 1918 flu, smallpox, bubonic plague, etc. where there was a risk across the full population. There is an obvious population that is impacted, and there is also some scatter into other areas at a much lower rate.