• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Which Vaccine do we Like?

coronavirus

  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

#31 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,050 posts
  • 634
  • Location:United States

Posted 26 January 2021 - 02:05 AM

She doesn't say she lost consciousness yet claims to have had CPR done on her.

 

Which story are you talking about, seems there are dozens on that page?

 

Im a little surprised by the number of people taking it early, b/c the govt says it safe.

 

 

Hank Aaron info, hard to say for sure why he died.  Interesting celebrities are being used to encourage others to take it.

 

https://visiontimes....19-vaccine.html

https://www.republic...19-vaccine.html

 

 

I found this interesting on the reporting system

American rights and environmental lawyer Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in an article posted on his website, The Defender: “Public health advocates worry that the vast majority of injuries and deaths will go unreported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the notoriously broken voluntary surveillance system run by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).”

2001 study by the Department of Health and Human Services found that “fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” As of Jan. 23, the Center for Disease Control’s (CDC) WONDER reports VAERS contains 170 life threatening events, 121 deaths, and 65 cases of permanent disability in relation to all forms of the COVID-19 vaccine.


  • Good Point x 2
  • like x 1

#32 Dorian Grey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,163 posts
  • 975
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 26 January 2021 - 09:59 PM

53 Dead in Gibraltar in 10 Days After Experimental Pfizer mRNA COVID Injections Started 

 

https://vaccineimpac...ctions-started/

 

Gibraltar is a British Colony at the southern tip of the Iberian Peninsula attached to the country of Spain. It’s population is just over 30,000 people, and it is best known for its huge “rock,” the “Rock of Gibraltar.”

I have been contacted by residents in Gibraltar stating that 53 people have died in 10 days immediately following the roll out of injections of the Pfizer mRNA COVID injections, and calling it a “massacre.”

Local media reports confirm the deaths, but blame them on COVID, and not the COVID injections.

However, prior to the roll out of the injections, it is reported that only 16 people in total died “from COVID” since the beginning of the “pandemic” about a year ago.


  • Informative x 3
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Good Point x 1
  • dislike x 1

#33 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,050 posts
  • 634
  • Location:United States

Posted 27 January 2021 - 05:04 AM

Autism and mRNA vaccine.

 

Not sure about the autism connection, but the fact this information is being blocked is truly disgusting.

 

CDC Scientist: 'We scheduled meeting to destroy vaccine-autism study documents'

 

 


Edited by Gal220, 27 January 2021 - 05:58 AM.

  • Informative x 3
  • Ill informed x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • like x 1

#34 smithx

  • Guest
  • 1,433 posts
  • 451

Posted 27 January 2021 - 06:44 AM

Since when do we post political propaganda with nothing to back it up?

 

I thought this was a science site.


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 3
  • Needs references x 1
  • like x 1

#35 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,050 posts
  • 634
  • Location:United States

Posted 27 January 2021 - 02:07 PM

Since when do we post political propaganda with nothing to back it up?

 

I thought this was a science site.

Nothing is going to change in the NIH and CDC if things continue on like this.  From the article 

 

A current Centers for Disease Control (CDC) senior scientist has made an unprecedented admission: he and his colleagues--he says-- committed scientific misconduct to cover up a meaningful link between vaccines and autism in black boys.

Just as startling, the CDC scientist, Dr. William Thompson, says the study co-authors "scheduled a meeting to destroy documents related to the study. The remaining four co-authors all met and brought a big garbage can into the meeting room, and reviewed and went through all the hardcopy documents that we had thought we should discard, and put them into a huge garbage can."

"The...co-authors...brought a big garbage can into the meeting room... [and put the documents]...into a huge garbage can." --CDC Senior Scientist Dr. William Thompson

Despite this whistleblower testimony, which Dr. Thompson provided to Rep. Bill Posey, R-Florida, there is little chance of a meaningful hearing or investigation.

 

Whether there is an autism connection or not, the information should be out there.  If the studies are flawed, explain why that is so.


Edited by Gal220, 27 January 2021 - 02:07 PM.

  • Good Point x 2
  • Ill informed x 1

#36 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 2,660 posts
  • 634
  • Location:USA

Posted 28 January 2021 - 08:14 PM

53 Dead in Gibraltar in 10 Days After Experimental Pfizer mRNA COVID Injections Started 

 

https://vaccineimpac...ctions-started/

 

Gibraltar is a British Colony at the southern tip of the Iberian Peninsula attached to the country of Spain. It’s population is just over 30,000 people, and it is best known for its huge “rock,” the “Rock of Gibraltar.”

I have been contacted by residents in Gibraltar stating that 53 people have died in 10 days immediately following the roll out of injections of the Pfizer mRNA COVID injections, and calling it a “massacre.”

Local media reports confirm the deaths, but blame them on COVID, and not the COVID injections.

However, prior to the roll out of the injections, it is reported that only 16 people in total died “from COVID” since the beginning of the “pandemic” about a year ago.

 

I'm a bit skeptical of a story like that that comes from a site called "Vaccine Impact" that quotes a blog post from another similar site.

 

They are talking about covid deaths in the first week after the vaccine was delivered to Gibraltar on Jan 9 (between Jan 9 and Jan 17th).  Now, it's normally the case that when someone dies of covid, they have been in hospital care for at least several weeks before succumbing.  So unless someone said that those deaths between the 9th and the 17th were diagnosed after the 9th and died before the 17th (which would indeed be unusual and noteworthy), my assumption would be that they were diagnosed with covid before the 9th and almost certainly would not even have received the vaccine (they will not give vaccine to someone with active covid).

 

I can tell you that all of the people that I have known that died of covid, none of them were in the hospital for less than 3 weeks. Small sample size of course.


  • Good Point x 1
  • Agree x 1

#37 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,842 posts
  • 722
  • Location:Austria

Posted 28 January 2021 - 09:13 PM

You're right, Gibraltar had a peak of 127 infections on 7th of January (7-day average), and on 17th Januay a very unique spike of 19 deaths. It now leads the world in deaths per million - with only 70 total covid-19 deaths (only 4 states in the US are still higher). https://www.worldome...ntry/gibraltar/

Edited by pamojja, 28 January 2021 - 09:13 PM.


#38 motorcitykid

  • Guest
  • 276 posts
  • 71
  • Location:New York

Posted 29 January 2021 - 05:34 AM

IMO, Inovio pharmaceuticals has the safest and most effective vaccine.

https://www.inovio.c...ients/covid-19/

 

I follow some of those enrolled in the INO covid vax trials on Instagram and they have zero side effects which backs up safety data from the study.

 

The company has been shamelessly slow walked by the FDA, halted for ludicrous reasons (NOTHING to do w/ safety or efficacy, and everything to do /w Moderna, Pfizer and Big Pharma getting their garbage to market first). Inovio is not politically connected like Moderna and Pfizer but INO's day in the sun is coming soon.(sadly, they have been shorted relentlessly by parasitic hedge funds). 

 

Utilizing DNA plasmids and an electroporation device (think Star Trek) the plasmids enter the cells. This remarkable method and also the device was developed by Inovio. After the primary injection, a slight electric jolt opens the cell just enough for the DNA plasmid to enter. Durable antibody and T-cell response.

 

No need to refrigerate this vax either. Likely to protect from mutated strains.

 

Their entire drug pipeline is DNA based!

https://www.inovio.c...cines-pipeline/

 

They are successfully treating glioblastoma, a seriously challenging and aggresive cancer. In the years to come, I believe that this little pharma company will be the Tesla of Biotech. Disruptive technology.

 

Dr. Kim has been working with DNA based systems since the 90's, the leader in the field.  He switched to working with DNA, from RNA back in the 90's saying something to the effect that working with RNA was problematic and had limitations. 

 


Edited by motorcitykid, 29 January 2021 - 06:07 AM.

  • Informative x 2
  • like x 1

#39 smithx

  • Guest
  • 1,433 posts
  • 451

Posted 31 January 2021 - 07:32 PM

IMO, Inovio pharmaceuticals has the safest and most effective vaccine.

https://www.inovio.c...ients/covid-19/

 

 

I think this is an odd statement. They have no results from phase III clinical trials so we don't actually know how effective the vaccine is. And there are a bunch of issues with Inovio DNA vaccines:

 

- They use an expensive device that nobody has yet to get the vaccine through the skin and into cells.

 

Just producing those devices, getting them out to vaccination sites, and training people on how to use them is a giant challenge.

 

-With a DNA vaccine there's the concern that the DNA could continue to express the proteins that it's encoding, forever through various  mechanisms.

 

DNA is stable, so it can keep working indefinitely in a cell and can even be replicated when the cell is replicated, potentially.

 

This is in contrast to mRNA vaccines like Moderna and Pfizer which only can produce about 150 copies of the protein per mRNA molecule before they are degraded by the cell automatically. There's also no chance that they can end up in the cell's DNA.


Edited by smithx, 31 January 2021 - 07:34 PM.

  • Informative x 3

#40 zorba990

  • Guest
  • 1,602 posts
  • 315

Posted 01 February 2021 - 12:46 AM

I think this is an odd statement. They have no results from phase III clinical trials so we don't actually know how effective the vaccine is. And there are a bunch of issues with Inovio DNA vaccines:

- They use an expensive device that nobody has yet to get the vaccine through the skin and into cells.

Just producing those devices, getting them out to vaccination sites, and training people on how to use them is a giant challenge.

-With a DNA vaccine there's the concern that the DNA could continue to express the proteins that it's encoding, forever through various mechanisms.

DNA is stable, so it can keep working indefinitely in a cell and can even be replicated when the cell is replicated, potentially.

This is in contrast to mRNA vaccines like Moderna and Pfizer which only can produce about 150 copies of the protein per mRNA molecule before they are degraded by the cell automatically. There's also no chance that they can end up in the cell's DNA.


Can you please provide a reference to this "This is in contrast to mRNA vaccines like Moderna and Pfizer which only can produce about 150 copies of the protein per mRNA molecule before they are degraded by the cell automatically. There's also no chance that they can end up in the cell's DNA." thanks.
  • like x 1

#41 smithx

  • Guest
  • 1,433 posts
  • 451

Posted 01 February 2021 - 02:29 AM

Can you please provide a reference to this "This is in contrast to mRNA vaccines like Moderna and Pfizer which only can produce about 150 copies of the protein per mRNA molecule before they are degraded by the cell automatically. There's also no chance that they can end up in the cell's DNA." thanks.

 

You may find these interesting:

https://sciencebased...alter-your-dna/

https://berthub.eu/a...pfizer-vaccine/

 


  • Informative x 1
  • WellResearched x 1

#42 motorcitykid

  • Guest
  • 276 posts
  • 71
  • Location:New York

Posted 01 February 2021 - 06:17 AM

I think this is an odd statement. They have no results from phase III clinical trials so we don't actually know how effective the vaccine is. And there are a bunch of issues with Inovio DNA vaccines:

 

- They use an expensive device that nobody has yet to get the vaccine through the skin and into cells.

 

Just producing those devices, getting them out to vaccination sites, and training people on how to use them is a giant challenge.

 

-With a DNA vaccine there's the concern that the DNA could continue to express the proteins that it's encoding, forever through various  mechanisms.

 

DNA is stable, so it can keep working indefinitely in a cell and can even be replicated when the cell is replicated, potentially.

 

This is in contrast to mRNA vaccines like Moderna and Pfizer which only can produce about 150 copies of the protein per mRNA molecule before they are degraded by the cell automatically. There's also no chance that they can end up in the cell's DNA.

 

FDA is permitting a fast track on Covid vax studies combing phase 2/3 together, so your concerns specifically re: phase 3 trial do not technically apply here but clearly the vaccine must prove to be safe or it's a no go. 

However, INO's vax is undergoing phase 3 trials in China so there will be data on that in the near future.

 

Are you familiar with the logistics of how a major hedge fund decides to increase their financial investment in a pharmaceutical company? A top expert in the field of study representing the hedge fund (a doctor or scientist) is sent to the pharma company to investigate relative data. They review the latest unfolding scientific data and latest progress not readily available or not as yet disclosed to the public. 

BLACKROCK, an industry leader in the financial market, JUST INCREASED their financial position with INOVIO Pharmaceutical 86pct. Blackrock is now holding fourteen million shares-they might know something, ya think? ;-)

 

The Dept of Defense believes Inovio's Cellectra device has great value and that it will be a game changer in the field of medicine - the D.O.D paid Inivio $70 Mil for use of their Cellectra devices.

 

I'm not sure where you getting your info about the high cost of training medical personal to use the Cellectra device. Was it on a hit piece from a short selling company? The device kinda looks like a Gillette electric shaver and there hasn't been any major concern about inflated costs or complications in this area. The cost of Cellectra device itself ( which delivers somewhere in the neighborhood of 5000 shots per unit) is already built into the cost of the vax and the cost of production of INO's vax is the lowest of all. The low cost is another big attraction- depending on which side of the fence you're on (if your Big PHarma, it's a negative).

 

For instance, if you compare the inherent cost of producing, manufacturing INO-4800 vax (including cost of the cellectra device) to

Moderna's vax cost of production, we must take into consideration a short shelf life and also the high cost of storage -temperature regulation (needs a specialized portable freezer) the cost of Moderna's vax is ridiculously high and also impractical to use in many parts of the world around or below the equator. In one area of the US, a shipment of Moderna's vax had to to be tossed because the freezer's weren't working properly.

INO has thee best temperature stability (room temperature). Oh and did I mention 5yrs shelf life in refrig? Important factors when implementing mass immunizations to battle and considering overall cost of a vax.

 

 

INO 4700 for MERS(cousin of covid-19) was the only vax proven safe and effective for Covid 1 (***DNA based and there was not an issue detected that the DNA was "expressing the proteins that it's encoding, forever through various mechanisms"****)

 

Ino has the best peer - reviewed animal data.  The broadest response, inclusive Killer CD8+ T cells, Antiibodies, Memory cells and CD4+ helper T cells. The best safety ( **no side effects, no Transverse Mielitis**).

 

This one-of-a-kind platform delivers optimized DNA into cells, where it is translated into proteins that activate an individual's immune system to generate a robust targeted T cell and antibody response.

Inovio’s DNA medicines are composed of optimized DNA plasmids, which are small circles of double-stranded DNA that are synthesized or reorganized by a computer sequencing technology and designed to produce a specific immune response in the body, INOVIO states*** 'DNA medicines do not interfere with or change in any way an individual's own DNA.'***

 

 

--94% of Phase 1 trial participants demonstrated overall immune responses at Week 6 after two doses of INO-4800 in trial with 40 healthy volunteers in preliminary analyses

--Week 8 INO-4800 regimen was deemed safe and well-tolerated with no serious adverse events; all reported adverse events were grade 1 in severity( a red mark at site of injection).

--In preclinical animal challenge study, INO-4800 provided full protection against SARS-CoV-2 replication in the lungs in mice challenged with the virus

--Nature review: In a previous study, In subjects immunized with INO-4700 (MERS-CoV S protein DNA vaccine) durable neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) and T cell immune responses were measured, and a seroconversion rate of 96% was observed and immunity was followed for 60 weeks in most study volunteers9.

 

 

Nature review: The INO-4800 vaccine induces cellular and humoral host immune responses that can be observed within days following a single immunization, including cross-reactive responses against SARS-CoV. The data demonstrate the immunogenicity of this COVID-19 synthetic DNA vaccine candidate targeting the SARS-CoV-2 S protein, supporting further translational studies to advance the development of this candidate in response to the current global health crisis.

 

Nature review: In summary, humoral immunogenicity testing in both mice and guinea pigs revealed the COVID-19 vaccine candidate, INO-4800, was capable of eliciting functional blocking antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 spike protein.

Nature review: In summary, T cell responses against SARS-CoV-2 S protein epitopes were detected in mice immunized with INO-4800.

 

 

The DNA plasmid manufacture process allows for scalable manufacture of drug product, which has the potential to circumvent the complexities of conventional vaccine production in eggs or cell culture

DNA drug product is non-frozen and can be stored for 4.5+ years at 2–8 °C, room temperature (RT) for 1 year and 1 month at 37 °C, while maintaining potency at temperatures upwards of 60 °C. In the context of a pandemic outbreak, the stability profile of a vaccine plays directly to its ability to be deployed and stockpiled in an efficient and executable manner.

  • INO-4800 showed durable antibody and T cell responses in rhesus macaques for 4 months

INO-4800 is the only vaccine to demonstrate long-term protection in non-human primates challenged with SARS-CoV-2 virus 13 weeks from vaccination

Memory T and B cell responses resulted in reduced viral loads and faster viral clearance in macaques' lungs and nasal passages

INO-4800 vaccination generated antibodies neutralizing both the earlier strain of virus as well as the mutant variant (D614G) that has emerged with greater infectivity, and now accounts for >80% of newly circulating virus

               >>>>>No antibody-dependent enhanced disease events were reported<<<<<<

INO-4800 reduced viral load in both the lower lungs and nasal passages in macaques that received two doses of INO-4800 (1 mg) four weeks apart and then were challenged with live virus 13 weeks after the second dose (study week 17). The reduced viral loads following exposure to SARS-CoV-2 infection at this timeframe demonstrate an important durable impact mediated by INO-4800.

INO-4800-treated animals demonstrated seroconversion after a single vaccination, with protective neutralizing antibodies and T cells lasting in their blood more than four months after the initial dose. The antibody levels were similar to or greater than those seen in patients who have recovered from COVID-19, the infection caused by SARS-CoV-2, and the T cell responses were significantly higher than those from convalescent patients.

The published data support that immunization with INO-4800 limits active viral replication and has the potential to reduce severity of disease, as well as reduced viral shedding in the nasal cavity. In the study, researchers assessed the ability of INO-4800 to induce acute and memory T cell and B cell immune responses, including neutralizing antibody responses against both early virus as well as now-dominant G614 mutant variants. To INOVIO's knowledge, this is the first report of vaccine-induced responses driving immunity against G614 variants. A strong anamnestic or memory T and B cell responses were demonstrated following challenge with the live virus.

"In addition to safety and efficacy, it is essential that any vaccine targeting SARS-CoV-2 generates a relevant durability of response," Dr. Broderick added. "A vaccine that only provides protection for a very short period of time is not going to realistically solve the problem of this pandemic."

In May, the peer-reviewed journal Nature Communications published an INOVIO study ("Immunogenicity of a DNA vaccine candidate for COVID-19") showing that vaccination with INO-4800 generated robust binding and neutralizing antibody and T cell responses in mice and guinea pigs. The study was funded by a grant from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI).

 

 

CORRUPTION AT PLAY?

 

Since the beginning of the pandemic INO was recognized as being in the top 6 of COVID vaccine developers for the US. Amongst the top 6 are Inovio, Moderna, Novavax, Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca.

Of these 6, INO is the ONLY company not to have former execs who are now in executive positions with at least one of the following groups: Operation Warp Speed, BARDA, NIH, FDA, The Lancet, The New England Journal of Medicine...etc. INO soon became a target of short sellers and disappeared from coverage on CNBC, FOX BIZ.

 

 

INO has quite a pipeline of DNA based drugs: prostate cancer, Glioblastoma and many others with impressive peer reviewed data.

 

Around the end of March, expect to see phase 3 data on INOVIO's DNA based drug, VGX-3100: 

 

Precancerous cervical dysplasia, destroyed and cleared high-risk HPV 16 and 18 in a Phase 2b clinical trial. High-risk HPV is responsible for 70% of cervical cancer, 91% of anal cancer, and 69% of vulvar cancer.

 

"These Phase 2 efficacy results are a very promising non-surgical advance for a recalcitrant disease that normally requires repetitive ablation and excision procedures to achieve disease and risk reduction, and may offer a more safe, tolerable and efficacious treatment option for patients."

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


  • Well Written x 1
  • Informative x 1
  • dislike x 1

#43 zorba990

  • Guest
  • 1,602 posts
  • 315

Posted 01 February 2021 - 02:33 PM

You may find these interesting:
https://sciencebased...alter-your-dna/
https://berthub.eu/a...pfizer-vaccine/


Thanks. A quick search of those links for '150' or 'copies' yields nil but I will read further.

From my perspective the DNA altering talk is a distraction. The issue, for me, with this vaccine is
that tissue penetration (Tropisim) studies seem to be missing which makes the results of vaccine ripe for
auto immune effects (if the vaccine, through its liposome, can penetrate tissue that the virus, initially, would not)

#44 pamojja

  • Guest
  • 2,842 posts
  • 722
  • Location:Austria

Posted 11 February 2021 - 08:18 PM

 

ANALYSIS
Deaths of Elderly Who Recovered From COVID-19, but Died After Vaccine, Raise Questions
February 10, 2021 17:48, Last Updated: February 11, 2021 9:53
By Sharyl Attkisson

Two small clusters of deaths after COVID-19 vaccination have been reported among nursing homes in Kentucky and Arkansas.

In Kentucky, four seniors died the same day of their vaccination on Dec. 30, 2020. Three of the four who passed away reportedly already had had coronavirus prior to getting vaccinated.

In Arkansas, four seniors died at a long term care facility about a week after their vaccination. All tested positive for COVID-19 after vaccination.

The deaths are reported in a federal database called VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

Deaths after vaccination don’t necessarily mean the vaccine is to blame. Of those receiving coronavirus vaccines, many are elderly and frail, or already suffering from serious illnesses. That makes it difficult to know whether there’s a connection.

Kentucky Nursing Home Deaths

According to VAERS reports, the Kentucky deaths occurred on Dec. 30 after vaccinations with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. An ill 88-year-old woman who was “14 + days post covid” was given the Pfizer-BioNTech shot while she was “unresponsive in [her] room.” She died within an hour and a half (914961-1). An 88-year-old who was “15 days post covid” got the shot, was monitored for 15 minutes afterward, and passed away within 90 minutes (914994-1). A third report says an 88-year-old woman who was “14 + days post covid” vomited four minutes after receiving her shot, became short of breath, and passed away that night (915562-1). And an 85-year-old woman vaccinated at 5 p.m. was “found unresponsive” less than two hours later and died shortly after (915682-1).

In response to questions about the Kentucky cluster, a spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) said its experts noted “no pattern … among the [Kentucky] cases that would indicate a concern for the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine.”

Scientists differ on whether people who have had coronavirus, like the Kentucky patients, should receive the COVID-19 vaccination at all. The CDC insists it’s safe for people who have recovered from COVID-19 to get vaccinated and that there’s no minimum interval recommended between infection and vaccination.

“Vaccination should be offered to persons regardless of history of prior symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 [the virus that causes COVID-19] infection,” it states.

But other scientists say vaccinating people who are already considered immune after a natural COVID-19 infection wastes valuable doses of vaccines when there are shortages. And neither Pfizer’s nor Moderna’s studies showed any benefit to vaccinating previously infected patients.

The Kentucky patients were vaccinated shortly after the CDC disseminated false information on this point. The CDC claimed studies showed that vaccines are effective for people who have had COVID-19. The disinformation was given on the agency’s website, in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report and in a webinar instruction to medical professionals.

In the webinar, the CDC’s Dr. Sarah Oliver falsely stated, “Data from both clinical trials suggests that people with prior infection are still likely to benefit from vaccination.”

Under pressure from Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who first flagged the CDC’s incorrect information in December, the agency recently issued a correction but used wording that still falsely implies studies showed that the vaccines helped people previously infected with COVID-19.

Meantime, preliminary results from a study co-authored by a team of more than two dozen researchers noted that people infected with COVID-19 in the past “experience systemic side effects with a significantly higher frequency” after vaccination than others.

The CDC confirms that it’s monitoring reports that people who’ve already had COVID-19 seem to be suffering significantly more frequent or more severe reactions after vaccination, or “reactogenicity,” than those who didn’t have COVID-19.

“CDC is aware of reports of increased reactogenicity (such as fever, chills, and muscle aches) in persons who have had COVID-19,” said a spokesman.

Arkansas Nursing Home Deaths

Four nursing home deaths in Arkansas occurred after vaccination with the Moderna-manufactured vaccine. All four patients tested positive for COVID-19 after vaccination, according to the VAERS reports. But there’s no indication as to whether they had coronavirus at the time of their vaccination or acquired it after their shot.

A 65-year-old man (921547-1) who received the Moderna vaccine on Jan. 2, 2021, died two days later, with the VAERS report noting that he had COVID-19. Three other Arkansas seniors died about a week after receiving the Moderna vaccine on Dec. 22, 2020. The person reporting the death of an 82-year-old man (917117-1) six days after his shot said he was vaccinated in an attempt to “mitigate his risk” and that “this was unsuccessful and [the] patient died.” The VAERS report notes, “After vaccination, patient tested positive for COVID-19.”

Two elderly women, ages 90 (917790-1) and 78 (917793-1), were vaccinated the same day as the 65-year-old man and also tested positive for COVID-19 about a week after their shots and died. According to the unnamed person who reported the 90-year-old’s death, “the vaccine did not have enough time to prevent COVID 19” and “There is no evidence that the vaccination caused patient’s death. It simply didn’t have time to save her life.” The person who reported the 78-year-old’s death claimed she died “as a result of COVID-19 and her underlying health conditions and not as a result of the vaccine.”

In response to questions about the Arkansas cluster, the CDC said, “Surveillance data to date do not indicate excess deaths among elderly patients receiving COVID-19 vaccinations.” Overall, says the agency, the number of deaths at long term care facilities after COVID-19 vaccinations is no higher than what would be expected to occur naturally.

Frail Patients

Separately, the CDC is monitoring the impact of the vaccines on already-frail patients such as the chronically ill in nursing homes.

In Norway, alarm bells sounded when 23 people died shortly after vaccination. After investigating 13 of the deaths, Norway’s medical agency has concluded side effects that are common with the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, such as fever, nausea, and diarrhea, “may have contributed to fatal outcomes in some of the frail patients.”

“There is a possibility that these common adverse reactions, that are not dangerous in fitter, younger patients and are not unusual with vaccines, may aggravate underlying disease in the elderly,” said Steinar Madsen, medical director of the Norwegian Medicines Agency.

A World Health Organization (WHO) expert panel disagrees. It says the deaths “are in line with the expected, all-cause mortality rates and causes of death in the sub-population of frail, elderly individuals, and the available information does not confirm a contributory role for the vaccine in the reported fatal events.”

But one unanswered question is whether patients who are both frail and have already had COVID-19 might suffer a double-whammy that puts them at greater risk when vaccinated. First, those with a previous COVID-19 infection might be more likely to suffer adverse events upon vaccination, according to scientific reports. Second, their frailty may make them less able to handle the adverse events, as Norway’s medical agency found with some patients.

In the United States, VAERS reports contain numerous other cases of elderly, frail people who’d had COVID-19, got vaccinated, and died.

A 96-year-old Ohio woman tested positive for COVID-19 in November, got the Pfizer vaccine on Dec. 28, 2020, in a rehab facility after a fall, and died that afternoon (915920-1).

A 94-year-old Michigan man at a senior living facility who had COVID-19 and other illnesses received the Moderna vaccine on Jan. 2, 2021, and died of cardiac arrest two days later (918487-1).

A 91-year-old Michigan woman with Alzheimer’s and other illnesses at a senior living facility who had tested positive for COVID-19 received the Moderna vaccine on Dec. 30, 2020. She died four days later (924186-1).

And an 85-year-old California woman with Alzheimer’s and other disorders at a senior living facility received the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine on Jan. 5, 2021, and was found dead the same day. After her vaccination, an earlier COVID-19 test from Jan. 3 returned positive, though she’d had no symptoms (924456-1).

In other cases, elderly, frail patients tested positive for COVID-19 shortly after vaccination.

A 104-year-old woman in New York received the Pfizer vaccine on Dec. 30, 2020. The next day, a COVID-19 test was done and came back positive. She became ill the following day and died on Jan. 4, 2021 (920832-1).

And a 71-year-old New York man received the Moderna vaccine on Dec. 21, 2020, developed a fever and respiratory distress, and tested positive for COVID-19. He was given Remdesivir. He died after 6 days (922977-1).

A WHO vaccine safety subcommittee reviewed reports of deaths among the frail, elderly after the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The members determined, two weeks ago, there’s no cause for concern. “The benefit-risk balance of [Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine] BNT162b2 remains favorable in the elderly, and does not suggest any revision, at present, to the recommendations around the safety of this vaccine,” said the WHO officials.

Pfizer, Moderna, and CDC Responses

In response to questions for this report, Pfizer issued a statement saying: “We take adverse events that are potentially associated with our COVID-19 vaccine, BNT162b2, very seriously. We closely monitor all such events and collect relevant information to share with global regulatory authorities. Based on ongoing safety reviews performed by Pfizer, BioNTech and health authorities, BNT162b2 retains a positive benefit-risk profile for the prevention of COVID-19 infections.”

Pfizer said that millions of people have been vaccinated and “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.”

Pfizer didn’t answer whether it has concluded that any deaths might be linked to vaccination. It also wouldn’t answer whether it has looked at any clusters of deaths, or noted any patterns or areas of concern. And the company wouldn’t say whether it recommends that those recently or currently infected with COVID-19 get vaccinated.

Moderna didn’t answer our questions or request for information and comment.

Currently, the CDC recommends vaccination for people who’ve already had coronavirus.

The agency didn’t directly answer the question of whether it’s safe for people to get vaccinated while they have an active COVID-19 infection. A CDC spokesman said that deferring vaccination is recommended in those instances, but didn’t say whether it was due to a safety issue.

“Vaccination of persons with known current SARS-CoV-2 infection should be deferred until the person has recovered from the acute illness (if the person had symptoms) and criteria have been met for them to discontinue isolation,” says the CDC. “This recommendation applies to persons who develop SARS-CoV-2 infection before receiving any vaccine doses as well as those who develop SARS-CoV-2 infection after the first dose but before receipt of the second dose.”

Sharyl Attkisson is the New York Times bestselling author of “Stonewalled,” a five-time Emmy Award winner, and the host of Sinclair’s national investigative television program “Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson.”

Source: https://www.theepoch...692259.html/amp

 


  • Informative x 1
  • like x 1

#45 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,050 posts
  • 634
  • Location:United States

Posted 12 February 2021 - 06:32 AM

 

I agree, if you are in really poor health, not worth it.

 

The long term auto-immune effects if you encounter the virus later are what concern me.

 

We should know shortly though, plenty of people beta testing it.


  • Good Point x 1

#46 platypus

  • Guest
  • 2,386 posts
  • 240
  • Location:Italy

Posted 12 February 2021 - 07:16 AM

I'd prefer Sputnik, clever use of two carrier viruses so the 1st and 2nd shots differ from each other. 


  • Informative x 1
  • like x 1

#47 smithx

  • Guest
  • 1,433 posts
  • 451

Posted 12 February 2021 - 08:41 PM

Thanks. A quick search of those links for '150' or 'copies' yields nil but I will read further.

From my perspective the DNA altering talk is a distraction. The issue, for me, with this vaccine is
that tissue penetration (Tropisim) studies seem to be missing which makes the results of vaccine ripe for
auto immune effects (if the vaccine, through its liposome, can penetrate tissue that the virus, initially, would not)

 

It looks like that statement was removed. Here's one from Moderna (search for "half-life") saying that the mRNA half-life is 8-10 hours:

https://www.fda.gov/...144452/download



#48 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,050 posts
  • 634
  • Location:United States

Posted 06 March 2021 - 08:47 PM

If taking the 2 shot combo, maybe consider just taking 1 as it is nearly as effective

 

Warning from Ben Stein(I think we have all read the 2nd is worse than the first though)

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=S6M9SBYIFbU



#49 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 07 March 2021 - 05:47 PM

Russian Disinformation Campaign Aims to Undermine Confidence in Pfizer, Other Covid-19 Vaccines, U.S. Officials Say - WSJ

 

 
Russian Disinformation Campaign Aims to Undermine Confidence in Pfizer, Other Covid-19 Vaccines, U.S. Officials Say Websites linked to Russian intelligence services publish false information questioning vaccines’ safety, efficacy

 

WASHINGTON—Russian intelligence agencies have mounted a campaign to undermine confidence in Pfizer Inc.’s and other Western vaccines, using online publications that in recent months have questioned the vaccines’ development and safety, U.S. officials said.

An official with the State Department’s Global Engagement Center, which monitors foreign disinformation efforts, identified four publications that he said have served as fronts for Russian intelligence.

The websites played up the vaccines’ risk of side effects, questioned their efficacy, and said the U.S. had rushed the Pfizer vaccine through the approval process, among other false or misleading claims.

 

 


  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Informative x 1

#50 Oakman

  • Location:CO

Posted 07 March 2021 - 06:12 PM

If taking the 2 shot combo, maybe consider just taking 1 as it is nearly as effective

 

Warning from Ben Stein(I think we have all read the 2nd is worse than the first though)

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=S6M9SBYIFbU

 

I've had both Moderna shots, and his case is one example, and too bad his reaction was as he describes, for him anyway.

 

Mine was, 1st does was nothing but a sore arm, second was 24 hrs of pretty strong flu symptoms (chills, fever, muscle aches, bed due to lack of energy), but minus runny nose, sore throat.

 

Afterwards, all symptoms gone, and now for enjoying some long ago lost freedom from being around people!

 

PS. FME the first shot is simply a COVID-19 sensitizer for your immune system, the second give your antibodies some practice to work on the viral bits and multiply (and shows how well they have developed since the 1st shot).


  • Informative x 1
  • like x 1

#51 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,050 posts
  • 634
  • Location:United States

Posted 08 March 2021 - 01:31 AM

I've had both Moderna shots, and his case is one example, and too bad his reaction was as he describes, for him anyway.

Yes, but If you were older and in poorer health, would you still take both? 

 

Single Shot Of Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine Is 85% Effective, Study Finds -   another source

 

Most of the negative reactions are coming from the 2nd jab.


Edited by Gal220, 08 March 2021 - 01:31 AM.


#52 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,661 posts
  • 570

Posted 08 March 2021 - 01:50 AM

Oakman is 72.  I'm 64 myself.  Although I'm on a list, my number hasn't come up yet.  However, everybody in our age group that I've talked to seems to describe similar effects as Oakman with little to no effect from the first dose and a day or 2 of mild flu like systems from the 2nd dose as was the same experience of my 35 year old daughter (due to job requirements) after both doses of Pfizer.  How much older does  one have to be to not take the whole intended compliment of both doses?

 

Edit:  I can't help but think that if my covid risk outcome was even worse due to being even older with worse health, I would want the vaccine efficacy to be as high as possible.  I would definitely go for 93% rather than 85% and risk catching covid due to insufficient vaccine protection.  The odds in these worst case scenarios would be to risk becoming ill due to bad vaccine reaction versus death (or long hauler whom I know a few and that is life altering) due to covid.

 

Double Edit:  My intuition tells me the individuals having the worst reactions to the vaccines are the same individuals that would have the worst outcomes from the virus.... pick your poison.


Edited by Hebbeh, 08 March 2021 - 02:22 AM.

  • Off-Topic x 1
  • Good Point x 1

#53 Dorian Grey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,163 posts
  • 975
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 11 March 2021 - 05:13 AM

Submitted for your approval...  A very deep dive into mRNA vaccines with a German Cellular Biologist.  

 

http://enformtk.u-ai...chmidt_krueger/

 

Interview with Dr. Vanessa Schmidt-Kruger / Hearing # 37 of German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee 30 January, 2021

 

I initially started skimming through this and became totally transfixed.  Not your typical conspiracy rant.  Attached a pdf, & here are a few excerpts to peak your curiosity.  

 

*VSK: I’m a cell biologist and my specialist field is the functional characterisation and elucidation of proteins, i.e., I understand how proteins are produced, how they are transported in the cell, how they are taken up by cells, how they are metabolised, how intra- and intercellular communication takes place, including within tissue, and how organs interact. This is all very important if one wishes to conduct a risk assessment: how the vaccine functions for example, and the dangers/risks of the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs). This technology is not really new: it’s novel as a vaccine, but we have been using these LNPs in research for over 20 years, and we have always been struggling with the problem of toxicity of the lipids and balancing this against their efficacy.

 

The first point is that the BioNTech vaccine that is currently already being used is not highly purified, it contains contaminants of certain components.  The problem that BioNTech had is that in the clinical phase the product, i.e. the RNA, was produced with completely different techniques to how it is being produced now. During the clinical phase they only needed small volumes of vaccine, they were able to use very expensive techniques that delivered highly purified end products. Now that they have entered mass production, that is no longer possible, they have had to switch to lower-cost processes.

 

t the RNA is transcribed from the DNA and then the DNA has to be eliminated, it is digested by enzymes: by DNAses. And if this DNA is not digested well enough, if residues are left, this harbours risks.  BioNTech has admitted that there are DNA contaminants.

 

It was found that the integrity of the RNA always varies in the batches that had been made.  So – the integrity of the RNA means of course the RNA quality. They have found that this is not very high: it was higher for the processes during the clinical phase.   they have found new batches with only 55% RNA integrity, i.e., half of it is basically unviable.  

 

VSK: To come back to Ms. Fischer’s question about the DNA. The problem is that when it contains DNA contaminants, then the situation is: well, with RNA it is relatively unlikely that it can integrate into the host’s cell nucleus. The situation is different with DNA, and especially in this case because you have contaminants of linearised DNA.  

 

the lipid nanoparticles get into all cells, not just the muscle cells – it is an error to believe the latter

 

So it is theoretically possible that this linearised DNA that is in there as a contaminant could integrate into the host’s cell nucleus in a dividing cell, linearised DNA is optimal for integration.

 

The vaccine itself, even if the DNA – that contamination – were not in it – is still a genetic intervention. 

 

there are further contaminants, there is double-stranded RNA for instance. The EMA Committee says it is slight, it is acceptable

 

There are also contaminants with regard to the lipids (30.32). There are two new lipids, they have focused on them. One is ALC-0315, that is the cationic lipid, and the other is ALC-0159, the PEGylated peptide, the PEG component. And they have found that the end product – that there are contaminants in the end product in some batches.

 

The technology of the nanoparticles. I don’t want to completely malign it. It’s a superb technology really. But the problem is that it is still much too early for use in human beings. The toxicity is still too high, that first needs to be eliminated, then it would really be a brilliant technology. There are many scientists working on getting rid of this toxicity, research has been conducted on that for years.

 

the LNPs consist of up to 50% of these cationic lipids: 50% is very high, they are toxic because they have this positive charge. This enables them to enter into interactions with other components of the cell really well, they can also basically interact with negatively charged amino acids. This destroys the proteins which lose their ability to function because they “unfold” as it is called. In principle they can interact with the DNA because the DNA is also negatively charged due to its phosphate groups, creating DNA strand breaks. They can also interact with other lipids because they are also negatively charged, especially the lipids of the cell membrane. E.g. the cell membrane of the mitochondria.  If however these cationic lipids gain entry, it is confirmed in many publications that they destroy this membrane, and this leads to the formation of a large number of oxygen radicals. These oxygen radicals create a lot of damage in the cell. They interact – they alter the amino acids, the cell pours out as many cytokines as it can, the oxygen radicals also attack membranes and create lipid peroxidation.  

 

The questions that arise before something like this comes onto the market are how long it remains in the body, divided up as follows: how long do the lipids remain, How long does the mRNA remain? How are they broken down? What is their distribution in the body?

 

So what is the distribution of the lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) in the animal trial?  They injected the whole muscle and watched how the lipids spread out throughout the body, and found that these lipids were in many organs after just 15 minutes.  They found evidence of the cationic lipid in the plasma for 12 days, and evidence of the PEG lipid for 6 days. So they remained for quite some time.  The cationic lipids are exclusively degraded in the cells, only 1% was found in the stool. This means the cells take the full hit of the toxicity.  One can still find 5% of the lipid in the liver after 4 - 6 weeks – that is incredibly long.  

 

cationic lipids have a half life of 20 to 30 days in human beings, and the elimination to 5%, so not really eliminated, takes 4 - 5 months.  That’s a long time.  

 

So why exactly is the liver being damaged? It’s because the liver is the organ that takes up the most lipoproteins. And why does it take up the most? Because one of its functions is to break down cholesterol; I’ve explained that the nanoparticles are bound to ApoE proteins. These make their way directly back to the liver where the cholesterol is broken down, and that’s why the liver comes into contact with a huge amount of this.  With the mice or rats, the damage disappears after 3 weeks: does some small damage remain in the liver, or does it regenerate completely? VSK: Yes, it regenerates completely. The liver is fairly robust.


Long-term studies and studies on possible autoimmune conditions were not conducted.


This mechanism crosses the blood-brain barrier due to the ApoE -mediated transport. So the LNPs can cause damage in the brain.  


RF: How long does one need to hold one’s breath when one has been vaccinated. A lifetime, or does there come a time when you can relax again? VSK: It depends on which damage you are observing. The lipids are there for 4 - 5 months. Damage can arise for as long as the lipids are there.  

 

-----------------------

 

Don't know about you, but I'm hunting down the J&J jab!  

Attached Files


  • Informative x 4
  • Good Point x 2

#54 Dorian Grey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,163 posts
  • 975
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 12 March 2021 - 06:47 AM

My God...  This is like a Si-Fi movie.

 

 

The vaccines, by preventing morbidity while allowing infection, are turning vaccinated humans into Gain of Function viral mutation factories.  

 

At the same time, while protecting against morbidity from current strains, they are compromising immunity to future variants which are potentiated by the vaccine program.  

 

God help us...  We're screwed!  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 12 March 2021 - 06:50 AM.

  • Cheerful x 2
  • Agree x 1

#55 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 1,050 posts
  • 634
  • Location:United States

Posted 12 March 2021 - 04:12 PM

God help us...  We're screwed!  

 

Looks like most people have vaccine on the brain though.  More news from Israel - https://www.israelna...RdZkG4U2m9R-lu0

I bet the Russian vaccine winds up being the best - https://www.bbc.com/...ealth-55900622 


Edited by Gal220, 12 March 2021 - 04:14 PM.

  • Informative x 1
  • Agree x 1

#56 smithx

  • Guest
  • 1,433 posts
  • 451

Posted 13 March 2021 - 12:16 AM

Submitted for your approval...  A very deep dive into mRNA vaccines with a German Cellular Biologist.  

 

 

I wish I had read this yesterday. I just got the Pfizer vaccine and would have not done it had I known about the DNA contamination.

 

I really hope this doesn't end up having been a horrible idea.



#57 zorba990

  • Guest
  • 1,602 posts
  • 315

Posted 13 March 2021 - 12:48 AM

My God... This is like a Si-Fi movie.

https://youtu.be/ZJZxiNxYLpc

The vaccines, by preventing morbidity while allowing infection, are turning vaccinated humans into Gain of Function viral mutation factories.

At the same time, while protecting against morbidity from current strains, they are compromising immunity to future variants which are potentiated by the vaccine program.

God help us... We're screwed!


<tinfoilorgonehat>The question will be if this is a mistake or intentional depopulation agenda </tinfoilorgonehat>
  • Cheerful x 1

#58 smithx

  • Guest
  • 1,433 posts
  • 451

Posted 13 March 2021 - 01:24 AM

Hmm. could this be propaganda?

https://nypost.com/2...-covid-vaccine/

 

I was able to find one reference to lower than expected intact mRNA here:

https://www.bmj.com/...nt/372/bmj.n627

 

But no reference anywhere to DNA contamination.

 


  • Agree x 1

#59 Dorian Grey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,163 posts
  • 975
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 13 March 2021 - 01:58 AM

I wish I had read this yesterday. I just got the Pfizer vaccine and would have not done it had I known about the DNA contamination.

 

I really hope this doesn't end up having been a horrible idea.

 

I wouldn't sweat this too much.  I'm actually not dead-set against the Pfizer jab myself.  No adjuvant, & tens of millions of doses already given without too much spooky stuff going on.  Do I really want to stick my arm out for the new kid on the block (J&J)?  

 

I do worry about the booster jab in the works for the variants which will probably be needed before too long, & any possible interactions with any of the current vaccines.  

 

The more I learn about these, the more I realize just how much I don't know!  Live is a gamble...  The stakes are just a bit high with the vaccines.  Hope to heck they know what they are doing.  


  • Good Point x 2

#60 Dorian Grey

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,163 posts
  • 975
  • Location:kalifornia

Posted 13 March 2021 - 02:15 AM

Hmm. could this be propaganda?

https://nypost.com/2...-covid-vaccine/

 

I was able to find one reference to lower than expected intact mRNA here:

https://www.bmj.com/...nt/372/bmj.n627

 

But no reference anywhere to DNA contamination.

 

The mRNA manufacturing process appears to involve DNA plasmids, which produce the mRNA.  

 

https://www.nature.c...id-plasmids-28/

 

First, you must be able to manufacture DNA plasmids—the templates upon which the RNA is built.

 

https://www.path.org...-manufacturing/

 

Plasmid DNA appears to be different than nuclear DNA: "A plasmid is a small, extrachromosomal DNA molecule within a cell that is physically separated from chromosomal DNA and can replicate independently." 

 

 

Apparently this is done with a bacterial soup:   "They are most commonly found as small circular, double-stranded DNA molecules in bacteria"

 

https://www.nature.c...id-plasmids-28/

 

Then, you've got to get rid of the DNA plasmid without damaging the mRNA, which apparently is quite fragile.  Not too hard to imagine how some leftover plasmid might happen.  As plasmid DNA is different from nuclear DNA, perhaps this isn't as alarming as it might appear.  


Edited by Dorian Grey, 13 March 2021 - 02:21 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: coronavirus

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users