O/T Covid Vaccine mRNA

[frogmiller]

The very definition of the word 'coercion'. An absolute scandal.

You are correct. The times have changed though and during the time of the lockdown people were shîtting themselves and followed the guidelines for the betterment of others.

Making sure granny was safe was one to entice parents to have kids jabbed even though now we know that kids have a far greater chance of injury from the vaccine than they do of being seriously ill and being hospitalised with Covid.

Yet like the people over 75 the kids are still encouraged to have the vaccine. It doesn’t make sense!

[crashbang]

Frog ,are you completely thick,? FFS no one is forced for god sake .stop with all the if this or if that .

[crashbang]

Have you been vaccinated,?

[CAMiller]

What is your definition of forced Crash? You aren't forced to drive on the left hand side of the road but I'm guessing you probably do for your own well being and the well being of others.

[crashbang]

Cam ,I understand people have choices, but please tell me when you are forced to have any vaccination.
It's not hard.,

[crashbang]

What is your definition of forced Crash? You aren't forced to drive on the left hand side of the road but I'm guessing you probably do for your own well being and the well being of others.

That is the highway code, not a law .

[animallittle3]

Could be coincidental of course and I'm not one for conspiracy theories by any means but since I had the Astra Zenica jab and boosters I've never suffered so much ill health .

My high blood pressure is a constant battle to keep down and something I've never had before 2021 , the only time I drink is on holiday , I don't smoke and I eat a decent balanced diet , I'm the same weight and I've an easier job these days than I had before covid , much easier .

I've very little stress , financially in the best position of my life , we have three good foreign holidays a year , I walk the dog every day for at least an hour .

I take a statin and aspirin everyday along with the blood pressure medication and yet since 2020 I'm going downhill despite the fact I'm only 62 .

Could be coincidental but my doctor won't even discuss the covid jab when I've brought it up , just dismisses it and gives me another blood test instead .

Now I understand they've taken the Astra drug off the market .

I just don't know I really don't .

[KerrAvon]

You may have missed it, but we've already discovered that this august medical publication known as The Lancet is majority owned by Blackrock, who own huge amounts of stock in vaccine associated businesses.

Airfinity are backed by the WHO, so no points there I'm afraid.

Science Media Centre are funded by, among others, Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry, Bayer plc, Astra Zeneca (ffs), Elsevier (owned by Blackrock), GlaxoSmithKline, and previously by Pfizer.

Vested interests here? Surely not? (And no mention of Twitter...)

Whether there are any points to be had rather depends upon your view of Blackrock and the WHO.

Blackrock are a wealth management company that looks to find value for its customers. They may be shareholder of the parent company of the publishers of the Lancet, but the view that they are capable of, or would be interested, in having an influence over what is published is faintly laughable. Do you have any actual evidence of such an influence?

I see that Legal and General are also a shareholder. Are they also apparently exerting a baleful influence or are they just trying to achieve growth for the pensions funds that they manage?

The WHO is a UN agency. I suspect that it’s a bit bureaucratic and inefficient and that there is probably a bit of corruption here and there (I base that on the experiences of afraid who spent time working for UNHCR), but again, the notion that they are some sort of Machiavellian organisation plotting the downfall of humanity seems a bit silly.

Do you have any evidence to suggest that the AZ vaccine didn’t save millions of lives?

[KerrAvon]

Little by little the whuhan lab information seems to be being exposed.

Here’s a summary of a New York Post article:

• NIH principal deputy director Lawrence Tabak admitted to Congress that the NIH funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, depending on the definition of gain-of-function, confirming the involvement through EcoHealth Alliance. “If you’re speaking about the generic term, yes, we did [fund gain-of-function research].”

• This admission follows years of evasive answers from federal health officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, about funding such controversial research.

• However, Tabak also said, “The generic term [gain-of-function] is research that goes on in many, many labs around the country. It is not regulated. And the reason it’s not regulated is it poses no threat or harm to anybody.”

• Dr. Bryce Nickels, a professor of genetics at Rutgers University, criticized the NIH’s communication as obfuscating and avoiding accountability. “Tabak was engaging in the usual obfuscation and semantic manipulation that is so frustrating and pointless.”

• The NIH has come under scrutiny for removing gain-of-function research definitions from its website amid debates on its research funding in Wuhan, raising concerns about its transparency and accountability.

• In response to these issues, the US Department of Health and Human Services recently barred the Wuhan Institute from receiving federal grants for ten years and pulled all funding from EcoHealth Alliance for three years.

• EcoHealth Alliance’s president, Dr. Peter Daszak, testified that his organization did not engage in gain-of-function research, contradicting previous statements and evidence.

• In previous communications and hearings, it was revealed that experiments funded by the NIH at the Wuhan lab increased the infectiousness of bat coronaviruses significantly. Tabak revealed that EcoHealth “failed to report” the bat coronaviruses modified with SARS and MERS viruses had been made 10,000 times more infectious, in violation of its NIH grant terms.

• The New York Post reports: “Fauci is scheduled to answer questions about the gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab and theories of the origin of the pandemic in a public subcommittee hearing set for June 3

Blimey. I’m criticised for linking to the Lancet and you rely upon a newspaper with all the credibility of the Daily Star and with a former Sun editor as Editor in Chief. And it is owned by News Corporation which numbers Blackrock and Vanguard amongst its shareholders… That apparently means that nothing that it publishes can be trusted.

[KerrAvon]

I’m not a fan of mandates, in part because they feed into conspiracy theories, but in the main because governments should be slow to interfere with individual freedoms.

The thing is though that some infringement of personal freedoms happens as a part of living in a society. As an example, the wearing of seatbelts is mandatory in the UK. Some people railed against that when it was proposed but it is generally accepted without protest now. I would imagine that is because there is a widespread acceptance that they benefit individuals and wider society even though seatbelts can and do cause injuries and even death in certain circumstances.

The benefits of the vaccines are less tangible than those from the wearing of seatbelts, because it’s impossible on an individual basis to know for certain if you have avoided death or long-term harm from a covid infection or have avoid passing it to a clinically vulnerable person, whereas you may be acutely aware if you have avoided going through your windscreen in a prang.

And then there’s the internet. If the imposition of a seatbelt mandate were only just being proposed, I suspect that Twitter would be packed full of stories about how seatbelts can damage livers and kidneys or cause myocardial contusion and even heart rupture (as they can in rare instances) and that RoSPA is a shady operation intent on world domination. Shouty right wing American TV presenters would get in on the grift, sorry, I meant act, decrying the plot against the driving public, in between adverts for guns and bibles.

In the UK, the taking of Covid vaccines was briefly mandated as a condition of being employed for front-line health and care workers (although I think it might have been dropped before it was rolled out – but I’m happy to be corrected on that). I would assume that the aim of that was to seek to protect the elderly and clinically vulnerable people that they came into contact with and to seek to reduce sick absence in those critical areas. How would that be achieved without vaccination?