"Muggles" wrote in message ...
On 2/7/2021 11:36 AM, Retirednoguilt wrote:
On 2/7/2021 11:35 AM, 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?


Muggles, you are mistaken again. The goal of vaccines is to use an
extremely low risk method to induce our immune system to develop the
ability to fight an extremely dangerous high risk pathogen. In other
words, it is a preventive treatment, given to totally avoid or minimize
the severity of disease in a patient who may become exposed to a high
risk pathogen.

geez ... you think because I used different words to describe the SAME
process that I'm "mistaken."


Our immune system, whether through exposure to an effective vaccine or
exposure to a pathogen, activates numerous mechanisms of immune response
IN ADDITION TO CIRCULATING ANTIBODIES. In contrast, COVID immune antibody
plasma doesn't induce our immune system to develop the full



Another advantage of vaccines is that in the case of pathogens that


See my previous statement.

I also specifically mentioned that covid antibody plasma could be good to
use for people who are very ill where their bodies are fighting multiple
infections causes by covid.

The GOAL is to get antibodies to attack the virus. I don't care what one
study said last month or even last year. I'm aware of one friend (with
multiple physical issues) who should be dead but is NOT dead because he
was given covid antibody treatments.

Evidently, it WORKS!

We know it doesn’t work anywhere near as well as
vaccination and doesn’t stop an uninfected person
from getting infected in the first place.

Why not treat more people who need life saving antibodies to fight covid?

Because it makes a lot more sense to stop them
getting infected or serious disease in the first place.
And vastly cheaper and vastly safer too.