3 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

@rabas stated: "No the general definition of vaccines didn't change nor did the science of immunology, which you don't seem to underatand."

That was incorrect, as the CDC 'refined' (the term you used for changed) the definition. 

You can argue that this is 'irrelevant', but it surely is not and I will post later WHY they had to change it, and this had everything to do with the EUA authorization for the covid-19 mRNA 'vaccines'.

 

 

The CDC updated *their* definition of vaccines because the old one might lead some people to believe that vacciness will be in all cases cause immunity which of course can't be the case. They are not a 100% sure way of protection. They refined the wording to be more precise. This has nothing to do with mRNA in particular but is applicable to all vaccines no matter the type. And again, you misleadingly stated it as if the general definition of vaccines had to be changed and that it was due to mRNA. This is not the case.

Unattributed conspiracy troll claim has been removed

21 hours ago, owl sees all said:

Well you did say that he was poorly after the jab, with the complaint taking a year to get under control. Then he went and had another.

At the time there was no indication it could be vaccine related, easy to be wise in hindsight.

49 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

@rabas stated: "No the general definition of vaccines didn't change nor did the science of immunology, which you don't seem to underatand."

That was incorrect, as the CDC 'refined' (the term you used for changed) the definition. 

You can argue that this is 'irrelevant', but it surely is not and I will post later WHY they had to change it, and this had everything to do with the EUA authorization for the covid-19 mRNA 'vaccines'.

 

As rabas stated correctly because the CDC does not define science, does it? Thought you didn't trust them anyway, more covoluted reasoning on your part.

 

Edited November 4, 20232 yr by rabas

16 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Where did I say the horse drug should be used on humans? The drug ivermectin is a FDA approved drug. period.

Yes it is approved as safe by the FDA for human use but one can't mix that with a Kool-aid of conspiracy theories to make an effective Covid cure...

 

https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/why-you-should-not-use-ivermectin-treat-or-prevent-covid-19

 

19 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

2. Neither mRNA technology—nor viral vector technology—is new. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine was created using viral vector technology, which has already safely been used in Ebola vaccines. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were created using messenger RNA (or mRNA) technology, which has been used for about 10 years in cancer treatment, with no long-term effects detected."

Which was discontinued due to, uh, causing blood clots. 

1 hour ago, frantick said:

Which was discontinued due to, uh, causing blood clots. 

 

Re the J&J vaccine, yes, and that showed that the vaccine safety monitoring system in the U.S. is and was working, that vaccine-related deaths in the U.S. have been minimal, and that the absurd survey results reported in the OP are pure nonsense.

 

But several more things to know:

 

1. As opposed to 1.1 million official deaths due to COVID in the U.S., and about 100,000 normal thrombosis blood clotting deaths in the U.S. per year, the impact of the J&J vaccine blood clots issue was as follows:

 

May 17, 2023

 

"The Johnson & Johnson (Janssen) COVID-19 vaccine is no longer available in the U.S."

 

"...an updated safety analysis showed that, as of March 18, out of more than 18 million people who got J&J, 60 cases of TTS were reported and nine people died.... The risk appears to be greatest—1 in 100,000—in women ages 30 to 49."

 

"The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, both of which are mRNA vaccines and use a different method to protect against the virus, have not been linked to blood clots at this time."

 

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/coronavirus-vaccine-blood-clots

 

And 2. separate research also has shown that getting COVID the illness actually leads to higher rates and risks of the same kind of blood clotting that getting other COVID vaccines.

 

April 14, 2023

 

"BUFFALO, N.Y. – A study led by University at Buffalo researchers has confirmed that contrary to claims by anti-vaccine proponents, COVID-19 [mRNA] vaccines pose only trivial risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), or blood clots. In addition, the study found that becoming infected with COVID-19 poses a significant risk of blood clots.

 

https://www.buffalo.edu/news/releases/2023/04/015.html

 

AND

 

And the higher risk issue with the J&J vaccine doesn't extend to the mRNA vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna:

Do COVID-19 vaccines cause blood clots too?

Feb. 16, 2023

 

"The mRNA vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna do not have the same association with blood clots, Das explains. "If anything, the vaccine is going to be protective (against blood clots) because it's going to decrease the severity of infection," Das says. "So there's absolutely no question in my mind — we'll be better off being vaccinated."

 

https://www.today.com/health/coronavirus/covid-blood-clots-warning-signs-rcna70086

 

 

 

When reading the posts on this thread it might look that I - and a couple of other dissident voices - are lone nutters rejecting the 'protection' that the Covid-19 booster jabs provide.  But from the uptake figures in US it looks that 90% of the population is not interested in getting another shot.

3 weeks ago already Politico reported

"... about 8 million individuals have received an updated XBB Covid-19 shot, Ilse Zuniga, a spokesperson for HHS, told Prescription Pulse. The figures come from providers and distributors that have voluntarily reported vaccinations to the federal government because the CDC halted Covid vaccine tracking when the public health emergency ended in May.

The mRNA shots from Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna have been available for roughly four weeks, and Novavax’s protein-based shot received a green light earlier this month. By comparison, the Biden administration estimated that roughly 13 to 15 million people ages 12 and older had received an updated vaccine at this time last year. 

... " 

Source: https://www.politico.com/newsletters/prescription-pulse/2023/10/17/vaccine-makers-prep-for-sluggish-demand-00121873

So if demand continues at the same pace, that would translate into about 30 million shots this year - less than 10 percent of Americans. 

And the head-line of that Politico article < Vaccine makers prep for sluggish demand > indicates that investors have clearly reached this conclusion too, which is one of the reasons why they’re fleeing Pfizer, Moderna and BioNTech, which supplies Pfizer’s mRNA vaccine.

Note: The other reason of course being the score of court-cases that are being launched, to hold these companies accountable, and which when successful would bankrupt all three.

48 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

But from the uptake figures in US it looks that 90% of the population is not interested in getting another shot

Of course not. The shots are no longer free so people can't/won't pay. 

3 minutes ago, gargamon said:

Of course not. The shots are no longer free so people can't/won't pay. 

Uninsured Americans can still get free Covid boosters

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/19/covid-vaccine-boosters-uninsured-americans-can-find-free-moderna-pfizer-shots.html

 

1 hour ago, gargamon said:

2 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

But from the uptake figures in US it looks that 90% of the population is not interested in getting another shot

Of course not. The shots are no longer free so people can't/won't pay. 

 

That explains reluctance on the part of a small population that's not covered by Medicare, Medicaid, private health insurance and a myriad of other gub'ment and private programs to take on the cost.  But certainly not the vast majority who are staying away in droves.

 

My forecast (and that's all it is) is that uptake will get to around 25-30%, and those will be the truly vulnerable age groups, and those who believe the risk of Covid exceeds the risk of known and unknown vaccine side effects.  In other words, by personal choice- as opposed to threats of losing jobs, being barred from buildings and other coercive gub'ment policies.

 

 

Rasmussen Reports Poll - 

24% of US Citizens Say Someone They Know Died From COVID-19 Vaccine 

 

Put in perspective:  

 

In 2022, 34% of Americans believed in UFOs driven by aliens. That rose to 42% after recent congressional hearings. [ref]

 

Therefore: 

Twice as many Americans believe aliens exist than believe they think they know someone who died of Covid vaccines. 

 

Edited November 6, 20232 yr by rabas

1 hour ago, rabas said:

Twice as many Americans believe aliens exist than believe they think they know someone who died of Covid vaccines. 

 

 

And that's not including the other well-informed folks who believe the Moon landings were faked or that the Earth is really flat.

 

 

And in another measure of just how bogus this Rasmussen claim is, last time I checked in Google search, their supposed poll results basically have been widely ignored by major news outlets based in the U.S. -- national wire services, major newspapers, mainstream TV network news, etc. ( cue the "it's all a conspiracy" claims... 😞 )

 

According to Google search, for the most part, just this AseanNow thread created by an avowed anti-vaxer on the forum, and a lot of non-credible alt-right websites that wouldn't even be allowed as news sources here.