it can be regarded as scaremongering.
Yes and sensationalized bullshit half truths .
Good old Fox News style
by Sea Breeze 67 Replies latest social current
it can be regarded as scaremongering.
Yes and sensationalized bullshit half truths .
Good old Fox News style
Here's a possible explanation for the bloodclots. Doesn't sound good though.
The delivery mechanism means the vaccines send the DNA gene sequences of the spike protein into the cell nucleus rather than the cytosol fluid found inside the cell where the virus normally produces proteins, Marschalek and other scientists said in a preprint paper released on Wednesday. Once inside the cell nucleus, certain parts of the spike protein DNA are spliced, or split apart, creating mutant versions, which are unable to bind to the cell membrane where important immunisation takes place. The floating mutant proteins are instead secreted by cells into the body, triggering blood clots in roughly one in 100,000 people, according to Marschalek’s theory. In contrast, mRNA-based vaccines, such as the jabs developed by BioNTech/Pfizer and Moderna, deliver the spike’s genetic material to the cell fluid and it never enters the nucleus. “When these . . . virus genes are in the nucleus they can create some problems,” Marschalek told the Financial Times.
Here's the link to the article: https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/german-scientist-discovers-what-causes-rare-blood-clots-some-astrazeneca-jab-recipients
I'm not taking it. Not going to let my kids take it either.
The vaccines are saving many more lives than they're taking.
If Martin writes it, I'll pretty much believe it.
Only a moron would refuse the vaccine.
Freemail:
Only a moron would refuse the vaccine.
It's not as simple as that. There are various vaccines available, and people should try to get one of the vaccines with the highest efficacy and without risks associated with any conditions they know they may be predisposed to (though the percentages for the risks are very low). If an individual is at greater risk from a particular vaccine with higher efficacy, that person may need to go for a vaccine with slightly less efficacy. For a very small number of people (proportionally), this may mean not be able to accept a vaccine (on actual medical grounds).
The other interesting thing is that the types of sources that complain about deaths related to vaccines are happy to accept statistics that include deaths that may have been caused by other factors incidental to the vaccine, but reject statistics for COVID-related deaths on the same basis.
As a physician, McCullough is no longer recommending this vaccine, and other prominent virologists and physicians are calling for a stop to the program. Sadly, many are complying simply because they're desperate to get back to the "normal" they knew before, of sending their children to school, keeping their job and leading the life they had before the pandemic.
Don't do it, McCullough says — don't fall for this trap because it's only going to make things worse. By vaccinating everyone against a very narrow spectrum of immunity — the original SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, which has since mutated in any number of ways and no longer exists — "we are setting ourselves up for a superbug that's going to wipe out populations," he says.
As such, the COVID-19 vaccine is a bioweapon, McCullough warns, and the side effect concerns are "far beyond anything we have ever seen … Americans should be extraordinarily alarmed."