Duck Hunting Forum banner
1 - 20 of 119 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
SARS-CoV Vaccines Caused Serious Immune Dysfunction in Test Subjects Nearly a Decade Ago

The clinical data on the potential dangers of COVID vaccines are still sparse, but the conclusion of a 2012 test of experimental SARS-CoV vaccines conducted by the University of Texas sheds light:

"Challenge of mice given any of the vaccines led to occurrence of Th2-type immunopathology suggesting hypersensitivity to SARS-CoV components was induced. Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans is indicated."

When the actual SARS-CoV-2 virus is encountered "in the wild" - as inevitably happens - vaccinated subjects' immune systems (if the results of the above-referenced study apply in this context) will react abnormally or, in medical terms, pathologically.

If/when an abnormal immune response (immunopathology) is definitively proven as a consequence of vaccination specifically in the case of SARS-Cov-2 "vaccines," serious discussions must be breached about criminally prosecuting the big pharma execs and public health officials responsible for Operation Warp Speed.
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021...ccines-caused-serious-immune-dysfunction-test

No :censored: way in hell I will EVER take that experimental therapy called 'the vaccine'....

"This combined experience provides concern for trials with SARS-CoV vaccines in humans. Clinical trials with SARS coronavirus vaccines have been conducted and reported to induce antibody responses and to be "safe" [29], [30]. However, the evidence for safety is for a short period of observation. The concern arising from the present report is for an immunopathologic reaction occurring among vaccinated individuals on exposure to infectious SARS-CoV, the basis for developing a vaccine for SARS. Additional safety concerns relate to effectiveness and safety against antigenic variants of SARS-CoV and for safety of vaccinated persons exposed to other coronaviruses…"

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0035421
So, in this study they used 3 different types of vaccines. A VLP (used in some flu shots) a whole virus vaccine (used in some flu shots) and an rDNA (used in some Covid vaccines). ALL three candidates led to the issue you describe. Not one specific type of vaccine. Furthermore, the massive studies done on the current MRNA Covid vaccines have not indicated anything as you described. In fact, the results are quite the opposite of a "hypersensitivity" to the COVID components of the vaccine. So, what's the correlation? Are vaccines, like the flu vaccination, that use VLP or whole virus vaccines unsafe as well because of this study? :huh:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
One of the best things I've heard recently.......

There are people right now in this nation with plastic shopping bags filled with gasoline in their houses, who won't take a vaccine because it's unsafe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Rat Creek said:
There you go projecting your bias that anyone who is not giddy to participate in a drug trial is an idiot. :rolleyes:

At the very least, you should be compensated for participating in drug trials. :fingerhead:
:thumbsup:

Rat Creek said:
Two of my mother in law's friends have now died within a week of the vaccine. I am sure it will be chalked up to something else. :fingerpt:
And that's a shame. It really is. I hope they find out what caused it, even if it was the vaccine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
lil dinamo said:
BigTerp said:
lil dinamo said:
A drug experiment trial that has zero liability and apparently the ingredients are a secret too... why are the inserts blank? Are we not allowed to know what is in the vaccines? What is the big secret...

There is no secret. :rolleyes:

https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2MY1TT

https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-956865924140
There is still zero liability. :rolleyes:
True. But where is the big secret? The Q-code, in fact, gives the user even more information than normal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
May be true, but the mRNA spike protein has been shown to be an inflammatory agent in the lungs which produces blood clots. It is currently unknown if immunopathology occurs when a vaccinated individual comes in contact with the real SARS-COV2 virus. You know damn well that it is a possibility.
Agreed there have been blood clots linked to the vaccine(s). I've read the reports and believe what is being reported. As to the exact cause, we still are not really sure. Did it come from the vaccine? I believe it absolutely did. But did these people have pre-existing conditions that caused the clots, or would've thrown a clot at some point anyway? Ya know, just like those hundreds of thousands that died WITH Covid and not BECAUSE of Covid? See my point here?

Of course it's a possibility. But to link it directly to the current vaccines is really grasping at straws!!

Indaswamp said:
And for most people the risk/reward is on the side of forgoing the vaccine and building natural immunity. Unless the individual is over 60 or has severe comorbidities it is just not worth the risk.
We've been over these risk/reward calculations many times. By our previous calculations in this very thread, about 400,000 Americans died from Covid in the past year or so. 3%, or 12,000, of those were between the age of 40-49. 15%, or 60,000, were between the ages of 50-64. So we take out those 65 and over, and we're OK with achieving "natural immunity" to a novel virus by killing 72,000 Americans between the age of 40-64? You're really OK with that?!?!?

We are already seeing some serious long term effects from Covid, besides death. The virus can damage the lungs, heart and brain, which increases the risk of long-term health problems. In addition, it can lead to long term fatigue, shortness of breath, "brain fog", sleep disorders, fevers, gastrointestinal symptoms, anxiety, and depression. Covid has been around for about 14 months. Vaccines began trials in July of last year, so let's say 10 months of data. So far the long term effects of the vaccine have been 4,434 deaths (using VAERS data :rolleyes:) and blood clots, of which 28 have been reported. That's it.

Let's compare......

Individuals vaccinated - 153,986,312
Deaths - 4,434

Covid infections - 3,280,000
Deaths - 400,000

Long term effects - read above

The risk/reward leans heavily, HEAVILY, on getting vaccinated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Rat Creek said:
It is not binary to vax or not. There are other approaches that are highly effective; drugs that have been around for a very long time, and help people get over Wuhan quickly with all natural, range fed, ethically sourced immunity. Ivermectin, HCQ, Remdesivir and others.

And regular old healthy people can use supplements and vitamins to boost their immune systems so they may need nothing at all.
If it was really this easy, and highly effective, why did 400,000 Americans die?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
ohio mike said:
As a Covid survivor with enough comorbidities for a couple of people let me weigh in here. First off I'm what they call a long hauler. I came down with it Nov.4 2020. I've had 3 rounds of therapy over 5 months. My lingering symptoms have been tiredness and a really sucky taste and smell thing. I'm not getting the vaccine RIGHT NOW because I've got natural immunity. If a variant appears believe me I'd take a vaccine for it in a second. Anyone who thinks getting this crap to acquire immunity is just bat**** crazy. I won't go on and on about symptoms but they ain't what anybody wants to experience. Imagine how it feels to go to sleep wondering if your gonna wake up, or saying two words into a five word sentence and forgetting what the hell your talking about. If ya want the vaccine get it,if you don't, don't. Just for God's sake quit fixating on it. Go fishing,or do a little dog training. Anything to lift your spirts. Believe you me I'd rather FF a Pitbull then go thru that again.
Dude, that sucks!! I hope with time things get back to normal for you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
Once again...I dispute those number of deaths FROM Covid...
Once again......where did the extra 400,000 American deaths come from last year? A question that's been asked over and over here, with not even a sniff of an answer, or theory......nothing. You want to refute the numbers of deaths from Covid, fair enough. But you've got to then be able to explain or, at least, theorize why there were hundreds of thousands of extra deaths in the past year.

Indaswamp said:
Asymptomatic spread of infection is a lie.
So, are ALL the scientist, doctors, epidemiologists, etc., etc. who have been studying this stuff for decades and Covid pretty intensely for the past year, be part of the grand scheme to present falsified data? If so, to what ends? What other science do you deny? Seriously. Below is just an example of one of those studies from Duke University. They must be in on the conspiracy as well.

"Nearly 40% of children ages 6 to 13 tested positive for COVID-19, but were asymptomatic, according to just published research from the Duke University BRAVE Kids study. While the children had no symptoms of COVID-19, they had the same viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in their nasal areas, meaning that asymptomatic children had the same capacity to spread the virus compared to others who had symptoms of COVID-19."

You say things like the above. Provide you're sources, provide your data, SHOW YOUR WORK. You can't just deny this or state that with literally nothing to back it up.

Like Spinner said earlier, some people are SO entrenched in their beliefs that they are blind to REAL facts and data. It's astonishing, really.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
cartervj said:
So asymptotic transmission happens at what rate.
I don't think this can be accurately assessed. What has been shown is that those that are asymptomatic carry just as much virus in their nasal areas (where it is expelled) as those with symptoms. Making transmission from asymptomatic patients possible.

cartervj said:
Early on and one of the first actual deaths reported in our area was a guy that worked with my wife. They were around each other thruout the days he was with virus but not with fever. His last day around her was he had a coughing fit. Coughing was regular with him since he was a smoker. The health department was never concerned because he wasn't in the presence of others for a continued amount of time. Remember that 30 minute window deal. They were told to monitor for symptoms. I can give several scenarios my wife was in contact with Covid positive people. She never was sickened and was only made to have the Covid test for a routine colonoscopy. We thought about doing the antibodies test yet the doc in the box says it 50% accurate. Maybe it's better now??????
Yeah, the "30 minute window deal" is a good example of some of the terrible recommendations, policies, etc. that have been done during all of this. I understand a novel virus pandemic is new to pretty much all of us, minus those that lived through Polio as a kid, and we needed time to figure things out. But I'd have much rather heard, especially early on, "we don't really know" or "we are trying to figure that out" sort of thing instead of "you must do this" actually nevermind "you now need to do this instead". Lost a LOT of credibility with this sort of messaging.

cartervj said:
Why all the fuss about temps if you're a spreader without a fever.
We discussed this the other day, and I agree that temps are marginally effective at best. But if it catches the few people who charge on during a pandemic with a fever from infecting others then it's certainly better than nothing.

cartervj said:
The authorities are either real incompetent, scare and lack understanding of the Covid virus or was used to force change.
Maybe all 3 is the correct answer.
I don't think you're too far off base here.

All I'm trying to convey is the real science and data that we've gathered over the past 14 months with the virus and 10 or so months with the vaccine. There will be years and years of study and data needed to truly understand it all. But you go with what you've got in front of you. For me, I chose to listen to the real science and data and ignore the heavily biased opinions and suggestions that are ALL OVER THE PLACE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
cartervj said:
So asymptotic transmission happens at what rate.
Exactly... no one can answer that question Carter. The study asymptomatic transmission is based on, initially the woman claims she did not have symptoms and infected 12 people. Upon further research and digging into the story, she had symptoms...coughing and sneezing. There was also a case in Thailand I believe where random people in an apartment building were infecting each other. People point to that as asymptomatic transmission but on further digging, it can be blamed on substandard plumbing...i.e. no sewer traps. And fecal matter from infected individuals is a known pathway to infection.
Agreed, that question cannot be answered. It could be high or low, but like the studies you mentioned earlier from 9 years ago, you know damn well it's possible. You quote studies that were flawed, and they should rightfully be called out as so. Yet you ignore the one I cited that showed that asymptomatic patients possessed the same viral load in their noses as those that were symptomatic. How do virus's spread? You're ok accepting the studies that have shown fecal matter contains live virus's and can lead to infection. Why ignore the others? Serious question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
The Big lie we were told is that 40-50% of Covid infections were happening from asymptomatic transmission. That was the justification for the extreme lockdown measures and the stupid mask protocols. Reality is quite the opposite...it rarely happens.
Agreed. There was NO WAY to determine this. Still to this day you cannot accurately assess the rate of transmission from asymptomatic patients, whether it's significant or miniscule. The fact still remains that it happens. But this goes back to what I said previously, instead of breaking out some arbitrary number like 40-50% to induce fear, why not be honest and just say "we know asymptomatic individuals can spread Covid. To what extent, we are not sure. We just know, currently, that they can spread Covid". It's not solving the world problem, but it's being honest instead of pretending they know everything. In fact, it helps with credibility . Crap like that would've went a long way in not loosing so much public trust.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
"Nearly 40% of children ages 6 to 13 tested positive for COVID-19, but were asymptomatic, according to just published research from the Duke University BRAVE Kids study. While the children had no symptoms of COVID-19, they had the same viral load of SARS-CoV-2 in their nasal areas, meaning that asymptomatic children had the same capacity to spread the virus compared to others who had symptoms of COVID-19."
What test was used?
"We recorded the results of SARS-CoV-2 testing performed for clinical care. Research staff collected nasopharyngeal swabs from participants who consented to a home visit. Participants who declined a home visit received a kit for self-collection of a midturbinate nasal swab. Nasopharyngeal and nasal samples were collected with nylon flocked swabs (Copan Italia, Brescia, Italy) into RNAProtect (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany).

Viral Load Assay
SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies per milliliter was determined using a 2-step real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay developed in the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified Immunology and Virology Quality Assessment Center at the Duke Human Vaccine Institute. DSP Virus/Pathogen Midi Kits (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany) were used to extract viral RNA on a QIAsymphony SP automated sample preparation platform. A reverse primer specific to the SARS-CoV-2 envelope gene was annealed to the extracted RNA and reverse transcribed into cDNA using SuperScript III Reverse Transcriptase and RNaseOut (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA). cDNA was treated with RNase H and then added to a custom 4× TaqMan Gene Expression Master Mix (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) that contained envelope gene-specific primers and a fluorescently labeled hydrolysis probe; quantitative PCR was carried out on a QuantStudio 3 Real-Time PCR system (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA) [11]. SARS-CoV-2 RNA copies per reaction were interpolated using quantification cycle data and a serial dilution of a highly characterized custom DNA plasmid that contained the SARS-CoV-2 envelope gene sequence. The limit of quantification was 62 RNA copies/mL of sample as determined by an extensive validation process consistent for use in a clinical setting.

Data Analyses
We described characteristics of the study population by SARS-CoV-2 infection status using frequencies and percentages for categorical variables and medians and interquartile ranges (IQRs) for continuous variables. We used the χ 2 or Fisher exact test for categorical variables and Wilcoxon rank sum tests or analysis of variance (ANOVA) for continuous variables to compare the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2-infected and uninfected children and to evaluate age-related differences in symptoms among SARS-CoV-2-infected children. We compared nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 viral loads (measured as log10 copies per milliliter) by age, illness characteristics, and timing of sample collection relative to symptom onset using ANOVA or linear regression. We used a quantile-quantile plot to verify normality of the nasopharyngeal viral load data. Study data were managed using REDCap electronic data capture tools hosted at Duke University [11]. Analyses were performed using R version 3.6.1 [12]."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
PCR test accuracy is questionable depending on how many replications are done.
I don't think it's perfect. But it has been shown to be the most accurate compared to antigen and rapid tests.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
Indaswamp said:
BigTerp said:
Indaswamp said:
PCR test accuracy is questionable depending on how many replications are done.
I don't think it's perfect. But it has been shown to be the most accurate compared to antigen and rapid tests.
I believe that the inaccuracies of the PCR test are being intentionally exploited to induce mass hysteria and fear. How many replications would you consider a reliable for the PCR test? Surely not 25?
I'm not a Clinical or Medical Laboratory Technician, so I have no idea how many PCR cycle counts would be too many and what effect that would have on the results. I do know if the tests are not used in accordance with the manufactures instructions (including either too many or too little PCR cycle counts) you're not getting the best results possible. Again, no idea if that would produce more or less positives. From a public health perspective and personally, I would want to see a higher case count per death or hospitalization versus a lower case count per death or hospitalization. From that point of view, I hope that cases have been way under reported. Better chance of this thing becoming endemic, mere background noise and far less of a burden and less deadly than the flu. Versus hanging around at higher levels with more people to infect and becoming more of a super flu type thing, or worse. FWIW, I think cases have been widely underreported and we are well on our way to the former. Which is a good thing.

I understand your point, and appreciate the reasoning behind it. But to answer your question, I really do not know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
SpinnerMan said:
BigTerp said:
I hope that cases have been way under reported.
Amen!!!

If it is way OVER reported, it is a way bigger :censored: problem.

If it is way UNDER reported, it is a way smaller problem.

All evidence is the CONFIRMED cases are a relatively small fraction of the actual cases.

If you go to the CDC, confirmed cases are 33M. There are about 330M people in America. That means 90% of the population has not had a CONFIRMED case.

Deaths attributed to Covid are 580k. That 1.8% of the confirmed cases. Much worse than the 99.9998765% survival rate.

While I agree that is probably an over estimate of the additional deaths that would not have happened if not infected by Covid, it is not a wild over estimate. We're talking 10% max error. The error goes in both ways. Excess deaths are close to that and are mostly the virus with a small amount being the result of bad decisions from the fear, effects of isolation, etc.

If the confirmed cases OVER estimate, the death rate from actually getting the virus goes UP!!!

If the odds of dying if you are infected is 0.3%, then the actual number of cases is 190M or about 59% of the population. A little less than 1 out 6 actual cases being confirmed. This puts us near herd immunity with the vaccinations. BTW, it doesn't vanish when herd immunity is achieved, but the dynamics change. The world needs herd immunity for it to vanish.

If this is accurate and it takes 70% infected to get to herd immunity, that means 230M Americans will be infected without a vaccine and just short of 700k Americans would die without vaccination.

If the actual cases were God forbid, LESS than the confirmed cases because of too many false positives. Let's say the real number, that would not have resulted in panic, were 20M instead of the 32M confirmed cases. The death was over reported by 50% so the actual deaths FROM Covid was only 300k and the herd immunity level only needed to get to 50%. This would be wonderful, right? We would then expect that once the 165M people eventually got it, only 2.5M people would be dead from it :eek: :eek: :eek:

Do the math? Half the time the argument is that it is way :censored: more deadly and we are miles from herd immunity (I guess because the lock downs worked :huh: )

At least get a logical consistent message. Follow the real science. Math is real science.

Yep!!! :clapping:

Now, don't get me wrong, there was a LOT of fear mongering and terribly mixed messages along the way. It's being frustrating and the public lost a lot of trust in the CDC and government in general because of it. The most recent example is Walensky's impassioned speech about her fear of impending doom back in March and just 2 days ago she wasn't comfortable sending her kid to camp (why by the way? Science would deem that is safe). Next day- goodbye masks. It's such a mixed bag of messaging and a terrible look. Give me science, numbers, and data, not your own personal worries, thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
cartervj said:
BigTerp said:
Now, don't get me wrong, there was a LOT of fear mongering and terribly mixed messages along the way. It's being frustrating and the public lost a lot of trust in the CDC and government in general because of it. The most recent example is Walensky's impassioned speech about her fear of impending doom back in March and just 2 days ago she wasn't comfortable sending her kid to camp (why by the way? Science would deem that is safe). Next day- goodbye masks. It's such a mixed bag of messaging and a terrible look. Give me science, numbers, and data, not your own personal worries, thanks.
I take it you're a Doctor

My father was admitted to the Covid floor early on in the outbreak. He was negative and the doc in charge said so but was waiting on confirmation. He said his lungs did not display Covid lungs. The broken glass appearance in X-rays.

Got to ask the doc in charge of the floor questions. He took it very serious since they were in unknown territory. This hospital was very forward and answered any and all questions they could. Saying we don't know if they didn't know.

The other hospital with a very new building and cutting edge equipment wouldn't answer crap from anyone. Simply stating look at
The state reported numbers to see theirs. Not a good look and certainly added to conspiracies. They did have 5 healthcare workers die from Covid.
I am not a doctor, but do work in the medical field. I try to look at this sort of stuff at face value using data, numbers, science, etc. It's been tough to sift through a lot of the BS though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
cartervj said:
BIL is piled up in bed after getting his second dose. Called and were to meet at the farm, he'd fertilize while I planted. He never showed so I called my sis. Said he turned around and back home and went to bed.
It's extremely interesting to me the wide range of side effects from the vaccine. Myself, I felt like I was hungover the entire next day. Cloudy headed, tired and just felt kind of out of it. Not nearly enough to keep me home from work. But my colleague who is 2 years older than myself (I'm 39) but in far less shape than I had full blown flu like symptoms and a swollen lymph node in his neck. He came to work (looking like hell), but went home shortly after. Then you have my wife who felt absolutely nothing and my 84 year old grandfather who also had zero side effects. I personally know of several dozen that have been vaccinated. All ranging from zero side effects to full on flu like symptoms like my co-worker. All were back to normal in 24-48 hours.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
417 Posts
HNTFSH said:
I turned 60 over the weekend (that was painful) but had no side effects from either the 1st or 2nd Pfizer shot. Just the typically reported sore shoulder for a few hours. It really is amazing how the COVID itself is so different among peoples.
It really is crazy. It'll be interesting in 10, 15 or even 20 years from now to see what we've learned from all this mess.
 
1 - 20 of 119 Posts
Top