Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Members Blogs
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Nationalist
Health
🦠 Covid 19 Vaccine Thread 💉
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="A Man Called Charolais" data-source="post: 67925"><p>Thanks for linking to an explanation of the study. jonp had posted it earlier and I found the paper but it's full of jargon.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>From what I understood, the mRNA vaccines produce a lot of junk proteins in the cells they infect, This is because when they bind to the protein factory, they often slip down the information link and produce a different protein. This means that it's not just spike proteins that are produced but random ones too. </p><p></p><p>From the ZeroHedge article, the researchers say that there are no observable side effects from this but the permission to apply the vaccines should have been more rigorous. Basically, they had something called a vaccine and they used it to hell with the consequences.</p><p></p><p>It's like the Brownstone article on masking posted by jpc above:</p><p></p><p></p><p>'Oreskes concludes that Cochrane got it wrong because its methods are too rigorous and that “it’s time those standard procedures were changed.”</p><p></p><p>Peter Gøtzsche, a physician scientist who co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and an expert in research methodology, says he is “stunned” by her comments.</p><p></p><p>“It’s clear that Oreskes lacks scientific objectivity,” says Gøtzsche in a stinging rebuke. “Oreskes is actually arguing that the researchers should have lowered their standards and relied on weaker evidence in their review.”</p><p></p><p>...</p><p></p><p>The authors write, “In medicine, new interventions with unknown benefit but known or potential risks cannot be ethically recommended or enforced until absence of harm is demonstrated.”'</p><p></p><p><a href="https://brownstone.org/articles/did-cochranes-masks-study-get-it-wrong/" target="_blank">Did Cochrane’s Masks Study Get it Wrong? - Brownstone</a></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="A Man Called Charolais, post: 67925"] Thanks for linking to an explanation of the study. jonp had posted it earlier and I found the paper but it's full of jargon. From what I understood, the mRNA vaccines produce a lot of junk proteins in the cells they infect, This is because when they bind to the protein factory, they often slip down the information link and produce a different protein. This means that it's not just spike proteins that are produced but random ones too. From the ZeroHedge article, the researchers say that there are no observable side effects from this but the permission to apply the vaccines should have been more rigorous. Basically, they had something called a vaccine and they used it to hell with the consequences. It's like the Brownstone article on masking posted by jpc above: 'Oreskes concludes that Cochrane got it wrong because its methods are too rigorous and that “it’s time those standard procedures were changed.” Peter Gøtzsche, a physician scientist who co-founded the Cochrane Collaboration in 1993 and an expert in research methodology, says he is “stunned” by her comments. “It’s clear that Oreskes lacks scientific objectivity,” says Gøtzsche in a stinging rebuke. “Oreskes is actually arguing that the researchers should have lowered their standards and relied on weaker evidence in their review.” ... The authors write, “In medicine, new interventions with unknown benefit but known or potential risks cannot be ethically recommended or enforced until absence of harm is demonstrated.”' [URL='https://brownstone.org/articles/did-cochranes-masks-study-get-it-wrong/']Did Cochrane’s Masks Study Get it Wrong? - Brownstone[/URL] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Name
Verification
What day comes after Saturday
Post reply
Latest Threads
Registrations now Open
Started by Declan
58 minutes ago
Replies: 0
Public Chat and Announcements
The Co-Op Has Been Formed.
Started by Declan
Yesterday at 7:29 PM
Replies: 3
Public Chat and Announcements
Fastway gone bust
Started by Anderson
Yesterday at 5:29 PM
Replies: 6
Economy
J
The Aisling O'Loughlin thread
Started by Jay Homer Simpson
Monday at 5:55 AM
Replies: 6
Public Chat and Announcements
Origins Thread (Uncensored)
Started by AN2
Saturday at 4:01 PM
Replies: 9
Science
Popular Threads
Ukraine.
Started by Declan
Feb 21, 2022
Replies: 15K
World at War
US Politics.
Started by jpc
Nov 7, 2022
Replies: 6K
USA
Mass Migration to Ireland & Europe
Started by Anderson
Feb 26, 2023
Replies: 5K
Nationalist Politics
C
🦠 Covid 19 Vaccine Thread 💉
Started by Charlene
Sep 14, 2021
Replies: 3K
Health
General Chat in The Marcus Lounge.
Started by Declan
Dec 30, 2024
Replies: 3K
Public Chat and Announcements
The Climate Change scam
Started by Anderson
Jul 29, 2022
Replies: 2K
Climate Change
Forums
Nationalist
Health
🦠 Covid 19 Vaccine Thread 💉
Top
Bottom
