Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

The Vaccine Mandates proved we have no rights to bodily autonomy


stevemagegod
 Share

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Fraust said:

So... If anyone whom WANTED the vaccine was allowed to have it, what's the reason behind forcing people that don't want to take it?  It just seems ridiculous especially considering we don't know the long term effects of the vaccines. Maybe all the people with it find out in ten years that they have a 10% higher chance of bone cancer.  Or a 5% chance of becoming infertile. https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/new-drugs-found-cause-side-effects-years-after-approval-n757526.  Is that a good trade for being protected from a slightly dangerous virus? I mean it was always clear that it strongly targeted specific groups and on top of that it has killed LESS people in 3 years than heart disease does every 6 Months.

Vaccines protect people that cannot be vaccinated. There are lots of people with suppressed immune systems. These are people such as transplant recipients, and cancer patients.

You speculate that a vaccine might induce a rather high number of problems. What if it was 0.0001% bone cancer increase? There certainly isn't evidence of that or infertility is there? You did link to an article which did not state the risks involved. Let's see what we can learn about some of those drugs

Humira

https://www.drugwatch.com/humira/warnings/

Quote

Humira is part of a class of biologics known as TNF blockers. These medications work by suppressing the immune system. While these drugs may be effective in treating symptoms of various inflammatory diseases, they also put users at greater risk of serious and even deadly infections and cancers.

In that case it is well known what the drugs does and the potential hazard it presents.

Abilify

https://nami.org/About-Mental-Illness/Treatments/Mental-Health-Medications/Types-of-Medication/Aripiprazole-(Abilify)

Quote

Aripiprazole may increase the blood levels of a hormone called prolactin. Side effects of increased prolactin levels include females losing their period, production of breast milk and males losing their sex drive or possibly experiencing erectile problems. Long term (months or years) of elevated prolactin can lead to osteoporosis or increased risk of bone fractures.

Some people may develop muscle-related side effects while taking aripiprazole. The technical terms for these are “extrapyramidal symptoms” (EPS) and “tardive dyskinesia” (TD). Symptoms of EPS include restlessness, tremor, and stiffness. TD symptoms include slow or jerky movements that one cannot control, often starting in the mouth with tongue rolling or chewing movements.

Temperature regulation: Impaired core body temperature regulation may occur; caution with strenuous exercise, heat exposure, and dehydration.

That was listed under rare conditions.

Praxada

https://www.drugs.com/sfx/pradaxa-side-effects.html

Quote

Rare

  • Chest pain, discomfort, or tightness
  • cough
  • difficulty with swallowing
  • dizziness
  • fainting or loss of consciousness
  • fast or irregular breathing
  • pain or discomfort in the arms, jaw, back, or neck
  • puffiness or swelling of the eyelids or around the eyes, face, lips, or tongue
  • redness of the skin
  • skin rash, hives, welts, or itching skin
  • sweating
  • trouble breathing
  • unusual tiredness or weakness

Notice again this is rare yet wen considering a vaccine you speculated with values in the common range.

Your summation is compare one cause of death with another. Why even bring up the drug hazard issue since the drugs kill less people than CVD does in a week?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Post it? So you can completely ignore it again?

Fact- A court had to force this companies own findings of safety studies out to the public. Of which we are still getting the information. They wanted them sealed till we were dead.
 

Fact- in those studies it describes many horrible side effects. Well over 1000. 
 

Fact- me pointing this absolute truth out is not a conspiracy. Not a “prediction” and lastly had nothing to do with any other vaccine. 
 

You thinking oh everything is just wonderful. No one is suffering these sides effects the company it’s self was forced to reveal to us, then YOU are the conspiracy theorist. 

The court ordered the release of the raw data, not the safety studies which were released.

And here is a lie "many horrible side effects. Well over 1000." - there were no horrible side effects.

Again you need to be truthful.

Edited by stereologist
clarity
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, stereologist said:

Vaccines protect people that cannot be vaccinated. There are lots of people with suppressed immune systems. These are people such as transplant recipients, and cancer patients.

You speculate that a vaccine might induce a rather high number of problems. What if it was 0.0001% bone cancer increase? There certainly isn't evidence of that or infertility is there? You did link to an article which did not state the risks involved. Let's see what we can learn about some of those drugs

Humira

https://www.drugwatch.com/humira/warnings/

In that case it is well known what the drugs does and the potential hazard it presents.

Abilify

https://nami.org/About-Mental-Illness/Treatments/Mental-Health-Medications/Types-of-Medication/Aripiprazole-(Abilify)

That was listed under rare conditions.

Praxada

https://www.drugs.com/sfx/pradaxa-side-effects.html

Notice again this is rare yet wen considering a vaccine you speculated with values in the common range.

Your summation is compare one cause of death with another. Why even bring up the drug hazard issue since the drugs kill less people than CVD does in a week?

Valdecoxib (Bextra) 

Maker:  Pfizer

Recalled:  In 2005 (after just one year on the market)

Financial damage:  Over USD$2 billion in legal awards and expenses.

Bextra, like Vioxx, is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that was prescribed to treat arthritis and pain from other inflammatory disorders.  It was removed from the market not long after Vioxx over similar concerns – increased risk of heart attack and stroke.  In some cases, it was also found to cause a fatal skin condition.  Although less publicized and the subject of fewer law suits, Bextra still resulted in USD$1.8 billion in legal awards against Pfizer and its subsidiary Pharamcia & UpJohn (not including expenses).  The reason Bextra is on this list, however, is because it gave rise to one of the largest criminal fines ever imposed in the US.  Pharmacia & UpJohn Company were fined USD$1.195 billion, in addition to legal awards, after admitting to criminal wrongdoing, specifically with ‘intent to defraud or mislead’ in relation to the promotion of the drug. 

 

Rofecoxib (Vioxx)

Maker:  Merck

Recalled:  2004 (after five years on the market)

Financial damage:  Nearly USD$6 billion in litigation-related expenses alone.

Vioxx is considered to be the largest drug recall in history, and one that elicited one of the greatest public outcries.  Vioxx, prescribed to more than 20 million people as a pain reliever for arthritis, was found to be responsible for increased risk of heart attack and stroke.  Both Merck and the FDA were roundly criticized for ignoring evidence of the dangers of Vioxx before its eventual recall.  The Lancet reported that as many as 140,000 people could have suffered from serious coronary heart disease from taking the drug in the US alone.  Merck settled Vioxx litigation in the US for USD$4.8 billion, with close to USD$1 billion in legal expenses.

 

 Terfenadine (Seldane)

Maker:  Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Aventis)

Recalled:  1997 (after 13 years on the market)

Financial damage:  Seldane was a big moneymaker for Hoechst Marion Roussel for such a long period (the year before it was pulled, it sold USD$440 million worth of Terfenadine worldwide).  In addition to its legal expenses, the loss of market share alone to drugs such as Loratadine (Claritin) was steep.

Seldane was a popular antihistamine brought to market in 1985 to treat allergies without causing drowsiness.  The FDA sought a recall from the manufacturer after cases of cardiac arrhythmia (abnormal electrical activity in the heart) appeared in patients taking Seldane with other drugs.  The recall is notable mostly for its scale; more than 100 million patients worldwide used Terfenandine as of 1990.  Following Seldane’s recall, Hoechst was able to mitigate its damages to some degree by introducing Allegra, a drug very similar to Seldane but without its side effects.

 

 

Fenfluramine/*spam filter* (Fen-Phen)

Maker:  Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories

Recalled:  1997 (after 24 years on the market)

Financial damage:  Awards to victims close to USD$14 billion, making it one of the most costly products liability cases in history.

Fen-Phen’s was a hugely popular weight loss drug, its popularity peaking in the 1990s.  It is estimated that as many as 6.5 million people took it to help fight obesity.  After consumers began experiencing heart disease and other pulmonary problems, the FDA set the recall in motion.  American Lawyer reported that more than 50,000 Fen-Phen victims have filed suits against Fen-Phen’s maker Wyeth, and legal expenses combined with awards may have exceeded USD$21 billion.  Lengthy time in the marketplace combined with the severity of both the public reaction and the significant awards granted to its victims make its impact unprecedented.

 

https://www.medicalerroraustralia.com/medical-disasters/10-worst-drug-recalls-in-history/

Edited by Fraust
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fraust said:

Valdecoxib (Bextra) 

Maker:  Pfizer

Recalled:  In 2005 (after just one year on the market)

Financial damage:  Over USD$2 billion in legal awards and expenses.

Bextra, like Vioxx, is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug that was prescribed to treat arthritis and pain from other inflammatory disorders.  It was removed from the market not long after Vioxx over similar concerns – increased risk of heart attack and stroke.  In some cases, it was also found to cause a fatal skin condition.  Although less publicized and the subject of fewer law suits, Bextra still resulted in USD$1.8 billion in legal awards against Pfizer and its subsidiary Pharamcia & UpJohn (not including expenses).  The reason Bextra is on this list, however, is because it gave rise to one of the largest criminal fines ever imposed in the US.  Pharmacia & UpJohn Company were fined USD$1.195 billion, in addition to legal awards, after admitting to criminal wrongdoing, specifically with ‘intent to defraud or mislead’ in relation to the promotion of the drug. 

 

Rofecoxib (Vioxx)

Maker:  Merck

Recalled:  2004 (after five years on the market)

Financial damage:  Nearly USD$6 billion in litigation-related expenses alone.

Vioxx is considered to be the largest drug recall in history, and one that elicited one of the greatest public outcries.  Vioxx, prescribed to more than 20 million people as a pain reliever for arthritis, was found to be responsible for increased risk of heart attack and stroke.  Both Merck and the FDA were roundly criticized for ignoring evidence of the dangers of Vioxx before its eventual recall.  The Lancet reported that as many as 140,000 people could have suffered from serious coronary heart disease from taking the drug in the US alone.  Merck settled Vioxx litigation in the US for USD$4.8 billion, with close to USD$1 billion in legal expenses.

 

 Terfenadine (Seldane)

Maker:  Hoechst Marion Roussel (now Aventis)

Recalled:  1997 (after 13 years on the market)

Financial damage:  Seldane was a big moneymaker for Hoechst Marion Roussel for such a long period (the year before it was pulled, it sold USD$440 million worth of Terfenadine worldwide).  In addition to its legal expenses, the loss of market share alone to drugs such as Loratadine (Claritin) was steep.

Seldane was a popular antihistamine brought to market in 1985 to treat allergies without causing drowsiness.  The FDA sought a recall from the manufacturer after cases of cardiac arrhythmia (abnormal electrical activity in the heart) appeared in patients taking Seldane with other drugs.  The recall is notable mostly for its scale; more than 100 million patients worldwide used Terfenandine as of 1990.  Following Seldane’s recall, Hoechst was able to mitigate its damages to some degree by introducing Allegra, a drug very similar to Seldane but without its side effects.

 

 

Fenfluramine/*spam filter* (Fen-Phen)

Maker:  Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories

Recalled:  1997 (after 24 years on the market)

Financial damage:  Awards to victims close to USD$14 billion, making it one of the most costly products liability cases in history.

Fen-Phen’s was a hugely popular weight loss drug, its popularity peaking in the 1990s.  It is estimated that as many as 6.5 million people took it to help fight obesity.  After consumers began experiencing heart disease and other pulmonary problems, the FDA set the recall in motion.  American Lawyer reported that more than 50,000 Fen-Phen victims have filed suits against Fen-Phen’s maker Wyeth, and legal expenses combined with awards may have exceeded USD$21 billion.  Lengthy time in the marketplace combined with the severity of both the public reaction and the significant awards granted to its victims make its impact unprecedented.

 

https://www.medicalerroraustralia.com/medical-disasters/10-worst-drug-recalls-in-history/

That's legal whatever. People can sue for anything they want to sue for and they don't even have to be right to win.

The issue is what is the hazard? What is the rate of injury? I don't see that anywhere in what you posted.

Earlier you speculated on 5% and 10% hazards. I doubt that even these items you listed exceed the 0.001% hazard rate. The first one sounds like it might be in the range of 0.00001%. Vioxx might be as high as 0.7%. Then there is Seldane which had problems with drug interactions. That was discovered because drugs are monitored after they are made available to the public.

And nowhere did you show that these drugs in anyway were deadlier than a single day pf COVID-19.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Fraust said:

If you get the vaccine, you're protected....so why do you care about someone else? 

Because I know a lot of people with pre-existing conditions who are in actual danger 

IMO, if an anti vaxer have them Covid and they died, that anti vaxer should be held responsible for their deaths. 

Bet your not confident enough in the unintelligent anti vax tirade to accept such terms. Anti vaxers don't stand behind their claims and accept no accountability. They are just people letting the community down for selfish reasons.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Post it? So you can completely ignore it again?

No, I'm asking you to actually post from the study itself. Not opinions or fear mongering for halfwits like Rogan. Not ant back lists like Malone. The actual study. 

15 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Fact- A court had to force this companies own findings of safety studies out to the public. Of which we are still getting the information. They wanted them sealed till we were dead.

Irrelevant. 

The request was denied. 

15 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Fact- in those studies it describes many horrible side effects. Well over 1000. 

Outright BS. 

Side effects include headaches and fever. Myocarditis was the biggest threat which was greater with Covid.

15 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

Fact- me pointing this absolute truth out is not a conspiracy. Not a “prediction” and lastly had nothing to do with any other vaccine. 
 

Yes it is. Hospitals were filled with Covid patients. Millions upon millions have acted responsibly and took the jab.

Hospitals are now coping. They are not filled with people suffering side effects from those jabs.

Have you ever thought of what is actually happening in the world? Look around. 

15 hours ago, preacherman76 said:

You thinking oh everything is just wonderful. No one is suffering these sides effects the company it’s self was forced to reveal to us, then YOU are the conspiracy theorist. 

The people who are suffering are suffering from long covid. You let your community down and don't like that being pointed out to you. The pandemic is the very, Covid is under control. All you have done is illustrate how wrong you have been every step of the way. You should be feeling remorse instead of still pushing what anyone can now see was total BS. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stereologist said:

That's legal whatever. People can sue for anything they want to sue for and they don't even have to be right to win.

The issue is what is the hazard? What is the rate of injury? I don't see that anywhere in what you posted.

Earlier you speculated on 5% and 10% hazards. I doubt that even these items you listed exceed the 0.001% hazard rate. The first one sounds like it might be in the range of 0.00001%. Vioxx might be as high as 0.7%. Then there is Seldane which had problems with drug interactions. That was discovered because drugs are monitored after they are made available to the public.

And nowhere did you show that these drugs in anyway were deadlier than a single day pf COVID-19.

 

 

We don't KNOW what the long term effects of the vaccine are, they could be anything. I would rather risk getting covid twice and survive, like I did, because I'm outside any of the high risk demographics,  Than have a chance at almost doubling risk of heart disease (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3231534/  Abstract of risk from Fenfluramine) which I am at high risk of already due to my occupation.  I should be allowed to choose my OWN risks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Fraust said:

We don't KNOW what the long term effects of the vaccine are, they could be anything.

Or nothing. 

What you need is an actual reason to think there will be side effects. 

That's what you don't have. Just a paranoid personal view. 

What we do know is Covid itself not only has long term effects but has a reduced risk of myocarditis compared with Covid cases! You're actually dismissing known long term effects for fictional ones! 

46 minutes ago, Fraust said:

I would rather risk getting covid twice and survive, like I did, because I'm outside any of the high risk demographics,  Than have a chance at almost doubling risk of heart disease

Your community can tell you that you suck then. 

The high transmission rate is the concern. You might be fine but some you infect won't be. That should be tracked and you should be held accountable for anyone you infected through your choice. 

If you infected someone through your own negligence and they died, IMHO, you should be charged with manslaughter. 

46 minutes ago, Fraust said:

 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3231534/  Abstract of risk from Fenfluramine) which I am at high risk of already due to my occupation.  I should be allowed to choose my OWN risks. 

Why, are you exposed to high levels *spam filter* as well, and if so what has that got to do with the available vaccines? 

Sounds more like a health and safety issue. 

You don't get to choose risks for your community. You should do the right thing and leave it if your beliefs put them at risk. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Because I know a lot of people with pre-existing conditions who are in actual danger 

IMO, if an anti vaxer have them Covid and they died, that anti vaxer should be held responsible for their deaths. 

Bet your not confident enough in the unintelligent anti vax tirade to accept such terms. Anti vaxers don't stand behind their claims and accept no accountability. They are just people letting the community down for selfish reasons.

I'm not an antivaxxer at all. I have all the vaccines that were required for school and my daughter has all her TDAP vaccines. The covid vaccine simply doesn't have enough of a pedigree for me to be confident it wont cause worse problems down the road.  You need to stop equating people that have concerns with this issue with anti vax morons. When anyone says "oh you must be an anti vaxxer because you don't think it's safe to take this rushed vaccine that's been out less than 2 years", they look like an idiot and a troll.  And in your estimation, should anyone whom didn't get a flu vaccine be culpable in someone's death as well?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

Or nothing. 

What you need is an actual reason to think there will be side effects. 

That's what you don't have. Just a paranoid personal view. 

What we do know is Covid itself not only has long term effects but has a reduced risk of myocarditis compared with Covid cases! You're actually dismissing known long term effects for fictional ones! 

Your community can tell you that you suck then. 

The high transmission rate is the concern. You might be fine but some you infect won't be. That should be tracked and you should be held accountable for anyone you infected through your choice. 

If you infected someone through your own negligence and they died, IMHO, you should be charged with manslaughter. 

Why, are you exposed to high levels *spam filter* as well, and if so what has that got to do with the available vaccines? 

Sounds more like a health and safety issue. 

You don't get to choose risks for your community. You should do the right thing and leave it if your beliefs put them at risk. 

So why does it make ANY sense to mandate the majority of the population that roughly half of disagree with, than to mandate the small percentage of immuno compromised individuals be extra careful? "Hey, these 50 million people are at risk, so lets force these 160 million to take a shot that they don't want to." This makes no practical sense and it will be interesting to see if there end up being ANY long term health consequences to the shots or boosters, whom will be held responsible, 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/7/2022 at 1:35 AM, and then said:

...If a massive campaign of civil disobedience is employed, they will have NO WAY to enforce their tyranny...

I've done my part, by not getting those Clot Shots and then catching the Coof myself. I got through it and didn't tell any authority. In which case, it didn't show up on their statistics.

Since this biological weapon was produced in China, allegedly under western supervision, the best way to combat future assaults of this kind would be to boycott the junk and tainted foodstuffs of which are forced upon us from there, initiated by Nixon's inclusive to world trade policy of which opened the way to both intellectual and physical outsourcing. The motive being the attempted concealing of factual monetary inflation caused by detaching the $ from the Gold Standard

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fraust said:

I'm not an antivaxxer at all. I have all the vaccines that were required for school and my daughter has all her TDAP vaccines.

Your school doesn't require Covid vaccines? 

What's the difference between you and any other anti vaxer regarding your reason for refusing the Covid vaccines?

1 hour ago, Fraust said:

The covid vaccine simply doesn't have enough of a pedigree for me to be confident it wont cause worse problems down the road. 

What nonsense. Another who doesn't know mRNA vaccine's have been in trials for over a decade now. The mRNA Covid vaccine is derived from earlier attempts at treating SARS related illnesses. Ten years ago it was attempted on cancer. 

And not all vaccinations are mRNA based. Astra Zennica is a traditional style of vaccine based on dead and dying cells. Only phizer and Moderna are mRNA vaccine's. There's a choice.

1 hour ago, Fraust said:

You need to stop equating people that have concerns with this issue with anti vax morons.

I'm not seeing the difference myself. 

1 hour ago, Fraust said:

When anyone says "oh you must be an anti vaxxer because you don't think it's safe to take this rushed vaccine that's been out less than 2 years", they look like an idiot and a troll. 

No, they look informed enough to know that all vaccines are not mRNA based and that mRNA treatments aren't new..

1 hour ago, Fraust said:

And in your estimation, should anyone whom didn't get a flu vaccine be culpable in someone's death as well?  

If it's as transmissible and puts the same pressure on hospitals and funeral homes of course. Silly question really. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fraust said:

So why does it make ANY sense to mandate the majority of the population that roughly half of disagree with, than to mandate the small percentage of immuno compromised individuals be extra careful? "Hey, these 50 million people are at risk, so lets force these 160 million to take a shot that they don't want to." This makes no practical sense and it will be interesting to see if there end up being ANY long term health consequences to the shots or boosters, whom will be held responsible, 

Do you understand Covid at all? 

The transmission rate is extraordinarily high. One person can easily infect another thirty. You're negligence may well have led to a death. Tracing should be better so that the relatives of anyone you infected can come see you and explain to you whom you took from them. 

If you're one of the fifty million with your life in actual danger, I have little doubt you would revise your outlook. 

That's why it makes sense. The fifty million. You don't get to choose who loves and ego dies. 

Show any good reason to illustrate why there is a risk of long term effects. It's something your just making up. What's ironic is ignoring that long covid is a very real long term effect that is confirmed. 

Your still ignoring a real long term condition for a fictional one in your head that doesn't actually exist. You're just scared it might exist. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Fraust said:

We don't KNOW what the long term effects of the vaccine are, they could be anything. I would rather risk getting covid twice and survive, like I did, because I'm outside any of the high risk demographics,  Than have a chance at almost doubling risk of heart disease (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3231534/  Abstract of risk from Fenfluramine) which I am at high risk of already due to my occupation.  I should be allowed to choose my OWN risks. 

Actually you are not. ALL people that get COVID-19 are at an elevated risk of cardiovascular complications for up to one year. It may be longer, but the study had one year of patient data to use. This applies to asymptomatic cases as well.

The article you linked to has no bearing on anything in this discussion.

There is no known long term risks with the vaccine. All of the drugs you posted were expected to pose a risk.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Fraust said:

I'm not an antivaxxer at all. I have all the vaccines that were required for school and my daughter has all her TDAP vaccines. The covid vaccine simply doesn't have enough of a pedigree for me to be confident it wont cause worse problems down the road.  You need to stop equating people that have concerns with this issue with anti vax morons. When anyone says "oh you must be an anti vaxxer because you don't think it's safe to take this rushed vaccine that's been out less than 2 years", they look like an idiot and a troll.  And in your estimation, should anyone whom didn't get a flu vaccine be culpable in someone's death as well?  

Your stance on the COVID-19 vaccine is a typical anti vaxxer stance.

This vaccine was not rushed. That's just people not knowing how technology has advanced in this area in the last decade. The other vaccines had people lined up taking the shots with almost the same testing.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Fraust said:

So why does it make ANY sense to mandate the majority of the population that roughly half of disagree with, than to mandate the small percentage of immuno compromised individuals be extra careful? "Hey, these 50 million people are at risk, so lets force these 160 million to take a shot that they don't want to." This makes no practical sense and it will be interesting to see if there end up being ANY long term health consequences to the shots or boosters, whom will be held responsible, 

And what about those that refuse shots and end up with COPD, kidney failure, liver disease, CVD, and other injuries from COVID-19?

Should I have to help pay for their medical expenses?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2022 at 7:33 PM, preacherman76 said:

Fact- A court had to force this companies own findings of safety studies out to the public. Of which we are still getting the information. They wanted them sealed till we were dead.

False.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2022 at 10:47 PM, Fraust said:

I'm not an antivaxxer at all. I have all the vaccines that were required for school and my daughter has all her TDAP vaccines. The covid vaccine simply doesn't have enough of a pedigree for me to be confident it wont cause worse problems down the road.  You need to stop equating people that have concerns with this issue with anti vax morons. When anyone says "oh you must be an anti vaxxer because you don't think it's safe to take this rushed vaccine that's been out less than 2 years", they look like an idiot and a troll.  And in your estimation, should anyone whom didn't get a flu vaccine be culpable in someone's death as well?  

MRNA Vaccine were being worked on since 2015 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25620012/ try doing research before making such bold claims.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Scholar4Truth said:

MRNA Vaccine were being worked on since 2015 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25620012/ try doing research before making such bold claims.

It was even earlier. First recognised in the 60s and the first mRNA flu vaccines were trialled on mice in the 1990s.

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7831080/

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Scholar4Truth said:

MRNA Vaccine were being worked on since 2015 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25620012/ try doing research before making such bold claims.

And don't forget to look up the side effects, they always have to list the most common side effects.  Think about that after you read them.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 6/7/2022 at 5:22 PM, stereologist said:

And what about those that refuse shots and end up with COPD, kidney failure, liver disease, CVD, and other injuries from COVID-19?

Should I have to help pay for their medical expenses?

Those who are responsible for participating in commerce with COVID's country of origin should be forced to pay from their own personal wealth and not from that of their corporate entities, where that may apply.

Instead of forcing vaccines and Cuck Muzzles upon us, they should instead be meticulously controlling travel.

Why is it that a new strain has morphed from across the Earth, just short of it finding its way here?

Edited by Autistocrates
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/6/2022 at 7:54 PM, stevemagegod said:

If you worked for the Federal Government you didn’t have a Choice. If you worked for a Company with over 100 people, you didn’t have a Choice. 

So... job-related.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Autistocrates said:

Instead of forcing vaccines and Cuck Muzzles upon us, they should instead be meticulously controlling travel.

What do you suggest be put in place for travel control, then?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Remotely measuring the temperature of airport arrivals, using infrared-detecting cameras, like they do in China. Mandatory quarantining for those who fail a 24 hour COVID test, for the remaining passengers.

Consequential control of both national maritime and land boundaries

Edited by Autistocrates
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.