1.Advertising. Using the forums for advertising, site or product promotion, or for business deals and offers. You may not make posts to promote commercial, personal, or not-for-profit websites, products, or services. Threads will be deleted if their purpose is to advertise, announce, or promote products, services, or organisations, build traffic at other websites, carry out business activities, or for similar purposes that do not benefit our forum community. If you wish to post a link - please contact one of the Admin Team beforehand
Written by
Steve112
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
106 Replies
•
"They" do not need us... There are 7 billions of us "too many"...
john campbell advised everyone to go and get vaccinated, before longer term data was reached ,now he is singing a different tune, now that we can see some longer term data, proves the point that it was all rushed through, any further jabs is each and everyones choice, at their own peril. to say they reduce severity of illness in my mind is impossible to say, if you could take the same person jabbed and then unjabbed with the same single infection, you could then maybe come to a conclusion, but hows that going to happen. further , the only people i knew and there are lots, that came down with this flu strain were all jabbed.
Just type Dr John Cambell into You Tube it’s on there. And yes he has certainly changed is tune regarding the vaccines. And finally censorship on this forum regarding showing an informative video is nothing short of scandalous and pathetic. We are all adult enough to make our own minds up on such subjects.
When the powers that be overreact and shut people like Dr C down it has the opposite effect and makes people feel that there must be some truth in what he is saying.
The stats don’t lie. It is no strange phenomenon that I think we are all witnessing so many friends and relatives taken iII or worse in the last 12 months.
Yes it is staggering the excess deaths and Heart related illnesses that are currently occurring and seemingly a media blackout unlike the daily fear meetings during the pandemic..we even have the British Heart Foundation bombarding our TV screens with the distressing advertising trying to normalise and desensitise us witnessing the sudden deaths of young children on the sports field..
I really do not like what is going on and like you personally know of so many that are suffering or sadly passed away one being my Cousin she was just 43 fit healthy lifestyle no existing conditions whatsoever found dead at home..cause of death “natural causes”
Hence my original posting which was seen to be unacceptable
Yes and all the excuses for the rise in sudden deaths some of them laughable and all of them present before covid or the vaccine roll out. What the authorities refuse to do is investigate on a vaccine status level and by testing antibodies to try and tease out those who might have died due to complications of covid and those who are more likely to have died from the vaccine. If somebody dies within a very short time of being vaccinated then it it cannot be dismissed simply as coincidence. But if the death is several months later ,which still might be due to the vaccine, it is more easily swept under the carpet. The real problem is the spike protein which is common to both covid and the vaccine and which various studies have shown to be responsible for the damage. The spike protein in the vaccine has been modified slightly to make it less easy for the body to destroy . Some people are producing it for far longer than was envisaged.and nobody knows how long a given individual might produce it for. Some people have been found to be producing it for over a year!
I have seen a recent vid by him on YouTube where he goes over a recent reanalysis of Pfizer's own trial data which shows a level of 1 in 800 for severe adverse effect. He points out that other vaccines in the past have been withdrawn so that a risk/ benefit investigation could be done at adverse event signaling at a much lower level. He does not call for a halt to the vaccine program as that would probably result in his YouTube channel being shut down so I have read that he has done it on Rumble.
Unfortunately Rumble is in a row with our government and we cannot get it here in France. Is this the video where he calls for stopping the vaccine rollout?
Thank you for the link. I have had all the COVID jabs and none of the flu jabs. Maybe I am lucky, but so far I have had neither COVID, or flu. ‘Things have changed’ as the Doctor stated. The Government realising the economic, and to them financial, cost of their policies is now muted on COVID statements. I think that the public in general is more blasé towards COVID. I still wear a mask on buses, and in shops-one of a small minority. I have a 70-year-old friend who has had all the jabs, but whose previous personal prevention methods have waned.
I am sure that the statistics are sound, but perhaps changing behavioural attitudes should also be considered. TerryW
Do ya think that maybe the reason people with more vaccinations catch Covid more often is because they are less careful otherwise about not catching it? Less mask wearing, more willing to go into crowds, etc, due to the perceived safety provided by the vaccinations?
Careful, Harry - this is not a thread where reasonable thoughts like that can be allowed to enter in.
Here is a quotation from a recent Twitter thread:
“Anyway, the most interesting result of the study to me is actually not the effect (or lack thereof) of the third dose of vaccine, but that: “No reinfection in any cohort progressed to severe, critical, or fatal COVID-19”.
And taken from the actual study that examined the possibility of "immune imprinting" from the booster vaccines against omicron, this is what the doctors concluded:
“These findings do not undermine the short-term public health utility of booster vaccination."
Clearly, the omicron variant has changed things; but how and why this is, scientists are still trying to ascertain. Is omicron “milder” or is that that mass vaccination has made covid “milder”? Until we know, I think it is fair for governments to use the one tool that kept our hospitals open and running: vaccination.
Now here is a quotation from the European Medicines Agency in December 2022: “The wide uptake of COVID-19 vaccines during the COVID-19 pandemic led to the rapid accumulation of extensive safety data from clinical trials, studies and spontaneous reporting on side effects. These data have established the safety profiles of these vaccines. Therefore, regular monthly safety updates are no longer necessary.”
So do we believe experts and health authorities like these or the cynical and mocking Dr John Campbell?
Look at where the EMA gets 85% of it's money. Hint it's not the European taxpayers whose safety they are supposed to be protecting. Look at the career of the woman of who currently heads it- nearly a decade spent lobbying for Pharma in Brussels. Why should we trust them? Anybody who has regularly watched the videos of John Campbell would not call him cynical and mocking. Boring and long winded in his style of presentation - maybe. But he has always struck me as being a person of integrity even when advocating for the vaccines.
As for the Qatar study that Prof Balloux quotes " no infection in any cohort .......COVID19" you do realise that one of the cohorts was the unvaccinated? So if the unvaccinated did not get to be hospitalised , get into ICU or die then what exactly shows the public utility of the booster vaccination given that the authors' conclusion was that the boosted had more infections? They give no explanation of their concept of what this " public utility " might be . A point made by some of the people who replied to Balloux's tweet.
Campbell is slyly mocking in his style. He's a manipulative speaker who has seduced many to believe his views. He is worth hearing, for sure, but his conclusions are not always rational.
Yes, I knew of the study parameters and the various the cohorts, but the doctors concluded correctly and wisely in many other experts' views. The EMA is not a crooked organization, but I still await the delayed FDA conclusion regarding the same. Since they approved the combined vaccine only very recently, I imagine they must feel and will soon announce that covid vaccines have been proven to be essentially safe.
You constantly refer to " experts" . By experts I suppose you mean scientists preferably of Doctoral level in fields related to virology/ epidemiology / genetics etc. Balloux for example is professor of computational biology at UCL . He describes himself as an infectious disease epidemiologist and microbial geneticist. But the tweet you quote above should not logically be used in anything other than a neutral sense . It is possible to interpret it as Balloux finding it interesting that in terms of severity of infection the unvaccinated were no worse off than the double or triple vaccinated. The conclusion of the doctors who authored the study was directly opposed to their findings. In what way is this correct or wise? Other than to give them a chance of getting off preprint and getting their study peer reviewed .So what if other "experts" agree with them? If these experts think it is wise and correct to conclude something that directly opposes the data what does that say about their scientific integrity? Perhaps you should let us know who these "other experts "are .
When I say "experts" I mean those professionals who inform the likes of NICE, the FDA and other health bodies (whose names I do not generally know) along with the many whom I read from who either directly carry out peer-reviewed studies or who seem to be acknowledged mainstream experts in covid studies (whose work and names I can find out and quote).
The Tweet I referred to was no more than a way for me to support my point quickly and easily using a current and decent-seeming source. That point being that the vaccine safely prevents hospitalisation and severe repercussions from covid in non-immunocompromised individuals (i.e. the vast majority) - and keeps our hospitals and their ICUs running.
Whether having had covid, or not having had the later boosters (i.e. only having the initial two vaccinations) is also sufficient to prevent severe infection is, I agree, in question and is being researched. Whether the omicron variant can defeat the boosters in allowing through non-serious infection as well as doing little for infectiousness seems likely and rightly brings into question once again the point in mass vaccinating young people given the increased risk of side effects.
The following three Twitter contributors are among several who have always seemed to me to be expert in their knowledge, trustworthy and balanced in their views and offer useful links to other trustworthy sources:
But if your point was that those who were commentating on the thread and expressing doubts over vaccines were somehow more unreasonable than Harry 63 ( as from your first words it appeared to be ), then no it is not supported because according to the tweet and the study you introduced the unvaccinated did no worse in terms of clogging up hospital and ICU. How does this study which shows no worse outcomes in the unvaccinated support your point? Indeed the triple vaccinated got more infections. Granted they were probably just on the level of a bad cold but who wants a bad cold? I have looked at the biographies of the 3 experts you referred to . Mina has left his academic positions and appears to have gone into the private sector - as chief science officer for eMed a diagnostic testing company . Makes sense as he was apparently so obsessed with rapid antigen testing that some of his peers blocked or unfollowed him on twitter.
The Wachter twitter thread that the link you posted lead to seems to be mainly a long complaint about how his wife despite having had FOUR jabs still got covid and developed long covid as a result. I looked him up as the name seemed familiar to me and realised I had read interwiews with him in the Guardian. He is paranoid about catching covid , still won't dine out indoors and has likened taking off masks to dangerous driving.
Even Akiko Iwasaki does not think that the presently available covid vaccines are very effective and advocates for nasal vaccines . Something I actually agree with!
I would like to know what it is that makes you so confident that the individuals that you cite to back up your pro covid vaxx views are any better credentialed than some of the individuals that I could cite who hold the opposite viewpoint ,other than confirmation bias? Which I will freely admit I might be guilty of too.
The study showed that the boosted got more infections than both the unvaccinated and those who only got the primary series.. A recent study done by Cleveland clinic investigating the efficacy of the bivalent (4th) boosters for their HC personnel showed similar - those who got the 4th booster were worse off in terms of infection. I don't actually know. There could be confounders that have not been taken into account. But from these studies it appears to be the case. Needs more investigation.
No I did not say that. But it is a possibility that needs to be investigated . It has not been ruled out that it's not the vaccine. The immune system is very complicated. The mRNA vaccines do not work like classical vaccines. They prompt the body to make the spike protein but the theory that this production would be turned off after a few days after the antibodies had been provoked has not been borne out as some people are producing it for much longer. Spike protein has been found in autopsies in some people much longer than a few days after vaccination. Who knows what effect this might be having . Or the change in the ratios of types of different antibodies that has been found recently. Vaccines have made infection worse before. It has happened with a vaccine that was developed for RSV and also with dengue. There are a lot of things that are still unknown about the virus itself and the vaccine makes our bodies produce a part of the virus. Some scientists think the choice of the spike protein was a bad idea. Only time will tell.
I'm not sure "confirmation bias" is meaningful in the sense you imply it. The difference between the information I point to and that from the likes of Dr Campbell is that I am not picking and choosing experts subconsciously or otherwise to support what I already believe, except inasmuch as my beliefs align with the status quo. I am not fishing around for experts to defend my cynical or contrary position or even what I - loosely - call "conspiracy" views. My "bias" is that I agree with the majority of knowledgeable experts who consider covid-19 to be sufficiently serious in terms of its potential for disrupting health service provision to need unusual regulatory measures to allow a means to curb it.
I do not believe that the covid mRNA vaccines, whatever their emergency regulatory status and the lack of long-term studies, were approved except that great consideration was given to ensure that they were safe, including the choice and safety of the lipid carrier system required. The idea that a required ten years was stupidly and riskily shrunk to a few months is a straw man if ever there was one. So far as I can read, the technique has been studied for several years as a means of delivering a range of treatments for cancer or whatever.
Concerning the Qatar study, isn't the important finding that omicron susceptibility might be different with regards to vaccination status (or non-status) but that vaccination (or previous infection) confers immunity from serious covid? Antibody studies, if I have read them correctly, show that even many non-vaccinated people carry the required antibodies presumably from prior infection, or even from prior vaccinations for such as TB.
In the same Twitter thread another doctor wrote what I've cut and pasted below. I found it very succinctly put, that, if it is to be dangerous at all, the first dose of covid is the one to be concerned about. Luckily, vaccination confers that "dose" in a generally safe manner devoid of the small but anxiety-inducing and potentially dreadful risks of catching the disease itself.
It has obviously never occurred to you that I might have what you describe as "a cynical and contrary position" because I came across the opinions of well credentialed scientists ( predominantly here in France where I have access to articles written in French) that did not accord with the "status quo"- if by this you mean the medical consensus - and not because of any fishing around as you put it. My original attitude when the vaccines were first introduced was " wait and see". This was influenced by my previous personal experience and because the word from the floxie community was mixed . Some people had no short term reactions to the vaccine others had a severe relapse of their floxing symptoms . There was no way of knowing into which category one might fall. I had also had in the past reactions to flu and tetanus vaccines. So I was in no hurry to roll up my sleeve. As time went on and the more I read I became more not less reluctant and will never forgive myself for succumbing to the very intense pressure there was here in France ( much greater than in the UK) to finally get vaccinated. As I have explained to you before I am not impressed by exhortations to follow the medical consensus as the history of medicine shows that is often wrong and progress is often made when it is overthrown.
I have already explained to you what a straw man is . Your use of it here shows that either you have not understood the definition or are wilfully ignoring it and just throwing it around inappropriately -bit like using a swear word.
Yes the mRNA platform has been studied for some time especially as a means of delivering cancer treatments. This is not the same as having actual treatments that are being used with postmarketing data. You say you worked in Pharma . You must be aware then of the difference between clinical trial data ( necessarily gathered from a limited number of people over the defined time period of the trial ) and postmarketing data which comes from a much wider range of the population and increases with time. It is generally during the postmarketing period that problems with treatments come to light. Though court cases have shown that Pharma companies have known all along ( even from the pre clinicals) that there were problems but have concealed them both from the regulators and the public.
If non vaccinated people carry antibodies through other means (such as previous infection with SARS Cov 2, or indeed cross immunity from other corona viruses that have been infecting humans for ages, or past TB vaccination) why should healthy and especially young people take a new treatment with no long term safety data from poorly conducted clinical trials where the adverse reactions of the trial participants were hushed up? I would suggest that instead of sticking so rigidly to the "status quo" you watch the film posted above to the end. There are "experts" on both sides of this debate . I personally find people like Peter Doshi ,Ryan Cole ,Pierre Kory etc more measured and credible than Fauci , Marks , Walensky etc. The poor people in this video were not anti vaxx. They were reassured by the "safe and effective" narrative , stepped up and rolled up their sleeves. They thought they were being good citizens .They were badly injured and have since been gaslighted and swept under the carpet and left with huge medical bills. Pay particular attention to the testimony of Maddie de Garay 's mother and the lady who was damaged by her first Astra Zeneca jab. The latter was told by AZ that because her reaction was so severe she could not have the 2nd jab. But she was wiped from the trial and her reaction not included in the data. Is she the only person this happened to? According to the whistle blower from Ventavia this sort of thing was happening in the Pfizer trial too- so many adverse reactions they could not keep up and many not logged.
I would be inclined to think that the results of the Qatar trial show that Omicron infection is not very serious for vaccinated and unvaccinated alike . So boosters are unnecessary. There are probably millions of people who had covid for the first time before the vaccine roll out and were no more ill than with a bad cold or mild dose of the flu - among them my daughter and sister . My sister had the original Wuhan strain in early Oct 2020. She said she had had far worse run ins with respiratory viruses when she was teaching. I'm sure my husband had it before there was testing . He was 76 and recovered much quicker than he did from a respiratory virus he caught in 2016.
Lastly the information John Campbell is conveying is not something he has made up out of thin air. It is the findings of studies that need to be looked at and if necessary refuted . So far I have not heard the CDC come back and say for instance that the reanalysis of Pfizer's own data ( done on the documents that the FDA were forced to release by the American courts) is incorrect. Perhaps you know different.
Just to be sure, on this occasion, I looked up "straw man". I used it correctly in this context.
As for the rest, yes, there are experts on both sides of this debate, except that, in an important sense, it isn't a debate: the hospitals and health system scraped through because of the effectiveness and general safety of the vaccines. Thank goodness for that.
Those who chose to put themselves - and the hospital and health care systems the rest of us might depend upon for our well being and lives - at great risk in the early days of vaccine and covid, and who allowed, even perhaps willed, themselves to become polarised in their thinking, and, some of them, to follow the small but social-media amplified voices of cynicism and descent, well, so be it.
But, hurrah that we have the freedom in our societies to do so.
Your continual coupling of dissent ( not descent) with cynicism has echoes of Newspeak. Not getting vaccinated because of genuine fears of adverse reaction to the vaccine is not choosing to put the health system at great risk and it is a disgraceful thing to suggest. I do not expect you will watch the above film but the people who testify show that the vaccine is not safe for everybody . They are not complaining of sore arms or a couple of days of fever and joint pain but of extreme damage that has ruined their lives, driven some to suicide and killed their loved ones . But for you they are probably just collateral damage . And you call me cynical.
And no I am not hurrahing. You might live in a society that gave you a choice . I do not. Although most of the people in the above (American )film got the vaccine voluntarily many people would have sustained damage because they were forced by mandates to have the shots in order to keep their jobs. When the vaccine passports were enforced here hundreds of thousands were forced to choose between their livelihoods and getting a medical treatment they did not want. Anybody who worked in hospitality or entertainment or anywhere where a user of the services had to produce a passe vaccinale. But not the police because the government knew they would probably rebel. Same in Italy and some other European countries. This is contrary to the Nuremberg Code which was formulated after the last war to give people the right to bodily autonomy. Maybe you should read it.
We both know that no drug is safe "for everybody" and that the testing and regulatory processes involve identifying those for whom a drug is not suitable; and we both also know that unexpected drug interactions occur as well as unforeseen, rare side effects. The blood clots and heart inflammation are very unfortunate, especially for AZ, in my view, whose vaccine worked well and was very safe overall. It also was sold at cost and could be stored easily at ambient temperatures for longer. I suspect there was some devious marketing by Pfizer over this, but there we are. France fell for it big time if there was with Macron speaking out quite unnecessarily. The issue with mandating vaccinations was at a time of the greatest fears for the health services and for the lives of the elderly and others prone to the cytokine storm, as it came to be called.
My suspicion also is that the internet is magnifying problems by becoming a magnet for those who have issues to air. Social media especially has a lot to answer for in my view. I shall watch the film, however, with interest, and read the other articles you suggest.
Yes, "dissent" - indeed. Thank you for pointing it out. Auto-correct and a tired mind have much to answer for. When I write with my favourite fountain pen, I rarely make spelling errors.
Steve
PS. I have just watched Campbell's video and realised that I had already watched it all a good while ago. I just couldn't listen to him once more throughout. What a character! He truly does know his audience and speaks very effectively to it. For anyone one who is studying for a qualification in Media Studies or Linguistics, it would make for a useful text for analysis. I hadn't realised it was all about the Cleveland study. My memory is getting worse. He's not for me, I'm afraid. I'll look out the others you mention for sure.
PPS. I'm confused by which video you asked me to watch. Is it the Campbell one about the Cleveland study? That ends with him telling us to download his posters in case he is removed from the airwaves.
Drugs are given to sick people. Vaccines to the healthy . There needs to be a much better risk / analysis assessment for vaccines. The regulatory bodies did nothing to identify those who might be badly affected . How could they when they accepted such poorly conducted clinical trials? The EMA brought up the problem of consistency of content. The BioNTech vaccine that was used in the clinical trials had an average of 75% intact mRNA but the commercial product an average of only 55%. Given the possibility that truncated RNA could cause serious problems like protein misfolding they said this was not good enough but in the end let it drop. Probably because Pfizer was unable to put this problem right and produce the amount of vaccine needed for the roll out. But that does not solve the problem of what the truncated RNA might be doing to people. I am not an "end justifies the means" person. I do not think it was a good trade off to vaccinate vast swathes of young healthy people so as go give a few more months of life to the very old. If the hospitals were collapsing ( and actually they did not collapse prior to the vaccine rollout or even in the time between the first and second doses being given) it was more because the governments here and in the UK had run down the health service for years. The hospitals in Sweden where there are far more beds per 100,000 of population coped much better even without a lockdown ,though they too committed the horrible "error" of turning out infected patients into the nursing homes. What worries me most is that no lessons will be learned from any of this and the same dire scenario will be repeated again and again in the future.
I had never heard about mRNA causing protein misfolding but a quick search revealed that since the mRNA from the vaccine never enters the cell nucleus, it could not cause protein misfolding. I do recall a scare story that mRNA can cause prion diseases, but that was debunked.
I think you have a point concerning the vaccination of young people, except perhaps those who came into direct contact with the elderly, and, even in that context, had N95 masks been available, then perhaps contact could have been made safe.
I suspect you are right in that few lessons will have been learned. The UK is currently in what might yet turn out to be dire straits, health wise, with the NHS seemingly close to being overwhelmed.
I don't know where your quick search took you . Protein synthesis takes place in the cytoplasm of the cell not the nucleus. The translation of mRNA instructions into proteins is done by the ribosomes in the endoplasmic reticulum The proteins start out on the ribosomes as linear sequences of amino acids. During and after synthesis the proteins need to fold into what is known as their native conformation. Protein misfolding is believed to be the cause of many degenerative and neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson's , Alzheimer's , Huntingdon 's and CJD. So whether the mRNA can enter the cell nucleus or not is irrelevant . It does not need to. A study done by Lund University showed that the mRNA of the Pfizer vaccine was reverse transcribed intracellularly into DNA of the human liver cell line Huh7 within 6 hours of exposure to BNT162b2. Now this was an in vitro experiment on a cell line so we cannot know for certain that this takes place in vivo but it does show that this is possible. The authors did the study because Pfizer's own biodistribution study on rats and mice presented in their documentation to the EMA showed accumulation of LNPs in the liver and other organs very shortly after intramuscular injection. Animals that received BNT162b2 were observed to have reversible liver changes such as enlarged livers and increases in liver enzymes. They wanted to see if theoretically there was a mechanism for this.
I'll look into this again. I am way out of my depth intellectually in this area but still try to make my way through the studies. I am pretty good at searching Google Scholar but found nothing of use that suggested mRNA vaccines had ever been seriously implicated in this, only the idea of their risking prion disease which was roundly rebuked and shown to be nonsense.
If you haven't read such responses and ripostes already then I am rather surprised as when the paper claiming mRNA covid vaccine could cause Alzheimer's came out it was the subject of several "fact check" and similar articles.
But, if you really did miss it, a search for the paper that set off the FB spree of nonsense about all this: "COVID-19 RNA Based Vaccines and the Risk of Prion Disease J. Bart Classen, MD" will reveal the same that I have seen.
For a truly useful reprise of vaccines for covid-19, I found this very useful and surprisingly readable:
Yes I did read it ages ago so I don't remember much what was in it. I do remember that I was not very impressed with it at the time and if he has published anything since I have ignored it. I have read fact checks sbout other things and often I am not impressed by them either. Often they are out of date . New studies are coming out all the time. But I think Classen's paper was speculative and theoretical from what what I do remember not a study of actual cases of CJD arising in close proximity to vaccination.
You must, I guess, then have other evidence that mRNA vaccines increase the risen of protein mis-folding since you mentioned it? I can find no evidence at all apart from suspect sources.
Readable? Are you serious? I have carefully read through it . It is for the most part a very detailed description of the way the mRNA vaccines work . The only relevant part of the entire article pertaining to the efficacy or safety of the vaccines is at the end . And the thing that stands out there like a sore thumb are the comparisons for adverse events in the vaccine arm and the placebo arm with MUCH higher rates in the vaccine arms for both Pfizer BioNTech and Moderna. The article was submitted in Feb 2021 and was obviously written very shortly after the vaccine rollout started. The only data available at that time was the limited data in the published clinical trials. Not even the six month data that showed greater mortality in the vaccine arm than in the placebo arm. So as for being relevant or "truly useful" 2 years on - you must be taking the p**s Oh and the authors even warn at the end that we will need to watch out for ADE.
The study came up in my search for a link between mRNA vaccines and prion diseases, which you had suggested. I thought, given the extraordinary complexity of the science, that the writers gave a good explanation of the vaccines; they explain clearly how the vaccines work, how crucial they are and why they are safe.
I asked you to give the evidence that you have for a link between the vaccines and human prion diseases.
Actually if you bother go back and read this exhange you will find that it was you who first mentioned prion disease . I mentioned the possibility of truncated RNA causing protein misfolding. You then came back with prion disease having been debunked. I find it difficult to believe this study did come up in your search for a link between prion diseases and mRNA vaccines. The word prion appears nowhere in the document and protein folding ( not misfolding) only once in the section on codon optimisation. If you had read it carefully and understood it you would see that although the writers give a good detailed description of how the vaccines work, they cannot state that they are safe as only safety data can do that and at the time the article was written this was largely lacking. The authors themselves say " Although continuous study of the long-term protection against SARS-CoV-2 and adverse effects remain to be carried out, the efficacy and safety of the two mRNA vaccines appear to be higher than the vaccines against other infectious diseases." Since when does "appear to be higher than the vaccines against other infectious duseases" mean the same as "are safe" ? Indeed time has shown the opposite as far as safety is concerned with more adverse event signals for these vaccines than for any other during the time that pharmacovgilance bodies have been tracking vaccine adverse event signaling. As for long term protection - most of the population has been encouraged to have a primary series and two boosters in the space of just under two years and some people have had 5 jabs. The authors also say " A recent screen of the monoclonal antibodies in the blood plasma isolated from mRNA-1273-vaccinated people showed slight to moderate decrease in neutralizing effects against the E484K, N501Y, and the K417N-E484K-N501Y combination variants. However, the rapid design and large-scale production features of mRNA vaccines can reduce the concern that an mRNA vaccine may lose the efficacy against novel SARS-CoV-2 variants." Given that the recently highlighted Cleveland study showed that the bivalent vaccine booster introduced last year had only 30% efficacy against the circulating BA 5 variant which was in the vaccine it seems that the authors of this paper were a tad optimistic. Also this decrease in neutralising effects they mention was showing up after a very short time maybe even as little as a month given the start of the vaccine rollout and when the paper was submitted.
If you are going to link to articles that you think prove how safe the vaccines are perhaps you could indicate some that have been written more recently say in the last 3 months rather than 2 years ago .
I used the term "prion disease" as plain language appeals to me rather that technospeak (or even sarcasm 😉 ). When you used arcane phrases such as “truncated RNA” and "misfolded protein", I felt you were implying that the vaccine might cause those deadly diseases – if not, why mention it at all?
Regarding the age of the paper I linked, really, the information it contained is still wholly relevant and the authors clearly support the use of vaccines and feel that they are safe. Science rarely moves as rapidly as you imply.
The safety of the vaccines is still considered to be unusually high, despite your claims to the contrary. The FDA analysis of Pfizer's evidence will be interesting, of course, but it's unlikely to change things. We can only hope that the new strains are truly weaker than the older ones and that no more mass treatment will be needed.
I mentioned it in the context of misgivings the EMA expressed over the quality control in the manufacturing process . As an example of how a regulatory body despite identifying a problem does not seem to have insisted that this problem be rectified. But there is probably a reason for that. Leaked emails have shown that some of the scientists at the EMA felt that they were under intense political pressure from the European Commission to grant the emergency authorisation.
Yes the authors support the use of the vaccines and felt they were safe in 2021.. So what? Why should the opinion of these scientists in Macau count anymore than that of other scientists who from the beginning thought they would not be safe ?. One is a geologist , another an organic chemist , and the only one (apart from the PhD student Lagniton) whose speciality has anything to do with the human body is a stem cell specialist. The information in the paper is irrelevant to the question of efficacy and safety of the continuation of the vaccine program today 2 years on. And if you bothered to read it properly you would see that the authors themselves say that continuous study is necessary. You say that science rarely moves as rapidly as I imply ie over a two year time scale. Yet the name given to the vaccine development program in America was Operation Warp Speed - a public–private partnership initiated by the United States government to facilitate and accelerate the development, manufacturing, and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines . So it's ok to roll out vaccines on the basis of 2 months worth of phase 3 clinical data but not to doubt it's safety after two years of accumulated adverse event signals?
The FDA supposedly analysed Pfizer's evidence BEFORE they authorised the vaccines. After all that is supposed to be their job, but they along with the CDC have since refused to release data they are mandated to collect, leading people to suspect they are hiding something. But that's more than you can say for the MHRA. I watched an interview with a retired surgeon from a UK hospital . He knew someone who worked for the MHRA ,who had told him that when the documentation for Pfizer was presented nobody bothered to analyse it. They just took Pfizer's word for it. Well I expect they were under intense political pressure from the UK goverment to authorise the emergency use- especially as Boris wanted the cachet of being the first country to start the vaccine rollout.
As you continue to be unable to see the distinction between someone "feeling" that something is safe and knowing that it "is" safe ( a bit odd for an English teacher) I see no point in continuing with this exchange .
The internet is a wonderful resource for those seeking science and reason but, along with social media, it also has the power to create and reinforce skewed and cynical viewpoints.
As a former teacher of Latin , Greek and logic my husband is much better than I am in matters of linguistics. He says I was incorrect to admit to being cynical ,as cynicism is unfounded distrust. Given my own personal experiences and the fact that they have been convicted many times in criminal proceedings my distrust of Pharma ( and the regulatory bodies who are supposed to watch over them but too often turn a blind eye) is not unfounded. I would go further and say that anybody who trusts them ,given their criminal convictions is naive. Naive persons are more likely to be deceived than sceptical ones. Oh and by the way a French company who are looking to develop an injectable form of Ivermectin have recently published a successful RCT in which they used the oral form of the drug. They are not descibing it as "horsepaste ".
Unless you count this forum as social media I have no aquaintance with it. I am not on Facebook , do not use Twitter or any of the other social media platforms. In fact I think they are a plague.
Well, I’m pleased that we agree about the nature of social media. This forum is that, too, of course – but a more restrained, modest and dignified form with sound moderation.
I am sure I’ve said more than once that I am also sceptical of some aspects of capitalism and even what some call "Big Pharma" but not to the levels you are. It’s likely that your past experiences with prescription medicines and mine of working in the industry brings us to interpret the same information very differently. I would say that you have developed a cynical rather than a balanced viewpoint regarding the pharmaceutical industry but not without some reason.
I have no doubt in my mind that the developing science around covid and the vaccines has been profitable and often exploited, but isn’t that is the nature of the capitalist beast? In its favour, the thrill of profit, the fear of loss and the intensity of competition combine to bring capitalism to drive innovation in ways that no centralised system has ever been able to replicate.
Our government dealt, in my view, generally quite badly with the crisis and, it seems to me and thanks to Johnson, exploited it for dubious reasons including politics and profit. The EU as a body, along with some European governments, dealt far better with it, again, that’s my feeling.
Overall, though, against the backdrop of the awful pandemic, it's truly been a wonderful time for science and for people like me who adore that august discipline. I’ve witnessed the kind of science that has helped humanity survive what, for many months, looked like the impossible to survive: an airborne, highly infectious pro-inflammatory virus, one that serendipitously homed in on individuals unfortunate enough to have what, an excess of ACE2 protein or something in their organs, leading them to suffer a disastrous disruption of their immune systems and often, death.
A Twitter poster called John Bye has done a great deal of interesting digging into what some of the "anti" experts are claiming. Rightly or wrongly, I can’t help wondering whether the likes of Dr Campbell don’t align themselves in some ways with some of them:
For somebody who thinks social media are a plague you seem to spend a lot of time on Twitter and have posted several links recently. I have never heard of HART though I am aware of the opinions of Mike Yeadon. I have no idea who this John Bye is or why anyone would think his opinion worth considering. Perhaps you can say who he is . Again this is OLD stuff -18 months old. Just one example of how out of date this is - after a cursory look through I noticed he mocked the antis because " members frequently suggest that covid vaccines made people MORE vulnerable " . Well recent studies are showing that as far as infection goes that is now true , as I have already pointed out to you more than once . Plus the national statistics of more than one country have shown in 2022 that all cause mortality is higher in vaccinated people in all age groups . I don't know why you label the people Bye mocks as "experts". One appears to be a lawyer, another a homeopath. But I suspect you call these people experts because you do not wish to engage with the views of people who are actually virologists or infectious disease specialists or geneticists etc but who hold opposing views to your own . I think it is an entirely scurrilous suggestion to say that Dr Cambell might be aligning himself with people who think this has something to do with 5G or graphene or depopulation. What John Campbell does is draw people's attention to the latest studies that are being done which lead to questioning of the "safe and effective " mantra. Studies which need to be discussed seriously and openly. But the likes of yourself label anything that might shake your faith in the vaccines as "skewed" , "cynical " or , "conspiracy theory ". Actually I think the last 3 years has been a terrible time for science as dissenting views about conduct of the crisis and the vaccines have been censored right ,left and centre and those who hold them have been ridiculed , blackened and often driven from their jobs, no matter how good their credentials were before 2020. Only now is criticism of lockdown being seriously discussed .
As for Pharma how does one interpret criminal convictions and billion dollar fines " differently" ie in a way that makes you believe that the offenders are trustworthy ? I give far more weight to that than to my own unfortunate experiences. Without that I might think I had just been unlucky but without my personal experiences I would still think they were untrustworthy given their records. This seems to be something that you are not able to address or even acknowledge . I would be interested to know in what capacity you worked for them.
And so it goes on. Mockery really is your modus operandae, you know.
"I suspect you call these people experts because you do not wish to engage with the views of people who are actually virologists or infectious disease specialists or geneticists etc but who hold opposing views to your own."
How many can you name? Respected leaders in the field of infectious disease, virology, immunology and genetics who are convinced the vaccination route was the wrong one given the appalling context of the time? Goodness me, I know a geneticist well, the daughter of a friend, never mind about "do not wish to engage...". Is she fully vaccinated? Yes. Did she wear masks? Yes. Did she socially distance? Yes.
That comment was not meant to be mockery. Mockery involves laughter and actually I feel sorry for you.
Prof Christian Perronne- infectious disease specialist
Prof Didier Raoult - microbiologist
These profs are infectious disease specialists and before the pandemic were among the foremost in this speciality here . Raoult was one of the most published in the world. His position on the vaccination program has become progressively more ambivalent .
Dr Alexandra Henrion Caude
Dr Christian Velot.
Geneticists .
Dr Jean Marc Sabatier - neuroscientist.
Dr Robert Malone- molecular biologist
Prof Luc Montagnier - virologist.
Geert Vanden Bossche- virologist
Now I expect you might go to Wikipedia to look these people up and say they are not respected leaders but anti vaxxers and purveyors of misinformation. But that label gets put on all those who disagree with the consensus no matter what their scientific credendials were before the pandemic.
Personally as an atheist I regard the hardline Catholic views of Dr Henrion Caude as nauseating , but she was always a conservative Catholic and before her retiral was a well respected researcher at INSERM . During her scientific career she was described by some of her mentors as " brilliant " . But all of a sudden she becomes "crazy" because she disagrees with the lockdown and vaccination policies of the government.
Same with Prof Montagnier. The fact that he espoused what many call crazy theories about the memory of water does not negate the fact that he was a world leading virologist and won the Nobel Prize for his work on HIV and therefore was cqualified to give his views about the virus and the means of dealing with it.
Dr Malone was one of the early pioneers of mRNA technology. Most of the above were dubious about or hostile to the vaccines PROPOSED ie the genetic based ones from the beginning. I don't know if they would have been opposed to more classical types of vaccines against the virus which have taken longer to come to market.
Prof Jean Francois Delfraissy ( virologist) was the head of the French equivalent of SAGE . He was known here as Mr Vaccine and was an ardent proponent of the vaccines until the middle of last year when he had the temerity to come out and say ( on television !) that the covid vaccines were a great disappointment , they were not working as had been promised and a rethink of the mass vaccination program was needed. Needless to say Macron promptly got rid of him and put a line toer in his place.
Citing one geneticist that you know who did those things is a silly argument . And what has masks got to do with this? I have always been in favour of wearing masks in crowded public places such as public transport and always complied with the mask mandates here. I wore a mask whenever I went shopping before they were mandated . Even though they are no longer compulsory I would still wear one if I was unfortunate enough to have to use public transport. Indeed the last time we flew in 2017 my husband and I wore masks for the flight . We were the only people on the plane doing so and got some funny looks, but it was the tail end of flu season.
Here's a quotation, "'Luc Montagnier has lost it,' wrote Science columnist and chemist Derek Lowe in 2012." Nature magazine, even in its obituary of him, but much more politely hinted at similar. As for Malone, well, much the same negativity can be found across the internet and his claim to have invented the vaccine or whatever has not added to his authority. I have struggled to find convincing information about the people you listed.
I cited my friend's daughter because of your mocking comment. I might have included her whole department at Cambridge but still you would have a riposte to that.
I have spent too long searching, not for the first time, trying to find some kind of validation for the views of those you list, trying to avoid the views of those who so roundly mock them. But I have failed.
As for plumbing the depths of silliness, well, your comments about my use of Wikipedia and your feeling sorry for me come close. Oh dear! Ad hominem, eh? 🙄
Have just watched all of this, so sad - poor people, but we dare not say too much. Loved the song in it, I Will Always Fight for You. I have watched presentations like this from UK residents too.
My nephew had trouble with several blood clots after he got the vaxxed, no one wants to say it was from that. Reports coming in from all over say differently. Time is telling the story. When I recently had an echo, the technician said they are seeing an increase in heart problems, she herself refused the vaxx and said if they keep pushing she will quit. She said, aren’t we supposed to be critical thinkers? It seems all governments are tying to put a stop to critical thinking. In California the governor signed into law, any Dr. not going along with the narrative will loose their license. Scary times. Some Drs. Like Peter McCullough have spoken out all along and are now targets. He started is own clinic and website.
The likes of McCullough , Kory and Marik have been persecuted and driven out of their jobs. They did not start speaking out because they wanted a career change. If not at the top of their tree in their specialities they were in the uppermost branches. Their credentials and work record as doctors had not been questioned. We are not talking about Andrew Wakefield here but members of America's medical establishment who have been turned into pariahs because they questioned an experimental treatment and dared suggest that lives could be saved with repurposed drugs in the time period before that experimental treatment was even available. One of the most moving testimonies from doctors in the film linked to on this thread was from Marik ,almost in tears because he was forced by the hospital he worked for to stand by and let patients die rather than let him treat them. There have been cases in America of relatives going to court to force the hospitals to give their very sick loved ones Ivermectin. The patients then recovered but the hospitals without the court order were prepared to let them die.
It is worse than sad. The denial of this problem , the shunning of the vaccine injured and the forcing of people to get these injections so as to keep their jobs is a crime against humanity as is mandating vaccination of children to ensure their schooling. I loved the bit towards the end with the two vignetttes of Fauci saying totally opposite things in March 2021 and July 2021 about the amount of virus in the noses and throats of the vaccinated and unvaccinated. In the space of 4 months it goes from 4 times less in the vaccinated and therefore proves that the "vaccines work in the real world" ( Fauci's actual words) to " essentially equivalent " which shows what? - that they are not working to prevent transmission which he is forced to admit.
I just feel the whole world has gone mad, right now, we appear to be going backwards instead of forwards. At least in France you still have a good medical service. Are you being encouraged there to have the covid vaccine as we are here.
I'' m afraid things were worse in some ways here Jean . When the passe sanitaire came in in August 21 people were forced to get a test at the chemists every 72 hours if they had not been vaccinated or had a certificate of recovery. This applied to all workers in every sector where the users had to produce a passe . At first these tests were free but not all pharmacies offered this service. Then in October the tests cost 25€ and went down to lasting only 24 hours. This made it impossible for most people as they would be paying an enormous chunk of their salary on testing. In January 22 the passe vaccinale was brought in where testing was not allowed at all so it was roll up your sleeve or lose your job if you did not have a certificate of recovery and the validity of that was reduced from 6 to 4 months with no scientific rationale behind it. I lost my passe in Dec 21 because I refused to get boosted so we were unable to go out except for essential shopping as all hospitality and entertainment places required a passe. They did this knowing that the vaccines were not stopping transmission and despite the fact that in the summer of 21 there was very little serious covid around here despite the delta wave. The hospitals were not overwhelmed at all.It was a cynical set of measures to force people to have the vaccine and Macron even said he wanted to seriously piss off the unvaccinated. The word he actually used is stronger in French than piss off but that's the nearest English equivalent! All this came to an end in March last year - guess why - because of the election in May. Lots of health care workers and firemen ( who do some ambulances ) were sacked and France is the only country in Europe who has not taken them back. There has been a lot of cut backs in the health service and they closed beds throughout the pandemic! Still things are nowhere near as dire as the UK as regards getting treatment. There is a lot of encouragement to get boosted but people are ignoring it. A lot of people say they don't want any more jabs including flu jabs and the take up for vaccinating children under 12 is very low. The passes applied to everyone from 12 up. There is talk of making masks mandatory again on public transport and in shops but nothing has been done so far. Very few people wear them now. Macron is very unpopular so I think there might be resistance to any new directives. Most people we know here and in the UK have had covid despite being boosted.
I'm amazed to hear what you have said about Covid in France and what people had to do in order to keep their jobs - talk about blackmail.
When Covid struck, my neighbours were part of an NHS scheme to monitor them for it. I felt quite envious at the start, because a nurse visited them often and they had lots of tests for Covid. Why them and not me I thought, but then I was quite anti the vaccine and they weren't. As I think I've said before I had 3 jabs out of fear, but will not have any more now. Anyway my neighbours have had Covid twice and now have the dreadful cough that is doing the rounds here in the UK. I haven't seen the nurse calling lately, so guess their monitoring has ended
My niece lives in Paris (her mum is French) and she is very anti Macron and the Covid vaccine.
John Campbell states that some evidence shows that people who have lots of jabs have been shown to have more episodes of Covid. I can quite believe that, because my daughter who works at quite a large hospital, where they were obliged to have the first 3 vaccines, says so many employees there have had Covid lots of times. She had Covid, with no symptoms whatsoever, and was forced to stay off work despite feeling fine. She worked many times in wards where people had bowel infections and yet never ever caught them. She proudly says it's because I wouldn't give permission for them to have many of the childhood/teen vaccines that were rolled out. We knew someone years ago, who nearly lost their child after having the measles vaccine.
We have friends who used to live in a neighbouring village but returned to live in Stockton on Tees. They were part of a scheme where they were randomly tested to see if they had covid whether they had symptoms or not. They have had all the jabs and he had covid twice after the first booster and she got it in Sept just before they were due to go and see their son in America. She was too ill to travel and they had to postpone the trip. He has just recently had the dreadful cough bug as well. I thought they did not oblige the health workers in the UK to get vaccinated.
I read in the Guardian that the government dropped the requirement for the NHS on a nationwide level at the very last minute before it was due to come in as it would have lead to too many staff leaving and staff shortages were bad enough anyway. But by then the blackmail would have worked and most workers would have got it . No wonder they can't discharge elderly hospital patients back into the community . There must be lots of care workers who just found other jobs when they were told "job or jab".
Very interesting and over time more will come out and hopefully open the eyes to those who put their full trust in the Pharmaceutical Companies and the agencies that are supposed to look after us.
Does anyone know as to why the other video had to be taken down?
Because it was going against what our C experts are saying/recommending. YouTube had already warned John Campbell about the content of his talks. No free speech in this country anymore. I like to hear all sides of a story.
very interesting if alarming. I would like to know if the vaccines are however still reducing our chances of severe disease because if so I would still opt for the vaccines. My own recent experience does back up his findings that more vaccines = more infections but in my case , they were less severe.
In October I had my 4 th Jab and 2 days later I tested positive for covid. I was poorly enough to be laid low for 8 days and took 3 weeks to feel normal again.
Over Christmas I tested positive again , I couldn’t believe I had it again so soon but guessed that I now had a different variant. This time my symptoms were really mild, less poorly than with a cold. So, more studies need doing before we all decline the next winters boosters. It would be dreadful if we had less infections but those that we did have, landed us in hospital.
It would not be that great either if every subsequent booster actually chipped away a little bit more at your immune system so that you became not only more susceptible to reinfection with covid but more likely not to be able to shake off other infections ,or worse your immune system did not deal as it usually does with the cancer cells that arise in our bodies all the time.
Quite! Which is why research does need to be done…. Before next winters round of boosters 😬 Is this specific to the new MRNA vaccines ? What about the traditional annual flu jab? etc etc etc
I think it might be specific to the mRNA vaccines. A recent paper published has highlighted a change in the proportion of the types of IgG antibodies produced after boosting. There is a switch to a much greater preponderance of IgG4. These are antibodies that are involved in tolerance of antigens rather than fighting and eliminating them - like tolerance of allergy causing substances. This was not found in people who had Janssen- a viral vector vaccine but only Pfizer. They did not test for Moderna or Astra Zeneca. This is not good news as our immune system should not be tolerating infections but might account for reports of people taking longer to clear covid infections or getting them in quick succession- maybe not another infection with a different variant but a rebound of the original one?
Yet the researchers who released that paper have stated that assumptions being made as to what the change of class actually means in the long run are premature.
Yes I am aware of that. They probably had to say something like that so their paper actually got published in a journal rather than languishing on preprint for months on end. But it does provide a plausible explanation for the findings of a recent study in the NEJM that showed that boosted people were the slowest to clear live culturable virus.
If you wish to read about emerging studies that take months to get into the MSM (if they ever make it) then go to the Substack platform. PM me if you are interested and I will give you the names of some of the blogs that I find interesting. I don't want to post them direct as it might be censored!
The fiasco over Covid, a Boris influenced government and vaccination has given academics a huge dollop of material on a variety of topics. Leaving that aside, on a personal family level, I am astonished at the extent of Big Pharma and their soldiers influence inducing wilful blindness on adult members and, from the info out there so far, I have bigger concerns for our beloved 4 grandchildren....and every other child!
I am pretty ashamed to say I have in the past been quite miserly in my charitable donations bringing up a family etc every pound counts. However, on this topic I have been very generous because I so respect those that have been brave enough to speak out for all of us, because they have suffered personally and because if the full truth is ever known I don't want to be shuffling my feet when the grandkids ask 'what did you do about it'.
I too after watching JC on you tube, wondered whether severity less as that was not the issue researched.Also interesting re use of MRNA vaccines for pilot study for cancer vaccinations though I doubt one could extrapolate to more cancer but less severe as a possibity
I am not sure that it is these covid vaccines that are to be used. Anti cancer mRNA vaccines are now in phase 3 trials and I read about one for melanoma that had promising results, but from what I read they were more complicated involving an individualised genetic component. Personally I suspect that one of the continuing reasons for pushing the covid vaccines now despite the lesser virulence of Omicron and the now accepted fact that they don't prevent transmission or infection, is because this is a giant clinical trial on the bulk of the human race for the mRNA platform. The more people who get them, the more data there will be on their pros and cons. The fly in the ointment of this approach is that the more the adverse event profile leaks out the less people ( particularly the young and healthy) will be willing to get injected.
Yes indeed. From what I can gather, which isn't much, some folk are already shunning all vaccines which may have adverse effects. I understand re MRNA phase 3 trials but tabloids are linking the 2 I feel (covid and cancer vaccine, which will cause its own issues I suppose.
Think it's inevitable the link in OP removed given this us such a polarised issue. Admin's job is smooth running of the group for discussion around AF and other arrhythmia. We've all seen some of the vitriol in previous posts and I'm sure this is upsetting for some. Since Jean had flagged where we can see the vid anyone here can go and look for themselves. For me, that's enough. Personally I have reservations about the efficacy of the ongoing boosters having had a reaction to the last one, which reactivated my shingles. Apparently I'm not alone. So I'll consider carefully whether I have another. Our immunity in general as a species is under threat and tbh that's more worrying. This is a symptom I guess. Off to think positive thoughts! Have a good weekend folks
The link removed was Not in any way controversial.. it was a discussion from a well respected individual reporting on our own government’s findings being the Swindon report..
The link kindly given by Jean is of another discussion.
As Richard Feynman once quoted
“I would rather have questions that can’t be answered than answers that can’t be questioned “
I, too, was told by an AFA moderator to remove three first-hand stories how honest folk came to be diagnosed with AFib and their success after a Wolf Mini Maze thoracic surgery.
I too had this procedure in Japan six weeks ago and it was uncomplicated, mildly painful (except for the first hours), smooth in recovery and the prize is being in NSR with just a maintenance dose of Flecainide for the first three months - no other medication (no AC).
I was asked by this forum's friends why I don't post more about my own experience?
I'm sorry your link was taken down. The title of the post (assuming this is the original) reads as potentially contentious to me. I think it's not the topic, it's peoples' responses if they have polarised positions. My take of course.
Yes, you are completely correct. Some people complained and I was told to remove, which is why I don't post my story. No room for petty squabbles and dumb censorship.
Thank you for your wishes, I am very well and can't remember that I had surgery recently, and the memory of my five year struggle with AFib is also fading (like the tiny scars).
I wish all AFib sufferers complete good health and freedom in 2023 and beyond. Saul
Two days after hospital discharge at the Sensoji (Asakusa Kannon Temple) - Japan.
Amazing- you look great! I might consider this in the future if needed. Depends on how finances go though. I'd be interested to know why you chose Japan. DM me if you prefer.
Oh, thanks for that info. I didn't know. Never had an issue with any of the COVID vaccines except the Pfizer Bivalent, nor flu for that matter. But I've only ever had 3 of those anyway.
Statistics. A straight line from an unwarranted assumption to a foregone conclusion.
I decided against being vaccinated with the new mRNA technology. I was scared of covid and it’s origins and I was worried about a mRNA being used in this way.
I also looked up my risk statistics on the Oxford risk calculator, which deemed my risk of death to be about 20,000-1 and hospitalisation at around 4,000-1. Many on here will have had surgery’s deemed (rightly so) very safe with a risk of death of 1000-1 or complications 100-1.
So I decided to wait for more data to decide what to do. I was widely criticised by friends and family.
Unbeknownst to me my actual risks were far far higher as I had undiagnosed coronary artery disease and afib. If I’d known this based on how scared I was as a fit healthy slim 46 year old, then as someone with to heart diseases I’d of 100% been persuaded to have the early jab.
I can now fully appreciate why many in the heart community did what I would of done and got jabbed to stay safe.
As it happens even with two heart conditions my case of covid brought home to me from my son was mild. Ill for three days bad headache sore chest aches and pains about four more days feeling tired, not bed ridden and feeling pretty good after day seven .
I think people should of been given more options, not just have the jab or be an idiot and you will likely die(press). Antivirals and monoclonal antibodies should of been an option for everyone. Some of the pro jab zealots where as bad as the anti ones.
I feel it was a very hard time for everyone, it was hard with all the noise and fear to make a decision. I’m now I’m reliant on pharma ! Which is quite ironic and I understand why people who’ve been successfully treated for heart conditions which have extended their lives or made them bearable had utter trust in the vaccines.
I just hope in the future we can have genuine independent health regulatory agency’s, who have zero funding from private corporations, who also pay for independent scientific studies on all major medicines to weed the good data from the bad/biased.
And that someone holds which ever party is at the reigns of the NHS to account for the utter shambles of a crisis the health system is currently in.
Daily mail online todays first 15 stories were about Harry’s book ! The first 20 should of been about Rishis nhs crisis talks.
I appreciate what you've said here about the difficulty of decision making in these times, especially at the outset. And independent regulatory boards yes. Alas the public is being deflected from real issues such as the collapse of the NHS by stories about Harry and Meghan - essentially gossip. Hard times right now.
Why is it that every time I've researched the nonsense you folks post, I've found a multitude of holes. Athletes pointed to as collapsing from the vaccine in "informative" videos, that didn't even have the vaccine, one even happened months before the vaccines were released and was pointed to as evidence!
Doctors pointed to as examples of having died from getting the vaccine, that actually had late stage lung cancer. etc etc etc
Do you ALWAYS fact check the things you read, or once you're in the rabbit hole do you become complacent and just eagerly eat up everything that continues to confirm your preconceptions. I believe it's the latter. That's how this nonsense survives. Unchecked cognitive biases.
I read the posts on this forum everyday. It is the first thing I do on opening up my tablet. I don't remember reading anything here about doctors dying of the vaccine . I must have missed the post about "Died Suddenly" which is I assume the video you are referring to? Or maybe there wasn't one .
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Is there a case for more specialism in Hospitals?
Fasting
Can you help?
Off topic, using GP on line services
