Coronavirus COVID-19

[may be rude]

immunizations don't cause mutations, it's the opposite. allowing the virus to be more prevalent is what will cause mutations.

where are you getting your info, @Claudius t Ansuulim? i wish you wouldn't spread harmful nonsense in dramatic large font.

 

please lmk where you got this

Edited April 28, 2021 by very honest

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

I try to get my info from academic sources.  As such my knowledge of things is only as good as the information I’m exposed to and if you or anybody else has good information to the contrary please don’t hesitate.  Here’s a good conversation between an evolutionary biologist and veterinarian with a background in virology and vaccine development to start:

Also none of these drugs they are calling vaccines confer immunity (by their own manufacturer’s claims) so it would be incorrect to refer to them as immunizations. 

[Rubin Farr]

17 minutes ago, very honest said:

immunizations don't cause mutations, it's the opposite. allowing the virus to be more prevalent is what will cause mutations.

where are you getting your info, @Claudius t Ansuulim? i wish you wouldn't spread harmful nonsense in dramatic large font.

 

please lmk where you got this

This is what is so worrying to scientists about India, with so many infected now in a population of 1.3 billion, the likelihood of more mutations becomes greater.

[danshoebridge]

hmmm, that may be so, I guess I should put it forward that I am not a medical doctor and as such am only going on what I see as the best available information coming from medical professionals (many of whom have been using the drug as both prophylaxis and early treatment at onset of symptoms).  It may be that the drug is only acting as placebo in those instances 
or, what I would theorize as more likely, when taken it frees up your immune system to fight off other infections
 

I'm not sure what medical professionals you are getting your info from, but you have ended up with a conclusion that is precisely the opposite of what 99% of medical professionals advise.

[may be rude]

22 minutes ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

I try to get my info from academic sources.  As such my knowledge of things is only as good as the information I’m exposed to and if you or anybody else has good information to the contrary please don’t hesitate.  Here’s a good conversation between an evolutionary biologist and veterinarian with a background in virology and vaccine development to start:

Also none of these drugs they are calling vaccines confer immunity (by their own manufacturer’s claims) so it would be incorrect to refer to them as immunizations. 

alright well the CDC and the WHO recommend getting vaccinated

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/keythingstoknow.html?s_cid=10496:covid vaccine update:sem.ga:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY21

https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/getting-the-covid-19-vaccine

 

[danshoebridge]

Specifically:

Evidence that Ivermectin is efficacious in treating Covid is currently weak at best.

Masks and social distancing help REDUCE the spread.

Mutations are more likely within a population with a high incidence of Covid itself, not vaccination.

Eating healthy and exercising is great advice for general health, but they are not specifically Covid treatments any more than they are treatments for a broken leg.

My advice: Don't look to YouTube for medical research.

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

The Center for Disease Control and World Health Organization both have interests that would make me question the objectivity of their recommendations.  That said, my own risk assessment is based off of what I know of virology and evolutionary biology (please watch that video I linked if you wanna know more of what I’m on about).  As for the drug recommendation, I knew that sentence was probably gonna be problematic and I though about removing it but I’m glad I didn’t because it’s prompted others to provide evidence to the contrary. I should reiterate that I am not a medical professional, and am also highly sceptical of ALL medical technologies, they have to be put in a physiological and evolutionary context to truly be understood and I don’t think we understand that much about these technologies at this point.

Knowledge is provisional

[may be rude]

33 minutes ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

The Center for Disease Control and World Health Organization both have interests that would make me question the objectivity of their recommendations.  

this is an Appeal to Motive fallacy

 

here's the AMA recommending vaccination https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2020-12/covid-19-vaccine-patient-faqs.pdf

Edited April 28, 2021 by very honest

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

The American Medical Association, making medical recommendations.  I am familiar with these.  Did you watch the video I linked?  The concerns are that the drugs they are administering as “vaccines” are actually driving up the number of hyper-virulent strains.  This would make sense from an evolutionary standpoint if you understand how viruses exist and mutate.  None of the drugs currently being tested provide sufficient inoculation as to prevent viral shedding.  Again I’m not completely against these medical technologies; I have had at least one relative that passed as a result of complications precipitated by the onset of symptoms caused by an infection of primarily SARS-CoV-2 and his life may have been saved had the drugs been available at the time.  My point is more towards cost vs benefit analysis and I fear having this mass vaccination program may be doing more harm than good in the long term.  Again, I’m open to evidence to the contrary, but I prefer it to be scholarly

[Satans Little Helper]

Have been following Bret for a while. And although he has a lot to bring to the table, my impression is he thinks too much like a scientist and not enough like a politician to make the political statements he sometimes does. Or rather, I'd be weary to blindly follow his cue when it comes to the political dimension. 

And I also get the impression, generally speaking, that people don't take his comments for what they are. He positions himself as scientist, but sometimes it's just opinion. Which is fair and all. But the two shouldn't be confused. And other times, people just take from it what they want. Especially when things are complex and nuanced. Which is often the case.

Often, when things get more into the alarmist side of things, I tend to log out. This is where things get sketchy. And it won't be the first time he gets things simply wrong anyways.

Take this as a general rule, I guess. Critical thinking is good. But at the point where people, or perhaps yourself, become alarmist, that's when you have to be extra critical (about yourself). As these are the points where emotions take over, and rationality fly out of the window.

I think the same holds for that wall of text with the bigger font-size back a couple posts. I appreciate the effort. But please take a step back and re-evaluate what you're saying. Dial back the alarmist nature and just have some rational conversation. Being alarmist never helps. This has nothing to do with being right or wrong, btw. It's about how to have some kind of dialogue where we can all have some kind of benefit. Instead of turning things into a shouting match. Not saying it has. But the risk is there, whenever things get alarmist, in my experience.

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

font size due to copy/paste from notes, no yelling intended

EXCEPT FOR NOW!!!!

[may be rude]

7 minutes ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

The American Medical Association, making medical recommendations.  I am familiar with these.  Did you watch the video I linked?  The concerns are that the drugs they are administering as “vaccines” are actually driving up the number of hyper-virulent strains.  This would make sense from an evolutionary standpoint if you understand how viruses exist and mutate.  None of the drugs currently being tested provide sufficient inoculation as to prevent viral shedding.  Again I’m not completely against these medical technologies; I have had at least one relative that passed as a result of complications precipitated by the onset of symptoms caused by an infection of primarily SARS-CoV-2 and his life may have been saved had the drugs been available at the time.  My point is more towards cost vs benefit analysis and I fear having this mass vaccination program may be doing more harm than good in the long term.  Again, I’m open to evidence to the contrary, but I prefer it to be scholarly

i think you're a good-faith debater and i appreciate the honest debate. further, i think it is important to test assumptions. however, i don't think the vet on weinstein's podcast has pointed out a mechanism that evaded the attention of the largest scientific vaccine development push in history.

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

you know who doesn’t (or at least shouldn’t) trust “the science” any more than anybody else? A: The scientists.  This is by design.  I think I understand the point though; we assume all this is peer reviewed.  Back to my original point though, science, politics, and private industry have become conflated, intertangled in ways that may actually be prohibitive towards sound science being performed and affecting public policy.  It’s not that Geert is proposing anything novel here, in fact he’s pointing out the obvious to anybody with an intimate knowledge of these systems.  What we’re really talking about here is the intersection of science and policy, and my highly subjective view of it at this point isn’t very positive.

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

I should also point out that at this point we are collectively considering as GLOBAL PUBLIC POLICY the possibility of MANDATORY VACCINES.  This not alarmist at this point, it’s REALITY.  So it is VERY IMPORTANT to have this discussion, especially amongst the scientific community and as an extension whatever commons we have (which happens to include electronic music message boards).

 

Copied and pasted from notes

[danshoebridge]

34 minutes ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

The American Medical Association, making medical recommendations.  I am familiar with these.  Did you watch the video I linked?  The concerns are that the drugs they are administering as “vaccines” are actually driving up the number of hyper-virulent strains.  This would make sense from an evolutionary standpoint if you understand how viruses exist and mutate.  None of the drugs currently being tested provide sufficient inoculation as to prevent viral shedding.  Again I’m not completely against these medical technologies; I have had at least one relative that passed as a result of complications precipitated by the onset of symptoms caused by an infection of primarily SARS-CoV-2 and his life may have been saved had the drugs been available at the time.  My point is more towards cost vs benefit analysis and I fear having this mass vaccination program may be doing more harm than good in the long term.  Again, I’m open to evidence to the contrary, but I prefer it to be scholarly

If you're looking for a 'scholarly' approach to disease research, 2-hour long YouTube videos probably aren't the best place to start. 

I did watch a bit of that, and read his original warning statement that got the initial attention.  Although I work in oncology rather than virology there were a few bits that raised my eyebrows straight away, specifically what he was saying about NK T-cells which seemed essentially false (or certainly counter to any current thinking). 

Anyway here's a nicely referenced post that takes apart some of the major claims: 

https://www.deplatformdisease.com/blog/addressing-geert-vanden-bossches-claims

If you are genuinely interested in scholarly research the reference list from that post alone would be a good start.

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

Thanks Dan!  This is the kind of response I was hoping for.  A cursory glance at the refutation and I could certainly be critical of aspects of it is well, but as mentioned previously it is important for that criticism to be directed inwardly as much lest my own confirmation bias affect my analysis.

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

I would guess most people glaze over the actual nitty gritty of articles like that and jump right to:

“Vaccines clearly reduce viral load, prevent severe disease, and disrupt transmission, and they can thankfully be readily modified to address problematic variants as is done every season for influenza with great effect. They are the way out until someone proposes something better. Bossche doesn’t and his claims are baseless. “

So again, speaking to my point, “we” collectively are considering approaching this, an adenovirus, with mechanisms we currently use for influenza, mechanisms that themselves may be flawed.  Also it should be pointed out that as far as policy goes we don’t mandate everybody to get the seasonal flu shot, and their efficacy is debatable.  I have had relatives paralyzed by the flu shot, and I’ve lost loved ones to complications from influenze infection. It’s anecdotal for sure, but I feel like this whole situation is rushing forward without due consideration.  I would certainly rather not feel the need to debate this in public forums but I feel current public policy and perception is forcing me from my happy seclusion.

[Claudius t Ansuulim]

also lol at all the facepalms I’m getting.  I guess it’s easier than debating thoughts, ideas, and concepts openly and honestly?

[Extralife]

19 minutes ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

also lol at all the facepalms I’m getting.  I guess it’s easier than debating thoughts, ideas, and concepts openly and honestly?

Just get your font size under control, bro.

[Silent Member]

Oh boy

[Braintree]

On 4/26/2021 at 3:48 PM, Braintree said:

The company I just joined mostly employs people in India and one of my coworkers died of COVID-19 this morning. Kind of surreal. I get the feeling I'm going to start seeing more messages like that pretty soon.

This morning, I was told that there are a lot of sick people on the team in India so we have to ramp up the team here. If I wasn't already concerned, I would be now.

8 hours ago, Claudius t Ansuulim said:

I am not a medical doctor

Super surprised over here.

[Rubin Farr]

As far as anecdotal evidence against vaccinations, try asking someone who had to suffer their whole life with polio paralysis, because it’s no picnic. And this woman was a sweetheart.

[ignatius]

NPR interviewed a doctor in india this morning and it sounds really bad. said he had a 30 yr old couple die of COVID just yesterday. he said patients are often younger now. generally people are coming in sicker than before.. either waiting too long or can't find a place to get in so are waiting in the parking lot. people are dying in hospital parking lots. they're experiencing a critical shortage of oxygen supply in hospitals. ventilators too.

sounds awful and only getting worse. they aren't through this wave at all. not even peaked. 

maybe i mentioned already and i forget where the study happened.. might've been UK.. they did a study of asymptomatic COVID patients doing scans of their lungs and found scarring in the lungs of EVERY patient they scanned. 

 

[dcom]

Smallpox. Polio. Tetanus. Hepatitis B. Rubella. Hib. Measles. Whooping Cough. Pneumococcals. Rotavirus. Mumps. Chickenpox. Diphtheria.

Those have been either eradicated or driven to submission thanks to vaccines (especially if you don't know what they are), and uncountable number of humans have been spared from death or life-long suffering from debilitating diseases.

Some of them - like Measles - are coming back with a vengeance because people believe lies instead of science and don't vaccinate, and there are enough susceptible people who disseminate the fear, uncertainty and doubt sown by the liars that it's a danger to the public everywhere.

Even here on WATMM.

Vaccination causes adults. Be an adult, vaccinate.

[dcom]

3 minutes ago, toaoaoad said:

I think it's also worth noting that there's this alarming assumption a lot of people seem to have that the vaccine is supposed to be 100% effective, and if there are still vaccinated people getting COVID then that means the vaccine doesn't work.

This applies to all medicine, not just vaccines. Nothing is 100 % safe and sure, there can always be unforeseen complications. Biological entities are complex to work with even without accounting for human error.

Edited April 28, 2021 by dcom