On 12/7/2025 at 11:14 PM, rattlesnake said:

 

Always assuming people are dumb and need to be 'told the right thing for their own good'… by the 'smarter ones', of course. 

It’s hilarious

  

They keep coming back over and over to fulfill their moral duty to save whoever it is that might stumble across our posts on an obscure section of an obscure forum.

 

Yeah….sure.

 

And they get angry when we laugh at them.

 

Bunch of Nancys. 🤫😬😅

 

On 12/8/2025 at 2:14 PM, rattlesnake said:

 

Always assuming people are dumb and need to be 'told the right thing for their own good'… by the 'smarter ones', of course. 

 

Arrogance :

 

 an offensive attitude of superiority shown especially by excessively confident or rudely dismissive behavior

3 hours ago, Airalee said:

It’s hilarious

  

They keep coming back over and over to fulfill their moral duty to save whoever it is that might stumble across our posts on an obscure section of an obscure forum.

 

Yeah….sure.

 

And they get angry when we laugh at them.

 

Bunch of Nancys. 🤫😬😅

 

TBH, I couldn't care less if they want a jab or two. But I do care when these monsters put the toxic filth into babes, toddles and kids. Also preggers ladies.

 

The pro-vaxxers are gradually losing their way. They have backed the wrong horse and they now know it.

 

 

On 12/8/2025 at 2:32 PM, richard_smith237 said:

What’s remarkable is how comfortably some people let fringe sites and misinformation mills dictate their worldview. First it’s “vaccines don’t work”, then it morphs into “viruses don’t exist” - as if ignorance becomes more profound the further you wander from reality.

 

Here, Richard.... is where you present yourself in a way which illustrates that your attempts to prove ignorance in others are for the sole reason of being an ego driven individual who always needs to win (and denigrate others in the process) ...

Hundreds of posts on this topic have pointed out, factually, the lies (or MORPHS, to use your term) .....regarding the "safety and efficacy " of the covid shots .  (the "morphing" into "viruses don't exist"  is only a morph in your deluded mind .  Two different topics !

 

Here is a sample of the falsehoods that were promoted regarding the "vaccine" :

 

 

1. The Original Narrative (Late 2020 – Mid 2021)

When the COVID vaccines were first rolled out, both government agencies and media pushed the idea that vaccination prevented infection and transmission.
This was the supposed “99% effective” claim derived from Pfizer’s relative risk reduction during their short-term, early-phase trials.

Officials like Anthony Fauci, Rochelle Walensky, Biden, and others publicly stated that vaccinated people “do not carry the virus” and “don’t get sick.”

This framing wasn’t accidental — it was part of a coordinated messaging campaign to justify mandates and public pressure on the unvaccinated. The problem was that the claim was never supported by long-term data, only by incomplete short-term results in carefully selected cohorts.

---

 2. The Turning Point (Summer 2021)

By mid-2021, something undeniable began happening:

• Breakthrough infections surged, even in highly vaccinated populations (i.e., Israel, Iceland, Gibraltar).
• Delta variant revealed that vaccinated individuals could carry similar viral loads to the unvaccinated.
• Internal CDC documents (leaked in July 2021) used phrases like “the war has changed.”

That was the first major crack. The CDC had to change its messaging from “prevents infection” to “reduces severe disease.”
In August 2021, Walensky admitted on CNN that “vaccines cannot prevent transmission anymore.”

---

 3. The Backpedal (2022–2023)

Once Omicron hit, the illusion collapsed completely:

• Vaccinated and boosted individuals were catching COVID repeatedly.
• Data from multiple countries (UK, Israel, Denmark) began showing higher infection rates per capita among the vaccinated.
• The CDC quietly altered its definitions:
  • “Vaccine effectiveness” was redefined from “preventing infection” to “reducing severe outcomes.”
  • The definition of “vaccine” itself was changed in September 2021 from “produces immunity” to “produces protection.”

They never directly admitted lying — they simply changed the wording quietly on their website and shifted to emphasizing hospitalization prevention instead.

 

note: Proof of vaccine injuries is also available for those willing to search.

 

 

On 12/8/2025 at 3:32 PM, richard_smith237 said:

Well, half the population is - by definition - below average intelligence, and the bell curve is hardly helped by the constant distortion caused by anti-vaxx rhetoric.

 

Not true.  Half the population is below the median intelligence.  That's not the same as the average.  If you're going to lecture down to people, get it right.

On 12/6/2025 at 4:08 PM, impulse said:

 

Even if that's the case, it'll be decades before we know if they were a net positive.  That's the nature of genetic experiments. 

 

And one more glaring reason they should not have been mandated.  If they really worked, the people who got the jabs should have been protected from the people who chose bodily autonomy over an experimental treatment.  And if they didn't work, they shouldn't have been pushed so hard, much less mandated.

 

There's also huge mass of studies coming to light where even normal vaccines may have prevented the disease they were targeted at, but the overall mortality skyrocketed from other causes (but only in those who were vaccinated).

A huge mass of studies?

Sounds dangerous , think I'll go down the pub instead!

2 hours ago, rumak said:

 

Here, Richard.... is where you present yourself in a way which illustrates that your attempts to prove ignorance in others are for the sole reason of being an ego driven individual who always needs to win (and denigrate others in the process) ...

Hundreds of posts on this topic have pointed out, factually, the lies (or MORPHS, to use your term) .....regarding the "safety and efficacy " of the covid shots .  (the "morphing" into "viruses don't exist"  is only a morph in your deluded mind .  Two different topics !

 

Here is a sample of the falsehoods that were promoted regarding the "vaccine" :

 

 

1. The Original Narrative (Late 2020 – Mid 2021)

When the COVID vaccines were first rolled out, both government agencies and media pushed the idea that vaccination prevented infection and transmission.
This was the supposed “99% effective” claim derived from Pfizer’s relative risk reduction during their short-term, early-phase trials.

Officials like Anthony Fauci, Rochelle Walensky, Biden, and others publicly stated that vaccinated people “do not carry the virus” and “don’t get sick.”

This framing wasn’t accidental — it was part of a coordinated messaging campaign to justify mandates and public pressure on the unvaccinated. The problem was that the claim was never supported by long-term data, only by incomplete short-term results in carefully selected cohorts.

---

 2. The Turning Point (Summer 2021)

By mid-2021, something undeniable began happening:

• Breakthrough infections surged, even in highly vaccinated populations (i.e., Israel, Iceland, Gibraltar).
• Delta variant revealed that vaccinated individuals could carry similar viral loads to the unvaccinated.
• Internal CDC documents (leaked in July 2021) used phrases like “the war has changed.”

That was the first major crack. The CDC had to change its messaging from “prevents infection” to “reduces severe disease.”
In August 2021, Walensky admitted on CNN that “vaccines cannot prevent transmission anymore.”

---

 3. The Backpedal (2022–2023)

Once Omicron hit, the illusion collapsed completely:

• Vaccinated and boosted individuals were catching COVID repeatedly.
• Data from multiple countries (UK, Israel, Denmark) began showing higher infection rates per capita among the vaccinated.
• The CDC quietly altered its definitions:
  • “Vaccine effectiveness” was redefined from “preventing infection” to “reducing severe outcomes.”
  • The definition of “vaccine” itself was changed in September 2021 from “produces immunity” to “produces protection.”

They never directly admitted lying — they simply changed the wording quietly on their website and shifted to emphasizing hospitalization prevention instead.

 

note: Proof of vaccine injuries is also available for those willing to search.

 

 

Yeah….b..b…but….

 

Conspiracy Theorist!!!!!

 

 

 

 

one of many r.smith's comments on the covid issues :

"There’s a kind of false equivalence that creeps in when emotion outweighs evidence. It feels intuitive to assign blame to the most recent event, but science doesn’t work on intuition - it works on data, patterns, and reproducible evidence. And the data are clear:  ........."

 

yes, they ARE CLEAR .    The public was lied to .  The old fallback of  "going by what we knew at the time"  is just BS .    You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to see the pattern of  choosing the handpicked data and making a coordinated effort to mandate one agenda which has been shown to be completely unwarranted .   It is clear that those participating in this  were guilty as hell of misinformation and then, in FACT,   destroying the name of any experts who told the real truth .

 

when a "pattern"  emerges .... of downright lies and corruption.... then all the "studies"  and "facts" wheeled out to influence their emotional audience must be discarded .   Finally some real studies, meaning honest not paid for by pharma to their corrupt cronies ...... finally some true facts are being revealed .   Many backing up what the "crazy "  experts said ,  the ones that were put through hell for putting ethics over capitulation and money,

On 12/8/2025 at 2:32 PM, richard_smith237 said:

Well, half the population is - by definition - below average intelligence, and the bell curve is hardly helped by the constant distortion caused by anti-vaxx rhetoric.

 

What’s remarkable is how comfortably some people let fringe sites and misinformation mills dictate their worldview. First it’s “vaccines don’t work”, then it morphs into “viruses don’t exist” - as if ignorance becomes more profound the further you wander from reality.

Which half do you think YOU are in?

19 hours ago, xylophone said:

So this penicillin took some 12 years to become a success, and now mRNA has taken about the same time to prove that it is successful and could well end up to be a major breakthrough in treating cancers and other serious illnesses/diseases.

Slight amendment to my post above, inasmuch as the mRNA vaccine has taken around 30 years from initial studies to be put into use for humans (and all the testing that entails), and as above, shows great promise in treating other illnesses in humans.........

RFK Jr. hits the nail on the head:

 

 

37 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

RFK Jr. hits the nail on the head:

 

Maybe he promotes conspiracies because JFK shooting was a conspiracy. ie his UNCLE!

 

 

5 hours ago, xylophone said:

Slight amendment to my post above, inasmuch as the mRNA vaccine has taken around 30 years from initial studies to be put into use for humans (and all the testing that entails), and as above, shows great promise in treating other illnesses in humans.........

",,,,,,mRNA vaccine,,,,,."

 

MRNA is not a vaccine of any sort.

47 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

Maybe he promotes conspiracies because JFK shooting was a conspiracy. ie his UNCLE!

 

 

 

He certainly has an insider view of what propaganda-driven mass manipulation looks like.

24 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

MRNA is not a vaccine of any sort.

so what would you call it? 

9 hours ago, Stiddle Mump said:

",,,,,,mRNA vaccine,,,,,."

 

MRNA is not a vaccine of any sort.

From what I have read online, there have never been any successful tests of mRNA technology in all those years and supposedly, all the test subjects (animals) died.

 

I heard that the Covid muck was tested on all of 8 mice (rats?).   
 

Impressive, no? 🫤

1 hour ago, Airalee said:

of mRNA technology in all those years and supposedly, all the test subjects (animals) died.

 

Yeah, but those rats were obese and diabetic, so the mRNA cannot be blamed entirely for their demise. 

 

11 hours ago, save the frogs said:

so what would you call it? 

Something I wouldn't even give a lab rat.

On 12/12/2025 at 8:07 AM, Jim Blue said:

A huge mass of studies?

Sounds dangerous , think I'll go down the pub instead!

 

Yup.  Here's another one, published 3 days ago by Stanford on December 10, 2025:

 

Stanford Medicine study shows why mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis

 

Stanford Medicine investigators have unearthed the biological process by which mRNA-based vaccines for COVID-19 can cause heart damage in some young men and adolescents — and they’ve shown a possible route to reducing its likelihood.

 

Elevated inflammatory cytokine signaling could be a class effect of mRNA vaccines. Notably, IFN-gamma signaling is a fundamental defense mechanism against foreign DNA and RNA molecules, including viral nucleic acids, Wu said.

“Your body needs these cytokines to ward off viruses. It’s essential to immune response but can become toxic in large amounts,”

 

I get a Cloudflare error message when I post the link to that page of the Stanford site, but it's fresh enough that you can find it if you try.

 

https://med.stanford.edu/

 

Edit:  The wingnut in me would bet these Stanford guys would be walking down the road scratching their unemployed butts had they published the same article a year or more ago.

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

 

Yeah, but those rats were obese and diabetic, so the mRNA cannot be blamed entirely for their demise. 

 

And the fat, diabetic rats probably blamed the unvaccinated rats.  Much like the fat diabetic posters on this site.

13 hours ago, save the frogs said:

so what would you call it? 

Well, considering that vaccines are not vaccines at all but concocted filth, I am reluctant to call the mRNA junk soup one. Anti-nature computer generated nonsense. But if I had to put a name to it then; 'Mouse killer serum'.

 

Have to ask what a vaccine is for in my world. Many of the so-called vaccine successes of yesteryear, were brought into the market after the 'disease' they were developed for had decreased to virtually nothing. Why did the occurrence of the disease lessen? Mostly social factors. And they were never diseases anyway. But, in the case of polio, a sharp reduction in the use of DDT. There is also the white-coats changing the definition of particular diseases. Again, polio being one. Why? To lessen - on paper - the actual cases of the sickness, to make it as though the vaccine was a wonder thing. When in actual fact is caused untold suffering and death.

 

This mRNA filth, is nothing more than tinkering with humanity. 

 

Nature has the answers we seek

 

1 minute ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Well, considering that vaccines are not vaccines at all but concocted filth, I am reluctant to call the mRNA junk soup one. Anti-nature computer generated nonsense. But if I had to put a name to it then; 'Mouse killer serum'.

 

Have to ask what a vaccine is for in my world. Many of the so-called vaccine successes of yesteryear, were brought into the market after the 'disease' they were developed for had decreased to virtually nothing. Why did the occurrence of the disease lessen? Mostly social factors. And they were never diseases anyway. But, in the case of polio, a sharp reduction in the use of DDT. There is also the white-coats changing the definition of particular diseases. Again, polio being one. Why? To lessen - on paper - the actual cases of the sickness, to make it as though the vaccine was a wonder thing. When in actual fact is caused untold suffering and death.

 

This mRNA filth, is nothing more than tinkering with humanity. 

 

 

 

...............and saving lives..............

6 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

Why did the occurrence of the disease lessen?

 

Why is flu season in winter months in Western countries?

 

Because, as far as I know:

1 - There is a lack of sunlight in winter months

2 - There is a lack of fresh air as people do not go outside much

 

So a flu vaccine is a "necessary evil".

In an ideal world, where everyone would be living near the equator and not be stuck indoors 24/7 half the year because it's too cold, one would hardly need a flu vaccine.

 

It's beyond me why anyone would need a flu vaccine in Thailand. You have to have a really really crappy diet to get the flu here. Or ... even in Thailand some people stay indoors all the time and barely get any sun.

 

Now, since I am talking to a brick wall, I guess you will just ignore all counter-arguments to your thesis that all vaccines are useless all the time.

 

The human race appears to have originated around the equator. It's debatable whether these harsh cold countries are even a good idea for people to live. No sunlight half the year is bad news. And that's where the flu vaccine comes from, as far as I know. 

 

We don't need no education. 

 

 

11 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

So a flu vaccine is a "necessary evil".

This is simply monumental humbug Sir.

 

There is no such thing as a flu vaccine'.

 

Dear me. Have you not been reading my posts? The flu is a natural body occurrence. It is very good for us. The reasons we get the flu are complex. But to put it in a nutshell, it is the body ridding itself of stored undesirables before the winter sets in. That's why it is often triggered during autumn. The body is protecting itself (you and me).

 

Now given the above, how can anyone devise a 'vaccine' to prevent a natural event?

 

Why do trees shed their leaves at certain times? It's nature at work. Same as the onset of flu.

 

23 hours ago, rumak said:

one of many r.smith's comments on the covid issues :

"There’s a kind of false equivalence that creeps in when emotion outweighs evidence. It feels intuitive to assign blame to the most recent event, but science doesn’t work on intuition - it works on data, patterns, and reproducible evidence. And the data are clear:  ...... 

 

when a "pattern"  emerges .... of downright lies and corruption.... then all the "studies"  and "facts" wheeled out to influence their emotional audience must be discarded .   Finally some real studies, meaning honest not paid for by pharma to their corrupt cronies ...... finally some true facts are being revealed .   Many backing up what the "crazy "  experts said ,  the ones that were put through hell for putting ethics over capitulation and money,

 

To continue with the explanation of WHY "the data are clear"  posters use THEIR sources to push the narrative THEY prefer (and then have the hubris to use slurs against opposing views) ...  Please consider the following :

 

Stanford Medicine, like virtually every major academic medical institution in the United States, has a strong institutional bias when reporting on the dangers of the COVID‑19 vaccines—not necessarily because individual scientists are dishonest, but because the system they operate within structurally rewards conformity to the established narrative.

 

 1. Institutional Incentives and Financial Dependencies

Academic medical centers such as Stanford depend heavily on:

• Federal grants (NIH, CDC, NSF) — agencies that explicitly fund research aligned with public health policies, such as vaccination campaigns. Challenging those policies risks funding loss.
• Pharmaceutical partnerships — Stanford has long been intertwined with Big Pharma through drug trials and licensing deals. During the pandemic, companies like Pfizer and Moderna funneled immense sums into collaborative research, effectively ensuring that findings remained “aligned.”
• Donor pressure and political optics — Large donors, public officials, and collaborating hospitals all emphasize “trust in science” messaging; dissent is interpreted as “misinformation,” which could threaten institutional reputation.

The combination of these incentives encourages narrative consistency rather than open debate.

---

2. Selective Framing in Publications

When Stanford-affiliated researchers publish on vaccine safety, notice the pattern:

• Adverse events are presented as “rare” regardless of underreporting or the known limitations of VAERS or EudraVigilance databases.
• High-quality independent analyses (especially reanalyses of all-cause mortality or myocarditis risk) are ignored or dismissed as “methodologically flawed” while pro-vaccine papers with serious statistical weaknesses pass peer review without scrutiny.
• Language manipulation: terms like “associated with” are only used when describing benefits, never for risks. Risks are labeled as “temporal coincidences.”

This framing encourages cognitive dissonance—acknowledging harm theoretically while denying empirical significance.

---

 3. Regulatory and Academic Capture

The FDA, CDC, and NIH—agencies deeply intertwined with the pharmaceutical industry—form the backbone of data that Stanford cites. Because these agencies control the data streams, Stanford’s “evidence base” is pre-filtered through government-sanctioned interpretations.

When independent datasets emerge (e.g., from Israel, Nordic countries, or the Cleveland Clinic) that contradict the official narrative, Stanford researchers often:

• Downplay them as “population-specific anomalies.”
• Emphasize “confounding factors” when results suggest harm.
• Avoid conducting replication studies altogether, which is the antithesis of scientific method.

---

 4. Suppression of Dissent and Internal Gatekeeping

During the pandemic, Stanford displayed authoritarian tendencies in managing internal dissent:

• Jay Bhattacharya, a Stanford professor of medicine, was ostracized for co-authoring the Great Barrington Declaration (which criticized lockdowns and questioned mass vaccination of low‑risk groups). Despite being from Stanford, his views were treated as threatening to institutional credibility.
• Younger faculty and students quickly learned that career advancement required ideological alignment, not scientific courage.

That dynamic chills objective reporting across the board.

---

 5. Underreported Vaccine Injury Reality

Stanford and peer institutions generally:

• Avoid long-term follow-ups that could uncover chronic conditions such as myocarditis sequelae, dysautonomia, neuroinflammatory syndromes, or autoimmune triggers.
• Frame any post-vaccination deaths as anecdotal unless shown in double-blind trials—which, ironically, they refuse to perform post‑marketing.
• Fail to incorporate independent toxicology or pathological autopsy studies like those from German and Japanese pathologists that revealed microthrombotic damage patterns after mRNA shots.

---

 Conclusion

Stanford Medicine’s reporting on COVID‑19 vaccine dangers is highly biased by systemic forces, not necessarily individual malice. It’s shaped by:

• Financial entanglement with industry and government.
• Institutional fear of reputational or funding consequences.
• Ideological conformity reinforced through academic and social pressure.

The only remedy for this distortion is independent, transparent, and data‑driven inquiry outside of the institutional research complex—something that very few university systems currently allow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

But to put it in a nutshell, it is the body ridding itself of stored undesirables before the winter sets in. That's why it is often triggered during autumn. The body is protecting itself (you and me).

 

Yes, the body is trying to rid itself. But in many cases, it CANNOT because the environment is not conducive. 

 

If I just explained to you that sunlight is important and getting fresh air is important to avoid the flu, but people in cold countries are getting neither for extended periods. So how will the body magically fix itself without the proper intervention?

 

My communication with you is over. You keep repeating the same thing over and over and ignoring my comments. Bye bye. 

 

 

12 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

The reasons we get the flu are complex.

 

No, no, no,

Now you're trying to act like you're the expert who knows more than everyone else.

Flu is mainly caused by lack of sunlight exposure, which is why it's mostly prevalent in winter months. 

 

16 minutes ago, Stiddle Mump said:

This is simply monumental humbug Sir.

 

There is no such thing as a flu vaccine'.

 

Dear me. Have you not been reading my posts? The flu is a natural body occurrence. It is very good for us. The reasons we get the flu are complex. But to put it in a nutshell, it is the body ridding itself of stored undesirables before the winter sets in. That's why it is often triggered during autumn. The body is protecting itself (you and me).

 

Now given the above, how can anyone devise a 'vaccine' to prevent a natural event?

 

Why do trees shed their leaves at certain times? It's nature at work. Same as the onset of flu.

 

Dr. Mump, who wants you all to die, to refuse help, because it's nature....................................

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

Yup.  Here's another one, published 3 days ago by Stanford on December 10, 2025:

 

Stanford Medicine study shows why mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines can cause myocarditis

 

Stanford Medicine investigators have unearthed the biological process by which mRNA-based vaccines for COVID-19 can cause heart damage in some young men and adolescents — and they’ve shown a possible route to reducing its likelihood.

 

Elevated inflammatory cytokine signaling could be a class effect of mRNA vaccines. Notably, IFN-gamma signaling is a fundamental defense mechanism against foreign DNA and RNA molecules, including viral nucleic acids, Wu said.

“Your body needs these cytokines to ward off viruses. It’s essential to immune response but can become toxic in large amounts,”

 

I get a Cloudflare error message when I post the link to that page of the Stanford site, but it's fresh enough that you can find it if you try.

 

https://med.stanford.edu/

 

Edit:  The wingnut in me would bet these Stanford guys would be walking down the road scratching their unemployed butts had they published the same article a year or more ago.

 

yes, i was "caught" by that headline as well ............. very clever of the "writers" .  Actually, when i started to read the biased article (see my post above)  i quickly realized how it exactly matched this :  "This framing encourages cognitive dissonance—acknowledging harm theoretically while denying empirical significance." 

 

Throughout the whole article the dangers of the "vax" were basically dismissed while the

"great benefits"  were pushed once again .   Total bias and distortion , following the pattern described in my post .

2 minutes ago, rumak said:

 

yes, i was "caught" by that headline as well ............. very clever of the "writers" .  Actually, when i started to read the biased article (see my post above)  i quickly realized how it exactly matched this :  "This framing encourages cognitive dissonance—acknowledging harm theoretically while denying empirical significance." 

 

Throughout the whole article the dangers of the "vax" were basically dismissed while the

"great benefits"  were pushed once again .   Total bias and distortion , following the pattern described in my post .

  

The part that didn't convince me was where they estimated the frequency of the damage (specific to the article I linked).  They seemed to pull those numbers out of the blue with their selection methods.  I suspect that most of the affected patients don't even realize their hearts are damaged, and won't until much later if and when they go in for a coronary CT scan.