Printable View
if that's reffing the reuters link - I used it because it seemed the most vanilla google answer to the question are mrna experimental in reply to cher's point about vaccine evaluation being far too complex for most people.Quote:
Originally Posted by bule1
the cdc should be thought of as reliable, no?
Not reffing any one link. It's more a comment of the the way people with entrenched beliefs wholeheartedly embrace things that support what they believe and dismiss anything that that does not. It is classic conspiracy theorists behaviour.
yes, sleaze, but your point that these men are deliberately trying to what?
true, although I think we all do it to one degree or another.Quote:
Originally Posted by bule1
the problem utm highlights with his reuters board issue, is how difficult it is to find totally problem-free resources.
If anybody here isn't going to accept that these vaccines were given emergency approval because they had not been properly tested, ie still at an experimental stage, then it's very clear you did not give informed consent.
Fair play MF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggie's Farm
The so called conspiracy theorists are facing an uphill battle trying to show people the sheer scale of the conflict of interests and corruption.
With big tech in the pocket, they are able to censor and shut down debate whilst promoting the pro-vax narrative.
What's happening now may help tip the balance somewhat, my feeling is that more people are at least starting to question what's going on with a percentage of two jabbed now intending not to have the 3rd, which will ultimately mean they will count as unvaccinated.
I used to say the same about cellphones actually. It seemed to me that the research period was nowhere near long enough to evaluate longterm use. I still think we might be in for news on that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by upthemaggies
However, the choice between letting c19 run free, or adopting clearly extremely effective short/medium term medicine is clear. If there are unpredicted longterm problems with the vaccine (seemingly unlikely given other similar vaccines), we'll deal with that after we've dealt with the immediate emergency.
Do not think anyone is saying they went through the same process as other drugs/vaccines. However the situation is very different, the deaths in the first wave were extreme. We could have faced a "Spanish Flu" situation, for those who do not know Spanish flu killed more in 1918-1920 than died in World War 1. Therefore an exceptional measure of skipping some of those safety steps is more than understandable, the second wave is a bit more complicated. However the ones we are talking about are the ones who went against the first wave advice.
it's not the conflict of interests and corruption they need to show (does anyone doubt how rife that is?), it's a credible narrative that pulls the wide range of actors together in a nefarioius plot to... what? Control humanity with a virus? with a vaccine? Kill us? what is 'their' end game as you see it?Quote:
Originally Posted by upthemaggies
Nice of 'them' to let this debate rage for so long then!Quote:
Originally Posted by upthemaggies