COVID Vaccine!

[Jag]

These fawks couldnt cure a ham. Ill wait to shoot zombies and figure it out later.

 

[trampas]

Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine. They are using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine. This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards. And the vaccine specifically has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it and it also has to disrupt transmission. And that is not what this is. They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop the transmission, it is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities because then people would say “what other treatments are there?“ The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable for both the legal definition and also it is actually the sucker punch to open and free discourse… Moderna was started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARSCOV2. If we said we are going to give people prophylactic chemotherapy for the cancer they don’t yet have, we’d be laughed out of the room because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is. This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small package of technology that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site. And I refuse to stipulate in any conversations that this is in fact a vaccine issue. The only reason why the term is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobson case that has been misrepresented since it was written. And if we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It is a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, it is not a biologic system, it is a physical technology - it happens to just come in the size of a molecular package. So we need to be really clear on making sure we don’t fall for their game. Because their game is if we talk about it as a vaccine then we are going to get into a vaccine conversation but this is not, by their own admission, a vaccine. As a result it must be clear to everyone listening that we will not fall for this failed definition just like we will not fall for their industrial chemical definition of health. Both of them are functionally flawed and are an implicit violation of the legal construct that is being exploited. I get frustrated when I hear activists and lawyers say “we are going to fight the vaccine”. If you stipulate it’s a vaccine you’ve already lost the battle. It’s not a vaccine. It is made to make you sick… 80% of the people exposed to SARSCOV2 are asymptomatic carriers. 80% of people who get this injected into them experience a clinical adverse event. You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce an immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you from transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.

When the paymaster for the distribution of information happens to be the industry that’s doing the distributing, we lose. Because the only narrative is the one that will be compensated by the people writing the check. That goes for our politicians… and our media - it has been paid for - if you follow the money you realize there is no non-conflicted voice on any network.

 

[Tech Tim]

Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine. They are using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine. This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards. And the vaccine specifically has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it and it also has to disrupt transmission. And that is not what this is. They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop the transmission, it is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities because then people would say “what other treatments are there?“ The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable for both the legal definition and also it is actually the sucker punch to open and free discourse… Moderna was started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARSCOV2. If we said we are going to give people prophylactic chemotherapy for the cancer they don’t yet have, we’d be laughed out of the room because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is. This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small package of technology that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site. And I refuse to stipulate in any conversations that this is in fact a vaccine issue. The only reason why the term is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobson case that has been misrepresented since it was written. And if we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It is a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, it is not a biologic system, it is a physical technology - it happens to just come in the size of a molecular package. So we need to be really clear on making sure we don’t fall for their game. Because their game is if we talk about it as a vaccine then we are going to get into a vaccine conversation but this is not, by their own admission, a vaccine. As a result it must be clear to everyone listening that we will not fall for this failed definition just like we will not fall for their industrial chemical definition of health. Both of them are functionally flawed and are an implicit violation of the legal construct that is being exploited. I get frustrated when I hear activists and lawyers say “we are going to fight the vaccine”. If you stipulate it’s a vaccine you’ve already lost the battle. It’s not a vaccine. It is made to make you sick… 80% of the people exposed to SARSCOV2 are asymptomatic carriers. 80% of people who get this injected into them experience a clinical adverse event. You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce an immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you from transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.

When the paymaster for the distribution of information happens to be the industry that’s doing the distributing, we lose. Because the only narrative is the one that will be compensated by the people writing the check. That goes for our politicians… and our media - it has been paid for - if you follow the money you realize there is no non-conflicted voice on any network.

Well said.

Are these your words Trampas or a cut and past?

If cut and paste, where from?

 

[trampas]

Well said.

Are these your words Trampas or a cut and past?

If cut and paste, where from?

Copy pasta. It's an email sent to me from Germany, via a Dr I don't know that name of. Nice piece without apparent opine... but i don't know of the actual source.

 

[Tech Tim]

Thanks, did some searching and found it:

It is not a vaccine: https://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bi...gi?read=162489


DR DAVID MARTIN unleashed MAJOR TRUTH BOMBS about the so-called COVID "vaccine" that is really a MEDICAL DEVICE to induce ILLNESS

 

[trampas]

Sure enough! Very good read.

 

[Mattafact]

Getting my VACCINE tomorrow morning. Will report any and all side effects.

 

[grumpy356]

Getting my VACCINE tomorrow morning. Will report any and all side effects.

We’ve seen The Walking Dead. We know the side effects.

 

[Donk]

So is the Oxford/AstraZeneca one a vaccine? It's not mRNA but not a traditional viral vaccine either. It's a known virus (adenovirus) that is genetically modified to simulate aspects of Covid 19 to trigger an appropriate immune response while all it's own self replication information has turned off.

 

[Mattafact]

Got the vaccine. They watched me for 15 minutes to make sure there was no allergic reaction. Feel good so far. We'll see what happens.

 

[MattS]

Wife's office just got 2k doses so she's in line for next week. I guess telling her if she pulls a walking dead on me she can pick the object I use wasn't what she wanted to hear. My real question that no one can answer is, if you get the shot (I'm not calling it what it is not) can you throw the mask away? I mean that's the whole fucking point right? I told her to ask HR and tell them she's fine with getting it but then she will not be wearing a mask. You don't get both. Will see where this goes.

 

[Weasel]

2nd dose received yesterday. Cruddy feeling but that's it so far. About the same throughout the facility, no side effects.

 

[Mattafact]

My real question that no one can answer is, if you get the shot (I'm not calling it what it is not) can you throw the mask away? I mean that's the whole fucking point right?

Even with the shot the masks stay unfortunately. My guess is that they haven't done enough research to conclude that you don't need a mask after being vaccinated.

From a researcher's point of view conducting a study like that would be difficult to get through the IRB process as you would be asking half your study population to potentially put themselves in harm's way and that wouldn't fly from an ethical perspective.

The only way to determine if we don't need a mask is to do some type of survey where the patients are asked if they were wearing a mask when they contracted COVID. That would be really difficult because of biases though.

It's going to be years before we have good data on this.

 

[Cod]

Wife's office just got 2k doses so she's in line for next week. I guess telling her if she pulls a walking dead on me she can pick the object I use wasn't what she wanted to hear. My real question that no one can answer is, if you get the shot (I'm not calling it what it is not) can you throw the mask away? I mean that's the whole fucking point right? I told her to ask HR and tell them she's fine with getting it but then she will not be wearing a mask. You don't get both. Will see where this goes.

Don't remember who said it, Fauci maybe, but no they still want to see the public wear a mask.

 

[Mattafact]

Got the vaccine. They watched me for 15 minutes to make sure there was no allergic reaction. Feel good so far. We'll see what happens.

Quoting myself. It's been more than 24 hours and the main side effect is a sore arm. I have some fatigue but I didn't sleep well so I can't say one way or another if it's the mask or all that USDA Prime Ribeye roast we smoked and ate last night.

 

[Ryno]

Wife is vaccinated now (Pfizer), zero side effects on the first round. She's in health care, wears a mask and face shield 8+ hours a day. I can't see the mask mandates going away until the end of this year at the earliest.

 

[MattS]

Even with the shot the masks stay unfortunately. My guess is that they haven't done enough research to conclude that you don't need a mask after being vaccinated.

From a researcher's point of view conducting a study like that would be difficult to get through the IRB process as you would be asking half your study population to potentially put themselves in harm's way and that wouldn't fly from an ethical perspective.

The only way to determine if we don't need a mask is to do some type of survey where the patients are asked if they were wearing a mask when they contracted COVID. That would be really difficult because of biases though.

It's going to be years before we have good data on this.

Then why take the shot? There is no reason to take it if the mask I still have to wear works so well. We don't need a study to prove anything. Let the public be the active study. If I get the shot so I can't get Covid there is no way in hell that I'm wearing a mask. It makes zero sense. I also don't need to wear it to keep others safe because I can't get it or transmit it.

 

[Tech Tim]

Wife's office just got 2k doses so she's in line for next week. I guess telling her if she pulls a walking dead on me she can pick the object I use wasn't what she wanted to hear.

That is awesome, going to use that on my wife....

My real question that no one can answer is, if you get the shot (I'm not calling it what it is not) can you throw the mask away? I mean that's the whole fucking point right? I told her to ask HR and tell them she's fine with getting it but then she will not be wearing a mask. You don't get both. Will see where this goes.

Even with the shot the masks stay unfortunately. My guess is that they haven't done enough research to conclude that you don't need a mask after being vaccinated.

.

Trampas' quote from last page:

Written by Dr. David Martin

Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine.

They are using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions.

This is not a vaccine. This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator.

It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards. And the vaccine specifically has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it and it also has to disrupt transmission. And that is not what this is.

They have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop the transmission, it is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities because then people would say “what other treatments are there?“

The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable for both the legal definition and also it is actually the sucker punch to open and free discourse… Moderna was started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARSCOV2. If we said we are going to give people prophylactic chemotherapy for the cancer they don’t yet have, we’d be laughed out of the room because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is. This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small package of technology that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site. And I refuse to stipulate in any conversations that this is in fact a vaccine issue.

The only reason why the term is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobson case that has been misrepresented since it was written. And if we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It is a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, it is not a biologic system, it is a physical technology - it happens to just come in the size of a molecular package.

So we need to be really clear on making sure we don’t fall for their game. Because their game is if we talk about it as a vaccine then we are going to get into a vaccine conversation but this is not, by their own admission, a vaccine.

As a result it must be clear to everyone listening that we will not fall for this failed definition just like we will not fall for their industrial chemical definition of health. Both of them are functionally flawed and are an implicit violation of the legal construct that is being exploited. I get frustrated when I hear activists and lawyers say “we are going to fight the vaccine”. If you stipulate it’s a vaccine you’ve already lost the battle. It’s not a vaccine. It is made to make you sick… 80% of the people exposed to SARSCOV2 are asymptomatic carriers. 80% of people who get this injected into them experience a clinical adverse event.

You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce an immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you from transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.

When the paymaster for the distribution of information happens to be the industry that’s doing the distributing, we lose. Because the only narrative is the one that will be compensated by the people writing the check. That goes for our politicians… and our media - it has been paid for - if you follow the money you realize there is no non-conflicted voice on any network.


DR DAVID MARTIN unleashed MAJOR TRUTH BOMBS about the so-called COVID "vaccine" that is really a MEDICAL DEVICE to induce ILLNESS:
https://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bi...gi?read=162489

It's not a vaccine, it doesn't stimulate the immune system, nor does it disrupt transmission, so no, they are not going to stop the mask mandate anytime soon.

Don't remember who said it, Fauci maybe, but no they still want to see the public wear a mask.

The mask isn't about the virus, never has been, the mask is about control.

 

[Weasel]

oh snap this 1 guy figured out this amazing trick..........:rolleyes:

 

[trampas]

Then why take the shot? There is no reason to take it if the mask I still have to wear works so well. We don't need a study to prove anything. Let the public be the active study. If I get the shot so I can't get Covid there is no way in hell that I'm wearing a mask. It makes zero sense. I also don't need to wear it to keep others safe because I can't get it or transmit it.

But does a vaccination shot prevent you from being a host? And then a carrier, vis a vis still a transmission point.

Letting the public be "the active study" would only fly in a microcosm scenario. A worldwide pandemic not so fast.

Brazil is all but fucked. The mandates for mask wearing are not very well enforced - I don't know the details but they're right behind us... of being fucked.

 

[MattS]

But does a vaccination shot prevent you from being a host? And then a carrier, vis a vis still a transmission point.

Letting the public be "the active study" would only fly in a microcosm scenario. A worldwide pandemic not so fast.

Brazil is all but fucked. The mandates for mask wearing are not very well enforced - I don't know the details but they're right behind us... of being fucked.

Then why is Florida not on the top of the list? They have no state wide mask mandate. But yet they are 3rd. A state full of old people and a destination spot for thousands. They should be #1 by a huge margin. Cali is #1 NY is #4.

https://www.tallahassee.com/story/n...a-florida-1-million-total-numbers/6476351002/

 

[SurfnSnow]

Got shot #1 this morning of the Moderna shot since I work in health care and besides a bit of a sore arm, not feeling anything else side affect wise.

 

[vetteboy79]

Question.

I see a bunch of people gleefully posting pictures holding this card, with all the information filled out on it.

Is this used for anything but personal satisfaction/knowledge? Seems awfully easy to counterfeit.

 

[Tech Tim]

Question.

I see a bunch of people gleefully posting pictures holding this card, with all the information filled out on it.

Is this used for anything but personal satisfaction/knowledge? Seems awfully easy to counterfeit.

It's all about the virtual signaling (aka brain washing) to make people want to get the card to show off how virtuous they are. One step closer...

 

[rockota]

Covid death rate is going to plummet starting 1/21....

the flu and pneumonia will come back, but Covid will drop.

 

[Tech Tim]

Highly doubt it. It has proven to be a very useful tool and they're not done yet.

 

[MattS]

Should be single soon. Anyone know if Gina is still single?

 

[bigun]

https://www.theepochtimes.com/55-pe...dium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-01-16-3

55 People Died in US After Receiving COVID-19 Vaccines: Reporting System


BY ZACHARY STIEBER

January 16, 2021 Updated: January 16, 2021
biggersmaller
Print
Fifty-five people in the United States have died after receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, according to reports submitted to a federal system.

Deaths have occurred among people receiving both the Moderna and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines, according to the reports.

The reporting system, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), is a federal database. The system is passive, meaning reports aren’t automatically collected and must be filed. VAERS reports can be filed by anyone, including health care providers, patients, or family members.

VAERS reports “often lack details and sometimes can have information that contains errors,” according to the reporting system’s website. Still, reports on VAERS represent “only a small fraction of actual adverse events,” the site states, though underreporting is believed to be less common for serious events.

In some cases, patients died within days of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.

One man, a 66-year-old senior home resident in Colorado, was sleepy and stayed in bed a day after getting Moderna’s vaccine. Early the next morning, on Christmas Day, the resident “was observed in bed lying still, pale, eyes half open and foam coming from mouth and unresponsive,” the VAERS report states. “He was not breathing and with no pulse.”

In another case, a 93-year-old South Dakota man was injected with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on Jan. 4 around 11 a.m. About two hours later, he said he was tired and couldn’t continue with the physical therapy he was doing any longer. He was taken back to his room, where he said his legs felt heavy. Soon after, he stopped breathing. A nurse declared a do-not-resuscitate order.

Moderna and Pfizer didn’t respond to requests for comment. Abigail Capobianco, a spokeswoman for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), told The Epoch Times via email, “Any reports of death following the administration of vaccines are promptly and rigorously investigated jointly by FDA” and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Officials at the agencies work with health care providers to obtain medical histories and clinical follow-up information and conduct a clinical case review, she said, adding, “It is important to note that it is generally not possible to find out from VAERS data if a vaccine caused an adverse event.”

Health officials on the VAERS website caution that a report to the system doesn’t prove a vaccine caused the adverse event, and that no proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for the system to accept the report.

In addition to the deaths, people have reported 96 life-threatening events following COVID-19 vaccinations, as well as 24 permanent disabilities, 225 hospitalizations, and 1,388 emergency room visits.



Neither the CDC nor the FDA has a central database of reported adverse events. Nancy Messonnier, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said on Jan. 6 that severe allergic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines were happening at a rate of 11.1 per million vaccinations, compared to the rate of 1.3 per 1 million flu shots.

As of Jan. 15, 10.5 million Americans have received a COVID-19 vaccine. Federal health officials have said that adverse events are being investigated but that the vaccines are still safe to get.

“These are safe and effective vaccines. We have good data to show that,” Messonnier said.

One death following a vaccination attracted attention earlier this week. Gregory Michael, a 56-year-old medical worker at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami, Florida, was injected on Dec. 18, 2020. Sixteen days later, he died.

Michael’s wife Heidi Neckelmann said on Facebook that her husband was “very healthy” before being vaccinated. She said he was admitted to an intensive care unit with a diagnosis of acute idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, a blood disorder, caused by a reaction to the vaccine. He eventually passed away.

“He was a pro-vaccine advocate, that is why he got it himself,” Neckelmann wrote. “I believe that people should be aware that side effects can happen, that it is not good for everyone and in this case destroyed a beautiful life, a perfect family, and has affected so many people in the community. Do not let his death be in vain, please save more lives by making this information news.”

Pfizer told news outlets in a statement that no evidence currently shows a link between the death and its vaccine.

“Pfizer and BioNTech are aware of the death of a health care professional 16 days after receiving a first dose of BNT162b2,” Pfizer said in a statement. “It is a highly unusual clinical case of severe thrombocytopenia, a condition that decreases the body’s ability to clot blood and stop internal bleeding.”

“We are actively investigating this case, but we don’t believe at this time that there is any direct connection to the vaccine,” the company added. “There have been no related safety signals identified in our clinical trials, the post-marketing experience thus far, or with the mRNA vaccine platform. To date, millions of people have been vaccinated and we are closely monitoring all adverse events in individuals receiving our vaccine. It is important to note that serious adverse events, including deaths that are unrelated to the vaccine, are unfortunately likely to occur at a similar rate as they would in the general population.”

A Pfizer spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email earlier this month that the company “closely monitor all reports following vaccination.” Moderna hasn’t responded to requests for comment on its involvement in monitoring serious adverse events in people who get its vaccine.

The updated VAERS data came after Norway changed its COVID-19 vaccination guide to direct officials not to give “very frail” people one of the vaccines, citing 13 deaths among people who were vaccinated.

 

[Lawless]

Norway is up to 23 vaccine deaths as of this morning.

 

[trampas]

Norway is up to 23 vaccine deaths as of this morning.

WUT?