Axiom Home Page Forums General Discussion The Water Cooler BRAVO CANADIAN TRUCKERS!

post got away again ...

Very nice response rrlev! Today is a busy day for me and your comments deserve serious response.

Nevertheless, a few short points.

1. The Pfeizer and Moderna Mrna vaccines are the first and second Mrna vaccines ever certified in the US.

2. Although Mrna technology has been studied and the subject of experiments since the 1990s, until the emergency use authorization for COVID, there is absolutely no historical or long term data on the effects of vaccines using this novel and very promising technology.

3. Neither of the Mrna vaccines could, by law, have received emergency use authorization if there were effective therapeutics.

4. The administrative/biopharma establishments very aggressively attacked the effectiveness of Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine (as well as their safety) despite strong positive clinical outcomes reported by frontline health care providers and scientists. Yes, social media has suppressed views opposing the CDC, NHI and WHO, and it is difficult to find any positive sources on Google, but the Great Barrington Group, Dr. Mallone, Dr. Charles Atlas and many others make a strong case for the use of these therapeutics. Had any of these therapeutics been acknowledged effective, the MRNA vaccines would not have been eligible for emergency authorization.

5. Despite the fact that over 200 million Americans have been vaccinated, there have been more COVID deaths from January 2020 than before. I am not contesting that the vaccines have a positive effect, the question is, how many lives were actually saved by the vaccines, since so many vaccinated died from COVID.

6. There is a valid question as to how these COVID death statistics are generated. If you die in a motorcycle accident and test positive before mortem, you are counted as a COVID death. Hospitals receive government payments for each COVID patient, more if you are put on a ventilator. The numbers are suspect.

7. Although some here argue that MRNA vaccines are a mature technology, sorry to repeat, but the Pfeizer and Moderna are the FIRST MRNA vaccines authorized for use here in the US.

8. Therefore, as to these specific vaccines there are no long term studies as to possible negative effects on recipients. MRNA (messenger RNA) commands the production of proteins within the cells. The issue as to whether, in some cases, the MRNA used in the vaccine can enter the cell nucleus, over an extended period of time, has not been answered because these are the first such vaccines and they have not been subjected to long term studies. (this could be better said, but I'm running out of time)

9. Although concerns that the MRNA vaccine nanotechnology can effect the genomes of vaccine recipients are routinely dismissed by the bureaucracy, and other interested parties, the risk of harm could be enormous to the human race. While the risk of harm may be slight (it is impossible to say "trivial" without long term evaluation) the harm threatened is potentially huge. This requires serious discussion, not a discussion where only one side is permitted to speak.

Social media, mainstream media permits discussion on these issues, but permits only one point of view. You may play your free speech banjo, but you are only allowed a single string.

That was much longer than I had time for. Chat later.

PS, Mr. rrlev, not familiar with 'FUD' so I looked it up. Fear uncertainty and doubt?

Yes I do my best … let’s look at your effective therapeutics … I.e. you first point
. Both of these drug are getting or have gotten a serious look. Hydroxychloroquine has been shown (proven?) to be ineffective. Ivermectin still has a couple of studies running and a couple which have completed. The ones which have complete have concluded that Covid-19 patients taking Ivermectin did no better then those taking a placebo. You’ll just have to wait and see if the other studies come up with something different.

As for Warp speed … Are you proposing to trade off testing for speed? So far there has been no indication that these drug even do anything for Covid. What has been proven is that have been nasty side effects and that they can be, if not used correctly ,dangerous. Given that, why would anyone want to by pass testing and safety to rush them out when there is a proven effective Covid vaccine that millions of people have taken safely?

So far no long term effects … and from what I’ve been told it’s more an anti-vax excuse then reality. But I will take a quick look around to see if it’s considered a real concern or not.


Note:
On this particular subject it’s doubly important to check your sources as these drug have gotten a triple whammy of mis-information: from believers who are out to prove these drugs work (and are more than happy to provide fake and misquoted proof), from sham organizations out to profit off anti-vax believers like AFLD (America's Frontline Doctors) and from political entities (Trump and other politicians who will say anything if it will help them get re-elected).

Actually these drugs have not received a serious look here in the US. It's my understanding that Hydroxy was given to people who were already on ventilators. Front line physicians who use it early report excellent results when used shortly after symptoms appear. I think you may have to go past the first google responses that come up. You may have noticed that the opinions of those who dissent from the orthodoxy of the health bureaucracy/pharma/government are suppressed.

Check out the Indian study on Ivermectin.

No, I'm not suggesting any shortcuts. The US has thrown more than a Trillion Dollars at Covid. You think maybe they could spare a few for some studies to determine whether existing drugs have therapeutic effect. Drugs which have been determined to be safe, like Ivermectin and Hydroxy not to mention developing new drugs?

As to AFD, you think they've sold their souls for a few bucks? Take a look at the record profits of Pfeizer and Moderna. You're talking about billions of dollars. Perhaps my friend, you should check your sources.

I remember when the left did not trust the establishment. Now they are the establishment and dissenting voices are not welcome.

2x,
A lot of your talking points seems suspiciously close to the stuff on AFLD's website ... Convincing isn't it.
And they use a tried and true method of deflection ... blame wrong doing on others. (right out of the GOP handbook ... sorry couldn't help it) . (We'll get into that when talking about CDC, NIH, Fauci.) As far as them selling their sole ... I don't think they had one in the first place. I believe it's been a scam from the start. Hey picking a name very close to a known organization "Americas Frontline Physicians" is no accident.
Anyway, Here a Time article on them ... worth the read ...
'America's Frontline Doctors' Peddle Bogus COVID-19 Treatment

Best way to get to who is right is to cite sources ... Here's a few of mine:

On Ivermectin:
(published October 14, 2021)
Ivermectin is a Nobel Prize-winning wonder drug – but not for COVID-19
Another article about current treatments (published September 20, 2021)
New treatments for COVID-19 may stave off the worst effects of the virus

Is Ivermectin for Covid-19 Based on Fraudulent Research? Part 3
You will need to sign up to read but it's free. it has a link to part 2, and that to part 1.

On Hydroxychloroquine:
Here a link to a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine which basically shows that the drug is ineffective
A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19

and the conversations’s take
Hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19: A ... shows flaws in research and no benefit

also in the same article quoted for Ivermectin above is stuff on Hydroxychloroquine
New treatments for COVID-19 may stave off the worst effects of the virus
this article points to these:
Is chloroquine or hydroxychloroquin...ople who have been exposed to the virus?
AND
FDA cautions against use of hydroxy...ial due to risk of heart rhythm problems
Oh, and lets not forget a link to the actual studies ...
ClinicalTrials.gov

Are you really equating a fraudulent company which ripped off thousands of people and probably is responsible directly or indirectly for people dying to drug manufactures which actually delivered real solutions and saved lives? I think you must have mis-spoke.
The question of if we overpayed for it is another discussion (which I don't think is relevant here).

I have and now you can too ... please publish yours ... I'd love to see where all this, ahhhh, information is coming from

again we will get into that in the CDC, NIH, ... discussion but if you wish to keep repeating it I guess I can't stop you.

I've never been on the AFLD's website. I don't receive talking points from anyone. I am an independent thinker, and, although immodest to say, pretty smart too.

I do think the CDC, NHI and democrats have grossly politicized COVID. Perhaps you are susceptible to democrat/socialist/administrative state talking points, or maybe, you express your sincere opinions, which is how I figure it.

I think more and more people are waking up to how destructive these dictates are to our liberty. I expect as the polling results come in, the democrats will run from dictates as fast as possible. I don't think it was ever a matter of principle to left leadership. IMO, it was, for them, always a matter of power and control. After all, vaccine dictates allowed the left to purge those who are not vaccinated.

It is not a matter of being an antivaxxer or anti-science. I'm vaccinated, by choice. It's easy to dismiss differing opinions if you figure those who hold them are flat earthers.

I figure the left will get washed out to sea in the midterms because of their anti-liberty (and anti-science) policies.

Just because you're marching in step doesn't mean you're heading in the right direction. My favorite graffiti was, "eat sh!t, 60 trillion flies can't all be wrong."

Just remember Trofim Lysenko. His genetic theories (wrong btw) were settled science in the Soviet Union. In 1948, criticism of his theories was criminalized. Lysenko's theories were, of course, later abandoned in order to save Soviet agriculture.

Let a thousand flowers bloom. Science is not one hand clapping.

I know your'e a smart guy and it's good to know you're not listening to those guys.
(IMO, this is the only useful information in this post)

Do you think saying something over and over is a convincing argument?
We can move that up to the next topic if your chopping at the bit to discuss it

The rest of this post is meaningless rhetoric and/or does not apply to the issue we are discussing (if it applies to anything at all).

You're a lawyer . If you showed up to court with only words (especially words that didn't apply to the argument you were making) and had no evidence to back them, I'd bet the court would reprimand you for wasting it's time.

In other words, 2x, you've argued your case now it's time to submit the evidence!


I believe I vetted my information and
I provided you with links to my citations so you can vet it too.

It's your turn to provide me with your citations so that I can understand where you're coming from.
Prove me wrong instead of posting meaningless prose.

2x,
Thinking about this
If you find our debate upsetting maybe we should stop here ...
I prefer to drop it, and stay friendly, rather than upset anyone.

Good idea. I kept personality out of the conversation and did not insult or criticize you. In this regard only one of us succeeded.

Best regards