On 07/02/2021 16:35, Muggles wrote:
On 2/6/2021 10:57 AM, Retirednoguilt wrote:
On 2/5/2021 9:32 PM, rbowman wrote:
On 02/05/2021 10:20 AM, Retirednoguilt wrote:
On 2/5/2021 11:14 AM, Muggles wrote:
On 2/4/2021 10:29 PM, Roger Blake wrote:
On 2021-02-04, Muggles wrote:
Gene therapy ...

I will not be vaccinated. Period.


I ONLY consider being vaccinated after such shots have been tested for
several years.* By then, the majority of negative reactions have been
documented, along with why those reactions happened.* I get a flu shot
every fall because I've seen those work with very little allergic
reactions.* The covid "vaccines" have not been tested long enough for
me to even consider taking one of those shots.** I'm no guinea pig.
If other people WANT to be experimented on, that's their business.


When in the history of vaccination approval and administration in the
U.S. was there was a vaccine that demonstrated a statistically
significant incidence of delayed side effects (serious or otherwise)
occurring more than a few months following inoculation?* Please provide
a reputable reference.* I don't think that you'll be able to find one.
Yet, on the basis of fear, unsubstantiated by any facts, you consider
the potential risk of such a situation greater than the extremely well
documented substantial risk of becoming crippled or killed by an
infection with one of the COVID variants.* For the sake of yourself,
your family members, friends, and possible co-workers, examine the
facts
and reconsider your decision!


When in the history of vaccination approval and administration in
the U.S. was there was a mRNA vaccine?


That's a non sequitur; completely irrelevant.* In the past, many new
vaccines when first approved and administered, were developed by novel
techniques and had never before been used to develop a safe and
effective vaccine.* You think the smallpox vaccine was safe?* How
about the Sabin polio vaccine?* Not even discussing vaccines, how many
people have life-threatening allergies to the penicillins or other
families of life-saving medicines?* Should we ban penicillin?* Should
we place a strict embargo on peanuts and ban them entirely from the
marketplace because a small percentage of the population is at risk?
All decisions involving public health constitute best judgement after
a risk vs. benefit analysis.

Risk vs. benefit.* Yes, we might be able to extend experimental
vaccine protocols for many months or even years but there's no
objective endpoint that can be set.* How long is long enough?* Why
choose any particular length of followup?* Usually it's a compromise
between recruiting and retaining sufficient subjects to enable an
appropriate magnitude of statistical significance when the data is
analyzed, the cost per month of keeping a research team funded to
maintain the protocol, the severity of the disease threat, and what is
known about the biology of how we respond to the introduction of
similar foreign substances into our bodies.* mRNA is not a novel
molecule, recently synthesized in the lab.* It's produced by cells and
viruses and needed to maintain that specie's viability in nature.* Our
cells need mRNA to fabricate proteins.* We've known about corona
viruses for decades and none have ever even been suspected much less
documented of being either mutagenic or carcinogenic.* We know how
lethal and transmissible the COVID corona virus has been.* The risk vs
benefit of administering mRNA vaccines against the COVID virus
strongly favors the use of the preapproval human clinical trial period
that was selected.



The goal of vaccines is to trick our immune systems into producing
antibodies that target a specific virus attacking our bodies.** Why not
skip traditional vaccines and go straight to treating the most sick
people with covid antibody plasma?

If it actually works, don't you think they'd be using it already instead
of vaccinating?