The true reason for going after NAC

thebigt said:
gotcha...hope you covid shot goes well with no bad side effects, good luck!!!
Click to expand...

Already had them. Ha ha ha. It’s nice to not have to worry about masks or spreading/contracting the damn thing. I don’t shame others if they choose not to though, I would just like people to be more honest about it instead of arguing that it is a conspiracy or there’s some inherent danger to it (if there is, show proof, there’s been a lack of proof though, so some people argue that the proof is being hidden, I mean, the narrative feeds into itself but they can do whatever they want I guess). I mean, maybe they really believe in what they say and think, so agree to disagree.
 
Comparing a known MRna process, that we know has killed thousands of people to UGL gear a hormone from China that has not killed anyone.

Is not an intelligent discussion.

There's zero comparison between UGL test and a vaccine.

You certainly can get sick from contaminated gear, but their are so many quality UGL's around that, that is far and few. Vaccines in general like any medication or drug have many side effects. Regardless if "ONLY" 4k deaths are attributed to millions of users, the fact is no one dies from Testosterone, making it a stupid comparison.


Maybe take something we use risky like DNP and then compare it to a vaccine.

Most people "tolerate" vaccines and DNP, but some of them kick the bucket. There I fixed it for you.
 
WesleyInman said:
Comparing a known MRna process, that we know has killed thousands of people to UGL gear a hormone from China that has not killed anyone.

Is not an intelligent discussion.

There's zero comparison between UGL test and a vaccine.

You certainly can get sick from contaminated gear, but their are so many quality UGL's around that, that is far and few. Vaccines in general like any medication or drug have many side effects. Regardless if "ONLY" 4k deaths are attributed to millions of users, the fact is no one dies from Testosterone, making it a stupid comparison.


Maybe take something we use risky like DNP and then compare it to a vaccine.

Most people "tolerate" vaccines and DNP, but some of them kick the bucket. There I fixed it for you.
Click to expand...

The mRNA vaccines has not killed thousands of people. Show me the data which shows that adverse effects are significantly worse than let’s say, the annual flu vaccine. I’ll wait.

I’ll help you out here, the number of deaths due to the mRNA vaccines has been: ZERO. This is an actual datapoint. To calculate it, you need to look at the death rate between vaccinated and non-vaccinated. It needs to be more than the death rate of non-vaccinated people per capita of 100k for example. This is basic math and basic statistics.

AAS users btw have a higher rate of death than non-AAS users. We actually have data for this. What isn’t as fully understood is why that is (the actual mechanisms at play). So on that datapoint, you are also wrong. I’m not going around telling people how horrible AAS is though because there’s a ton of other co-factors to consider, but the statistics does indeed show that they have a high rate of death.
 
Last edited:
kissdadookie said:
Already had them. Ha ha ha. It’s nice to not have to worry about masks or spreading/contracting the damn thing. I don’t shame others if they choose not to though, I would just like people to be more honest about it instead of arguing that it is a conspiracy or there’s some inherent danger to it (if there is, show proof, there’s been a lack of proof though, so some people argue that the proof is being hidden, I mean, the narrative feeds into itself but they can do whatever they want I guess). I mean, maybe they really believe in what they say and think, so agree to disagree.
Click to expand...
yes, agree to disagree...seems odd that manufacturers have been granted immunity from criminal or civil liability under the PREP ACT if covid vaccines have such a great long term safety record?
 
thebigt said:
yes, agree to disagree...seems odd that manufacturers have been granted immunity from criminal or civil liability under the PREP ACT if vaccines have such a great long term safety record?
Click to expand...

Yet what liabilities do supplement companies realistically have? 🤔🤔🤔 Not trying to throw shade at the industry but if you are critical of one and not critical of another just because you like the other, for example, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

Or how about this, in Texas, the medical industry is largely unregulated. What I mean is that it’s nearly impossible to bring a malpractice suit because hospitals and doctors are shielded. We don’t bring a stink about that even though they have Dr. Death coming out of there. Has there been evidence of vaccines actually causing harm? The data does not support that idea and we have plenty of vaccines which we have been using for decades. So, do you prefer to have the risk of polio or not? That one was rushed far quicker than the COVID-19 vaccine and way less clinical trials were ran for that.
 
bans NAC a proven health supp that works from public but you can still buy cigs from gas station... makes sense
 
diesel x said:
well whatever you wanna call it lol you know what i mean
Click to expand...

I mean, the problem is the retailers being overly cautious. The FDA’s last round of letters were given out due to claims on products that it cures hangovers. You’re not allowed to make claims for supplements.
 
kissdadookie said:
The mRNA vaccines has not killed thousands of people. Show me the data which shows that adverse effects are significantly worse than let’s say, the annual flu vaccine. I’ll wait.

I’ll help you out here, the number of deaths due to the mRNA vaccines has been: ZERO. This is an actual datapoint. To calculate it, you need to look at the death rate between vaccinated and non-vaccinated. It needs to be more than the death rate of non-vaccinated people per capita of 100k for example. This is basic math and basic statistics.

AAS users btw have a higher rate of death than non-AAS users. We actually have data for this. What isn’t as fully understood is why that is (the actual mechanisms at play). So on that datapoint, you are also wrong. I’m not going around telling people how horrible AAS is though because there’s a ton of other co-factors to consider, but the statistics does indeed show that they have a high rate of death.
Click to expand...
You will wait

Let me ask you this. Have you ever administered a medication or a vaccine? Or been licensed to do so?

Because I have. So I am speaking professionally.

Now I am not "Anti Vax" by any means. but I am realistic. EVERY SINGLE MEDICATION including VACCINES, hurt and injure people

4K+ people have died from the Covid vaccine, that is in VAERS.

I will wait while you go look.

And if you dare tell me you have no medical background and no license and no actual experience.

I do not want to hear from you ever again on this topic.

I'll wait for your response.
 
WesleyInman said:
You will wait

Let me ask you this. Have you ever administered a medication or a vaccine? Or been licensed to do so?

Because I have. So I am speaking professionally.

Now I am not "Anti Vax" by any means. but I am realistic. EVERY SINGLE MEDICATION including VACCINES, hurt and injure people

4K+ people have died from the Covid vaccine, that is in VAERS.

I will wait while you get off your lazy ass and go look.

And if you dare tell me you have no medical background and no license and no actual experience.

I do not want to hear from you ever again on this topic.

I'll wait for your response. Sounds smartass doesn't it, smartass?
Click to expand...

Again, you are using what was self reported. You need to actually compare death rate of vaccinated to unvaccinated. That’s how you can figure out if the vaccine is causing deaths (as the numbers would be higher for vaccinated than non-vaccinated if that is the case). It’s essentially the same concept for why we use placebo controls in studies. The non-vaccinated death rate in this case is the control (placebo).

Now, if you look at death rates for AAS users, they are higher than non-AAS users which indicates that AAS use at bare minimum is correlated with higher morbidity.

These are basic concepts for looking at data. It’s basic math. Basic statistics.
 
kissdadookie said:
I personally don’t feel that tying the vaccines into this makes any sense and unfortunately due to inaction from 2020, from the majority of the western world, we ended up with a terrible situation (personally at this point, I’ve know 5 people I know directly, in seriously bad shape from COVID with one of them dead after being in the ICU for over a month in a induced coma). The vaccines were necessary and the MRNA ones do have a lot of data behind them since they’ve been in development for decades (all the way back to at least the 90s) but was never put into commercial use as there wasn’t a use case for the technology yet. Now, the other one using a active virus which is correlated with the blood clots, that’s another story altogether (but they pulled it and reassessed it quickly enough).
Click to expand...

The idea dates from 1990, but Mrna research really only got rolling in 2005:

Invalid Link Removed
Every strand of mRNA is made up of four molecular building blocks called nucleosides. But in its altered, synthetic form, one of those building blocks, like a misaligned wheel on a car, was throwing everything off by signaling the immune system. So Karikó and Weissman simply subbed it out for a slightly tweaked version, creating a hybrid mRNA that could sneak its way into cells without alerting the body’s defenses.

“That was a key discovery,” said Norbert Pardi, an assistant professor of medicine at Penn and frequent collaborator. “Karikó and Weissman figured out that if you incorporate modified nucleosides into mRNA, you can kill two birds with one stone.”

That discovery, described in a series of scientific papers starting in 2005, largely flew under the radar at first, said Weissman, but it offered absolution to the mRNA researchers who had kept the faith during the technology’s lean years. And it was the starter pistol for the vaccine sprint to come.
Click to expand...

The reason it was never used, was because it was too dangerous to use (until now, of course):

The biotech had no scientific publications to its name and hadn’t shared a shred of data publicly. Yet it somehow convinced investors and multinational drug makers that its scientific findings and expertise were destined to change the world. Under Bancel’s leadership, Moderna would raise more than $1 billion in investments and partnership funds over the next five years.

Moderna’s promise — and the more than $2 billion it raised before Invalid Link Removed — hinged on creating a fleet of mRNA medicines that could be safely dosed over and over. But behind the scenes the company’s scientists were running into a familiar problem. In animal studies, the ideal dose of their leading mRNA therapy was triggering dangerous immune reactions — the kind for which Karikó had improvised a major workaround under some conditions — but a lower dose had proved too weak to show any benefits.

Moderna had to pivot. If repeated doses of mRNA were too toxic to test in human beings, the company would have to rely on something that takes only one or two injections to show an effect. Gradually, biotech’s self-proclaimed disruptor became a vaccines company, putting its experimental drugs on the back burner and talking up the potential of a field long considered a loss-leader by the drug industry.
Click to expand...

Regardless of what you feel about the vaccines, I think it’s a separate topic from how they regulate supplements.
Click to expand...

It should be, but it's not. That's like saying 'regardless of how you feel about FDA approval of weight loss drugs, it's a separate topic from how they regulated Ephedra'. I mean it should be, but we all know that's bullshit. We know money talks, and we know the FDA isn't just in it for your/our benefit and protection. When a cheap, safe, and generic ingredient is potentially up against a new drug technology that IS making billions, with the potential to make hundreds of billions over the next few decades, and the cheap safe effective thing is banned, well....if you chalk that up to 'a separate issue', I'm not sure what to tell you, besides that you are naive.

Distrust should be the default of all, when approaching .gov anything, at this point.,
 
poison said:
The idea dates from 1990, but Mrna research really only got rolling in 2005:

Invalid Link Removed


The reason it was never used, was because it was too dangerous to use (until now, of course):





It should be, but it's not. That's like saying 'regardless of how you feel about FDA approval of weight loss drugs, it's a separate topic from how they regulated Ephedra'. I mean it should be, but we all know that's bullshit. We know money talks, and we know the FDA isn't just in it for your/our benefit and protection. When a cheap, safe, and generic ingredient is potentially up against a new drug technology that IS making billions, with the potential to make hundreds of billions over the next few decades, and the cheap safe effective thing is banned, well....if you chalk that up to 'a separate issue', I'm not sure what to tell you, besides that you are naive.

Distrust should be the default of all, when approaching .gov anything, at this point.,
Click to expand...

There’s nothing to suggest that it wasn’t used due to it being dangerous. The problem has been difficulty of production as well as there simply not being a use case for it. You are also conflating the mRNA vaccine technology being using right now with the discovery of the concept of mRNA. The current vaccine is based on technology and research that dates back to the 90s.

Your argument of being distrustful of government as a blanket statement also makes no sense. Our modern government has been ran mainly to the beck and call of private industry. So your argument is to distrust government… and what? Place trust in the private sector instead as long as you think they are cool? The government is already mainly being ran by private industry, logically, private industry should be scrutinized far more than the government (considering our government is being ran mainly by private industry). The reason our government is so questionable is they are constantly operating for the benefit of private industry. Now that we have an actual pandemic where the lives of all are at risk, this all of a sudden perks your spider senses to want to be suspicious? LoL.

Should I point out that we are literally on a message forum which is mainly catering to the private supplements industry? Where is all the scrutiny about supplement claims? But you question the government in the middle of the pandemic with a life saving vaccine first? 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️
 
kissdadookie said:
Yet what liabilities do supplement companies realistically have? 🤔🤔🤔 Not trying to throw shade at the industry but if you are critical of one and not critical of another just because you like the other, for example, doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.

Or how about this, in Texas, the medical industry is largely unregulated. What I mean is that it’s nearly impossible to bring a malpractice suit because hospitals and doctors are shielded. We don’t bring a stink about that even though they have Dr. Death coming out of there. Has there been evidence of vaccines actually causing harm? The data does not support that idea and we have plenty of vaccines which we have been using for decades. So, do you prefer to have the risk of polio or not? That one was rushed far quicker than the COVID-19 vaccine and way less clinical trials were ran for that.
Click to expand...
you are arguing how safe the covid vaccines are based on the science, i am merely asking why the covid manufacturers got special dispensation over and above what is normally given under a special act wrote into a bill passed by congress.

back on topic, we were discussing how safe or unsafe the covid vaccines are...how about this--the spike protein travels to womens uterus/ovaries and renders them infertile-these women would have no recourse.
 
thebigt said:
you are arguing how safe the covid vaccines are based on the science, i am merely asking why the covid manufacturers got special dispensation over and above what is normally given under a special act wrote into a bill passed by congress.

you are going off topic, we were discussing how safe or unsafe the covid vaccines are...how about this--the spike protein travels to womens uterus/ovaries and renders them infertile-these women would have no recourse.
Click to expand...

The trials were being done early on. They’ve had safety data for this for a long while now since they were already trialing with 10s of thousands of people. You are trying to imply that there was no testing done and they just randomly YOLO’d this vaccine. They’ve been more transparent with the trials for these vaccines than most drugs that reach the market. So no, I’m not placing blind faith in this. You’re literally insinuating that they didn’t test this but the reality of the situation is that this went through extensive clinical trials. What did get cut out is a lot of red tape that usually goes with trials to move on to the next phases of clinical trials.

Now, how many people on here arguing against the vaccine pretty much place blind faith in supplements? 🤔🤔🤔 A bit contradicting do you not think?
 
kissdadookie said:
The trials were being done early on. They’ve had safety data for this for a long while now since they were already trialing with 10s of thousands of people. You are trying to imply that there was no testing done and they just randomly YOLO’d this vaccine. They’ve been more transparent with the trials for these vaccines than most drugs that reach the market. So no, I’m not placing blind faith.

Now, how many people on here arguing against the vaccine pretty much place blind faith in supplements? 🤔🤔🤔 A bit contradicting do you not think?
Click to expand...
you are not answering the question...if these vaccines have so much long term research behind them why did they need to have congress give them immunity written into a bill? there is a special exemption wrote into a bill passed by congress just for these vaccines---doesn't that at least make you wonder why?
 
thebigt said:
you are not answering the question...if these vaccines have so much long term research behind them why did they need to have congress give them immunity written into a bill? there is a special exemption wrote into a bill passed by congress just for these vaccines---doesn't that at least make you wonder why?
Click to expand...

Just in case something does go wrong, since these are coming from private companies concerned about liability. HOWEVER, the data clearly shows that they are safe. Both in clinical trials as well as out in the wild (we have statistics for this now). If there’s even a .00000001% that it could go really bad, they still want to be protected from it. I will be honest, when this was first rolling out, I was apprehensive about it, by the time I got my shots however, the data available was very positive that this was safe.

Just to give more context to mRNA vaccines, we’ve actually trialed a few of them in humans throughout the years (one was for the zika virus, but that got under control so the vaccine was unnecessary at that point). The main issue in regards to safety has been one of tolerability as they may trigger a strong autoimmune response (the flu-like symptoms a lot of people get and localized inflammation from the injection site). It’s not so much as a concern of safety but tolerability. As for how they affect your body and DNA, the stuff doesn’t stick around forever and doesn’t actually alter your genes. It’s there to trigger a NATURAL immune response (thus you have the antibodies without having to contract the virus). The safety profile on this technology is actually pretty solid and is a known quantity.
 
Last edited:
kissdadookie said:
Just in case something does go wrong, since these are coming from private companies concerned about liability. HOWEVER, the data clearly shows that they are safe. Both in clinical trials as well as out in the wild (we have statistics for this now). If there’s even a .00000001% that it could go really bad, they still want to be protected from it. I will be honest, when this was first rolling out, I was apprehensive about it, by the time I got my shots however, the data available was very positive that this was safe.

Just to give more context to mRNA vaccines, we’ve actually trialed a few of them in humans throughout the years (one was for the zika virus, but that got under control so the vaccine was unnecessary at that point). The main issue in regards to safety has been one of tolerability as they may trigger a strong autoimmune response (the flu-like symptoms a lot of people get and localized inflammation from the injection site). It’s not so much as a concern of safety but tolerability. As for how they affect your body and DNA, the stuff doesn’t stick around forever and doesn’t actually alter your genes. It’s there to trigger a NATURAL immune response (thus you have the antibodies without having to contract the virus). The safety profile on this technology is actually pretty solid and is a known quantity.
Click to expand...
for congress to put a SPECIAL immunity exemption into a bill that was passed into law doesn't make you question that the manufacturers are concerned about unforeseen dangers?


on average it takes 6-7 years of clinical trials for a drug to be put on the market at a estimated cost of $2.6 BILLION.

in 2017 alone 4,402 drugs were recalled AFTER passing clinical trials....food for thought-eh?
 
thebigt said:
for congress to put a SPECIAL immunity exemption into a bill that was passed into law doesn't make you question that the manufacturers are concerned about unforeseen dangers?


on average it takes 6-7 years of clinical trials for a drug to be put on the market at a estimated cost of $2.6 BILLION.

in 2017 alone 4,402 drugs were recalled AFTER passing clinical trials....food for thought-eh?
Click to expand...

We are also in a global pandemic. What part of a global pandemic did you not notice?

I also pointed out how drugs make it to market with FAR LESS safety data than the vaccine has. The SAFETY DATA on the vaccine is actually quite good. It’s fine if you think there is a government conspiracy and want to ignore the data. The problem is that you don’t have data and proof to substantiate your claims but the vaccine has facts and data backing it. That’s the difference here.
 
kissdadookie said:
We are also in a global pandemic. What part of a global pandemic did you not notice?

I also pointed out how drugs make it to market with FAR LESS safety data than the vaccine has. The SAFETY DATA on the vaccine is actually quite good. It’s fine if you think there is a government conspiracy and want to ignore the data. The problem is that you don’t have data and proof to substantiate your claims but the vaccine has facts and data backing it. That’s the difference here.
Click to expand...
did you not see the part where 4,402 drugs in 2017 alone that had 6-7 years of clinical trials were recalled?

the difference between those 4,402 drugs and the covid vaccines is if you develop bad sides from those drugs you can sue for damages...if you get bad sides from the covid vaccines congress has passed a bill that says you are shyt out of luck.

my point being that they thought those 4,402 drugs were safe when they went to market, turns out that with 6-7 years clinical trials at estimated cost of $2.6 BILLION each--they weren't as safe as the trials told them they were.
 
WesleyInman said:
And if you dare tell me you have no medical background and no license and no actual experience.

I do not want to hear from you ever again on this topic.

I'll wait for your response.
Click to expand...

Where’d you get your MD? Unless your a medical doctor or a PhD in immunology then you’re talking out of your conspiracy-minded ass.

The 4,000 deaths has been explicitly debunked. It was a fake fact spread on social media.

As I previously said, facts are available, but people don’t research because they prefer confirmation bias echo-chambers, rather than reality.

I do FDA clearance and litigation on a daily basis. The reason the vaccines got pushed through it because the world fucking world needed it and obscene amounts of money were dumped into it. mRNA technology has always been promising. When there’s suddenly several hundred times the normal funding available then companies can speed things up. Part of the reason for how slow things go in FDA clearance is the immense cost involved and having to regularly cut losses if a drug isn’t promising.
 
Last edited:
thebigt said:
did you not see the part where 4,402 drugs in 2017 alone that had 6-7 years of clinical trials were recalled?

the difference between those 4,402 drugs and the covid vaccines is if you develop bad sides from those drugs you can sue for damages...if you get bad sides from the covid vaccines congress has passed a bill that says you are shyt out of luck.

my point being that they thought those 4,402 drugs were safe when they went to market, turns out that with 6-7 years clinical trials at estimated cost of $2.6 BILLION each--they weren't as safe as the trials told them they were.
Click to expand...

Yet you are on a message board which is mainly supported by the supplement industry and you obviously are fine with using supplements using ingredients which we have very little data on them being safe or not having side effects down the road. So do you question the supplement companies in regards to their products? There’s basically NO trials for supplements. The vaccines have gone through all THREE phases of clinical trials. The emergency use is because we have a life or death situation called a pandemic. Private companies being private companies never want to be sued and since they are the ones whom can produce something that is needed desperately in the middle of a global pandemic, government will play ball especially after seeing the safety data thus far from a complete three phase clinical trial (pfizer completed theirs all the way back in November). As far as drug safety is concerned, it goes no higher than phase 3 clinical trials. After a successful phase 3, it goes to market.

You keep insinuating that these vaccines are dangerous. Your entire basis for that argument is that the government waived liability for them (due to the fact that they have the one thing that would get us out of this pandemic). The reason for doing that is clear especially considering that there’s been no adverse effects which are dangerous outside of normal statistics for adverse effects rates for any already available vaccine on the market. With there being a completion of phase 3 trials for both mRNA vaccines in the US, that means tens of thousands of people have already been vaccinated for over a year now with no safety issues (since Pfizer and Moderna finished their phase 3s around the same time, which is around November of 2020, phase 1 human trials were in the summer of 2020). If going by percentage, participants virtually across the board (tens of thousands of them) had no serious threatening adverse effects. So we are talking basically a 100% safe after roughly a year of being vaccinated.

The data is the data and you are arguing that it’s dangerous. So how long do we wait for it to be considered safe if over a year’s worth of safety data is already available for tens of thousands of people? Or are you one of those that wants something to be 100%? If so, how do you even walk around and exist? You should be afraid of everything because there’s nothing with 100% safety.
 
kissdadookie said:
Yet you are on a message board which is mainly supported by the supplement industry and you obviously are fine with using supplements using ingredients which we have very little data on them being safe or not having side effects down the road. So do you question the supplement companies in regards to their products? There’s basically NO trials for supplements. The vaccines have gone through all THREE phases of clinical trials. The emergency use is because we have a life or death situation called a pandemic. Private companies being private companies never want to be sued and since they are the ones whom can produce something that is needed desperately in the middle of a global pandemic, government will play ball especially after seeing the safety data thus far from a complete three phase clinical trial (pfizer completed theirs all the way back in November). As far as drug safety is concerned, it goes no higher than phase 3 clinical trials. After a successful phase 3, it goes to market.

You keep insinuating that these vaccines are dangerous. Your entire basis for that argument is that the government waived liability for them (due to the fact that they have the one thing that would get us out of this pandemic). The reason for doing that is clear especially considering that there’s been no adverse effects which are dangerous outside of normal statistics for adverse effects rates for any already available vaccine on the market. With there being a completion of phase 3 trials for both mRNA vaccines in the US, that means tens of thousands of people have already been vaccinated for over a year now with no safety issues (since Pfizer and Moderna finished their phase 3s around the same time, which is around November of 2020, phase 1 human trials were in the summer of 2020). If going by percentage, participants virtually across the board (tens of thousands of them) had no serious threatening adverse effects. So we are talking basically a 100% safe after roughly a year of being vaccinated.

The data is the data and you are arguing that it’s dangerous. So how long do we wait for it to be considered safe if over a year’s worth of safety data is already available for tens of thousands of people? Or are you one of those that wants something to be 100%? If so, how do you even walk around and exist? You should be afraid of everything because there’s nothing with 100% safety.
Click to expand...
do not put words in my mouth-if anything i am happy so many have decided to get the vaccines, if the vaccines would have not been so well received by so many then there were have been much more coercion/pressure applied to people like me who choose not to get the vaccine, actually i think there are more coercion's coming to 'FORCE' people to get the vaccine...

btw-having already tested positive i can say that for my wife and i the covid was no way even close to being as bad as we had been told...this is not to say that everyone reacts so well to it, i can only speak to my wife's and i experience.
 
thebigt said:
do not put words in my mouth-if anything i am happy so many have decided to get the vaccines, if the vaccines would have not been so well received by so many then there were have been much more coercion/pressure applied to people like me who choose not to get the vaccine, actually i think there are more coercion's coming to 'FORCE' people to get the vaccine...

btw-having already tested positive i can say that for my wife and i the covid was no way even close to being as bad as we had been told...this is not to say that everyone reacts so well to it, i can only speak to my wife's and i experience.
Click to expand...

You’re jumping around arguments here. You started with the argument implying that the vaccines are dangerous. Now your argument is that you just don’t like being told what to do. Look, I’m not here to argue that everyone needs to be vaccinated. I don’t feel comfortable forcing people to vaccinate. What I am saying is that any insinuation that this thing has a conspiracy behind it, vaccines and masks are dangerous, etc. NEEDS to be substantiated with facts and data. That is all.

As for having caught it before and it wasn’t that bad. That’s great, but most people catching the flu isn’t that bad but without the flu vaccines, the flu alone would cause hospitals to be at capacity and not be able to care for all the patients whom need it.

I already know 5 people whom I personally know and have regular physical contact with that caught COVID-19. One of them died and the other was put in ICU under a coma for over a month, almost didn’t make it. This was very early on in the pandemic when they couldn’t figure out a treatment for it that was effective yet. We had so many bodies pile up over here that right now there’s still bodies in storage that they haven’t figured out what to do with last time I checked. I’m confident that the body count speaks for itself as to the severity of the pandemic especially when there’s nothing available to mitigate it. So you stating that it wasn’t so bad for you and your wife, I find it a bit problematic because clearly that is to indicate that the whole thing isn’t as serious as people made it out to be (again, how do you explain away the body count?). I’m glad you and your wife came away from it relatively unscathed, you lucked out is the honest truth to that. It’s more luck than anything because again, we have the body count (and look at India recently, look at Italy earl on in the pandemic).

By the numbers, this thing has been many times more contagious than the flu and many times deadlier. That’s just a fact. Remember when people were going around saying how the flu killed more people? At that time, they were comparing the body count that the pandemic racked up in a matter of a few months to what the flu racked up in an entire year. Now with the body counts that we have, clearly this thing is far deadlier than the flu was.
 
kissdadookie said:
You’re jumping around arguments here. You started with the argument implying that the vaccines are dangerous. Now your argument is that you just don’t like being told what to do. Look, I’m not here to argue that everyone needs to be vaccinated. I don’t feel comfortable forcing people to vaccinate. What I am saying is that any insinuation that this thing has a conspiracy behind it, vaccines and masks are dangerous, etc. NEEDS to be substantiated with facts and data. That is all.

As for having caught it before and it wasn’t that bad. That’s great, but most people catching the flu isn’t that bad but without the flu vaccines, the flu alone would cause hospitals to be at capacity and not be able to care for all the patients whom need it.

I already know 5 people whom I personally know and have regular physical contact with that caught COVID-19. One of them died and the other was put in ICU under a coma for over a month, almost didn’t make it. This was very early on in the pandemic when they couldn’t figure out a treatment for it that was effective yet. We had so many bodies pile up over here that right now there’s still bodies in storage that they haven’t figured out what to do with last time I checked. I’m confident that the body count speaks for itself as to the severity of the pandemic especially when there’s nothing available to mitigate it. So you stating that it wasn’t so bad for you and your wife, I find it a bit problematic because clearly that is to indicate that the whole thing isn’t as serious as people made it out to be (again, how do you explain away the body count?). I’m glad you and your wife came away from it relatively unscathed, you lucked out is the honest truth to that. It’s more luck than anything because again, we have the body count (and look at India recently, look at Italy earl on in the pandemic).

By the numbers, this thing has been many times more contagious than the flu and many times deadlier. That’s just a fact. Remember when people were going around saying how the flu killed more people? At that time, they were comparing the body count that the pandemic racked up in a matter of a few months to what the flu racked up in an entire year. Now with the body counts that we have, clearly this thing is far deadlier than the flu was.
Click to expand...
no-what i implied was that the manufacturers are worried about possible serious side effects. why else would they have congress give them immunity from civil and criminal prosecution?

btw-i get a flu shot every year....damn, dude-you own stock in vaccines?
 
Last edited:
thebigt said:
no-what i implied was that the manufacturers are worried about possible side effects.

btw-i get a flu shot every year....damn, dude-you own stock in vaccines?
Click to expand...

They are typically afraid of lawsuits. Side effects, they have a high tolerance for it (OxyContin, fentanyl). However, again, we are in a pandemic. The vaccines were OK’d because our other option is to let the virus continue to go out of control and mutate.

Do you live in city? If you lived in a large, dense city, I think you may have a different perspective on things because again, the body counts speaks for themselves.

The first person that I know personally that died from COVID-19 was my doctor btw. The same doctor that told me in February of 2020 that this would all just blow over when the weather gets warmer. He died. I found out about it months later when I tried to schedule. It got him after about 8 weeks fighting it.
 
kissdadookie said:
They are typically afraid of lawsuits. Side effects, they have a high tolerance for it (OxyContin, fentanyl). However, again, we are in a pandemic. The vaccines were OK’d because our other option is to let the virus continue to go out of control and mutate.

Do you live in city? If you lived in a large, dense city, I think you may have a different perspective on things because again, the body counts speaks for themselves.

The first person that I know personally that died from COVID-19 was my doctor btw. The same doctor that told me in February of 2020 that this would all just blow over when the weather gets warmer. He died. I found out about it months later when I tried to schedule. It got him after about 8 weeks fighting it.
Click to expand...
when i was younger all the doctors smoked and hospitals had smoking in waiting rooms because no one knew that smoking caused cancer.

7 years ago i went to purdue university for a 6 hour class to get licensed for commercial weed spraying, the instructor told us that roundup-glyphosate was safe.
 
Lol, let's just ignore that Pfizer has the biggest doj settlement ever (at least in 2009)of $2.3b for being money grubbing dishonest fucks. And you want us to believe they're 100% safe because they say so? Nah son.

So the vaccines have excellent safety profiles. I'll agree, but there are caveats: 1) they didn't test enough of the most at risk demographics. It was heavily skewed toward younger people, despite their exponentially lower level risk from covid. Why? Because it makes the safety data more favorable, that's why. Nothing shady there. Myocarditis did not really show up because they didn't test enough people overall. 2) we have safety data up to 14 months or so, now. What's the safety prognosis for 2-5-10 years down the line, please? 3) there is a worrying number of people reporting some bad side effects, and an even more worrying lack of investigation of those side effects. Instead, we have raffles for new trucks or $, and an intense push to VAXX EVERYONE NOW!

Why? Is it because they're tryingnas hard as possible to stall on the reporting and investigation of the negative sides people are experiencing, because they know their window of awesome cash flow will close quickly once they can't stave that off anymore?

Who knows. BTW, why does Pfizer say you can be exposed to the vaccine through breathing and skin contact? I'd really like to know..
 
As far as not trusting vaccines, but using supps: supps are my choice, and mine alone. No one is harassing, harangueing, or otherwise bullying me over my supp use. This is exactly what some are attempting over vaccines, they want to mandate their use, or predicate activities on it.
 
poison said:
Lol, let's just ignore that Pfizer has the biggest doj settlement ever (at least in 2009)of $2.3b for being money grubbing dishonest fucks. And you want us to believe they're 100% safe because they say so? Nah son.

So the vaccines have excellent safety profiles. I'll agree, but there are caveats: 1) they didn't test enough of the most at risk demographics. It was heavily skewed toward younger people, despite their exponentially lower level risk from covid. Why? Because it makes the safety data more favorable, that's why. Nothing shady there. Myocarditis did not really show up because they didn't test enough people overall. 2) we have safety data up to 14 months or so, now. What's the safety prognosis for 2-5-10 years down the line, please? 3) there is a worrying number of people reporting some bad side effects, and an even more worrying lack of investigation of those side effects. Instead, we have raffles for new trucks or $, and an intense push to VAXX EVERYONE NOW!

Why? Is it because they're tryingnas hard as possible to stall on the reporting and investigation of the negative sides people are experiencing, because they know their window of awesome cash flow will close quickly once they can't stave that off anymore?

Who knows. BTW, why does Pfizer say you can be exposed to the vaccine through breathing and skin contact? I'd really like to know..
Click to expand...

Did you look at the data? It’s mostly on higher risk people (older people). 60-80 years olds literally made up over 40% of both US and international trial participants. HIGH RISK made up over 40% of all participants in both international and US trials. Younger demographics is actually newer data. The fact that you did not know this and are stating that they vaccinated younger people first in the trials, I mean, that’s literal misinformation. Jeeze, you’re one of the more intelligent ones on here as well.
 
The immunity was to help speed up manufacturing and development. Look at the pace of the vaccination in USA and then compare to the EU. You can see a noticeable difference as they haggled the manufacturers more.

4,000 deaths? I thought the global number was around 2 or 3 actual deaths? There’s really nothing scary about this technology. It’s just an advancement in delivering spike proteins via mRNA instead. These comments are why I don’t trust that maskless shoppers are fully vaccinated when I see them in the stores.
 
If you're vaccinated, you don't need to worry about the mask less. In fact, you don't need to worry about them regardless, masks are nonsense in this public usage case, period.
 
kissdadookie said:
Did you look at the data? It’s mostly on higher risk people (older people). 60-80 years olds literally made up over 40% of both US and international trial participants. HIGH RISK made up over 40% of all participants in both international and US trials. Younger demographics is actually newer data. The fact that you did not know this and are stating that they vaccinated younger people first in the trials, I mean, that’s literal misinformation. Jeeze, you’re one of the more intelligent ones on here as well.
Click to expand...

Maybe now, not before the eua.
 
I'm just sitting back, glad I actually got COVID, have T cell immunity, and don't need an experimental augmentation to my body due to me having a God given immune system superior to the inoculation.
 
poison said:
As far as not trusting vaccines, but using supps: supps are my choice, and mine alone. No one is harassing, harangueing, or otherwise bullying me over my supp use. This is exactly what some are attempting over vaccines, they want to mandate their use, or predicate activities on it.
Click to expand...
poison said:
Maybe now, not before the eua.
Click to expand...

No, not just now. This was the case back when both vaccines were in clinical trials. Clinical trials ended last year for phase 3. This means we have a ton of safety and efficacy data on mainly the most vulnerable. The reason being, they used the most vulnerable as they were at higher risk and the point of the vaccine was to protect those at higher risk. Lower risk and younger demographics is a relatively newer set of data. The reason they’ve recently opened it up for children as young as 12 is because the clinical trial data was finally in, reviewed, and third party validated. It was because they fully human trialed the vaccines for younger people as young as 12. The reason we don’t have the ok to vaccinate even younger people than 12 is because they data is not fully in yet (late stage clinical trials I believe).

You don’t have want to get vaccinated. Cool. You don’t want to wear a mask. Cool. This is however not a matter of it not being cool to be told what to do. It’s not about your freedoms being impeded on. This entire concept of this is freedoms and rights being impeded on is just stupid. You need a drivers license to drive. Your kids needs to be vaccinated to attend most public schools. A store can refuse you service because it’s private property and a private business. Sometimes there are rules and requirements for good reason and sometimes they are nonsense. In this case, it’s for good reason. It is a matter of public health. Public health and health risk (real ones, like a friggin pandemic) does not need to consider your bias and feelings about what you think your freedoms are. You think the health risks and crisis is a hoax, present data to support your claims. You can’t and you know you can’t. The data to support how this pandemic is serious and real is readily available. Safety data and trial data on the vaccines are readily available. Thus far your argument has been you don’t trust the government. Them are words of all feels and no real facts in this discussion.
 
Last edited:
kissdadookie said:
No, not just now. This was the case back when both vaccines were in clinical trials. Clinical trials ended last year for phase 3. This means we have a ton of safety and efficacy data on mainly the most vulnerable. The reason being, they used the most vulnerable as they were at higher risk and the point of the vaccine was to protect those at higher risk. Lower risk and younger demographics is a relatively newer set of data. The reason they’ve recently opened it up for children as young as 12 is because the clinical trial data was finally in, reviewed, and third party validated. It was because they fully human trialed the vaccines for younger people as young as 12. The reason we don’t have the ok to vaccinate even younger people than 12 is because they data is not fully in yet (late stage clinical trials I believe).

You don’t have want to get vaccinated. Cool. You don’t want to wear a mask. Cool. This is however not a matter of it not being cool to be told what to do. It’s not about your freedoms being impeded on. This entire concept of this is freedoms and rights being impeded on is just stupid. You need a drivers license to drive. Your kids needs to be vaccinated to attend most public schools. A store can refuse you service because it’s private property and a private business. Sometimes there are rules and requirements for good reason and sometimes they are nonsense. In this case, it’s for good reason.
Click to expand...
According to some experts, what you consider "good reasons" they consider nonsense. You think it is clear, and settled when it clearly is not.
 
ValiantThor08 said:
According to some experts, what you consider "good reasons" they consider nonsense. You think it is clear, and settled when it clearly is not.
Click to expand...

The data is the data. The data shows that the vaccine is not nonsense. Disprove the data with data. What data can you point to in order to support your argument? You literally made it the argument in this thread that you don’t need the vaccine because you have good immunity. Going by your logic, you should never have caught the VID since you have such amazing immunity. You should have been able to inoculate the virus… yet you caught it her disease from the virus (COVID is the disease you get from the virus). Going by your logic, you’ve contradicted your own argument.
 
kissdadookie said:
The data is the data. The data shows that the vaccine is not nonsense. Disprove the data with data. What data can you point to in order to support your argument? You literally made it the argument in this thread that you don’t need the vaccine because you have good immunity. Going by your logic, you should never have caught the VID since you have such amazing immunity. You should have been able to inoculate the virus… yet you caught it her disease from the virus (COVID is the disease you get from the virus). Going by your logic, you’ve contradicted your own argument.
Click to expand...
Bro. The data and "experts" admit one can still contract and give someone COVID even if fully vaccinated. Data reveals most people will survive COVID at any age if they get it, without a vaccine. That's data. Data shows there were therapeutics well before the shot that were highly beneficial, but suppressed for the expressed purpose of getting the emergency authorization for the vaccine. Durp.
 
And anyone with a great immune system can contract a virus/disease. Did I survive? Yes. Was I hospitalized? No. It was very mild. Had no lung issues. Completely unnecessary for someone like myself to get a shot, and completely unnecessary for me to wear a mask. So to me, and people like me, the data says nonsense.
 
ValiantThor08 said:
Bro. The data and "experts" admit one can still contract and give someone COVID even if fully vaccinated. Data reveals most people will survive COVID at any age if they get it, without a vaccine. That's data. Data shows there were therapeutics well before the shot that were highly beneficial, but suppressed for the expressed purpose of getting the emergency authorization for the vaccine. Durp.
Click to expand...

What kind of argument is that? We can get HIV and be fine these days, should we just go out and try and contract HIV? Survival rate is high but serious illness rate is also high as well as mortality. The therapeutics only increased your survival rate but that means nothing. We are still seeing long term adverse health effects even for those they have recovered.

I will take your argument seriously as soon as you tell us all that you are fine with contracting HIV because based on your own criterias as to what is serious or not, you should be perfectly fine contracting it and being perfectly ok with it.
 
ValiantThor08 said:
I'm just sitting back, glad I actually got COVID, have T cell immunity, and don't need an experimental augmentation to my body due to me having a God given immune system superior to the inoculation.
Click to expand...
AMEN...my wife and i both felt less sick from actually having the virus than many report being from the vaccines....and we are in our 60s.

but for those who choose to get the vaccine we will pray that you stay safe.
 
ValiantThor08 said:
And anyone with a great immune system can contract a virus/disease. Did I survive? Yes. Was I hospitalized? No. It was very mild. Had no lung issues. Completely unnecessary for someone like myself to get a shot, and completely unnecessary for me to wear a mask. So to me, and people like me, the data says nonsense.
Click to expand...

So your personal experience gives you enough data and credibility to give a general health recommendation to everybody else?

Again, I’ll take your arguments seriously as soon as you let us know that you are perfectly fine with contracting HIV because based on your criteria, it’s not a big deal. Survival rate is super high these days with modern treatment and no hit with symptoms either. Based on your criteria, you should be perfectly fine contracting it.
 
ValiantThor08 said:
And anyone with a great immune system can contract a virus/disease. Did I survive? Yes. Was I hospitalized? No. It was very mild. Had no lung issues. Completely unnecessary for someone like myself to get a shot, and completely unnecessary for me to wear a mask. So to me, and people like me, the data says nonsense.
Click to expand...
i am training for my 1st 7k race 4 months after testing positive for covid....
 
Last edited:
I don’t know why I even bothered. This thread is full of complete idiots with maybe High school level science aptitude that take anecdotal evidence as proof or fact.
 
Last edited:
kissdadookie said:
So your personal experience gives you enough data and credibility to give a general health recommendation to everybody else?

Again, I’ll take your arguments seriously as soon as you let us know that you are perfectly fine with contracting HIV because based on your criteria, it’s not a big deal. Survival rate is super high these days with modern treatment and no hit with symptoms either. Based on your criteria, you should be perfectly fine contracting it.
Click to expand...

I'm not at risk for hiv, so why would I take a vaccine?
 
kissdadookie said:
What kind of argument is that? We can get HIV and be fine these days, should we just go out and try and contract HIV? Survival rate is high but serious illness rate is also high as well as mortality. The therapeutics only increased your survival rate but that means nothing. We are still seeing long term adverse health effects even for those they have recovered.

I will take your argument seriously as soon as you tell us all that you are fine with contracting HIV because based on your own criterias as to what is serious or not, you should be perfectly fine contracting it and being perfectly ok with it.
Click to expand...

You will take his argument seriously as soon as he agrees to your straw man argument? Why would you expect anyone to agree to those terms of engagement?
 
poison said:
I'm not at risk for hiv, so why would I take a vaccine?
Click to expand...

The person that I was responding to stated that COVID is no big deal and for something so low risk if you contracted it, there’s no need to be vaccinated. Going by that person’s logic, that person should be perfectly ok with contracting HIV. I posed that to the person because I know that this person obviously would not want to contract HIV even though by the same criteria he has for believing that there’s no need to fear getting COVID because getting it is no big deal as symptoms are mild and survival rate is high. I pointed this out because the person isn’t being consistent with his logic and is arbitrary with when his argument applies or not even though going by their own argument, HIV is not a big deal since survival rate is high and symptoms can be managed to the point that there really are no symptoms.

You clearly did not bother reading what I was posting if you think I was saying that the COVID vaccine prevents HIV?
 
rob112 said:
You will take his argument seriously as soon as he agrees to your straw man argument? Why would you expect anyone to agree to those terms of engagement?
Click to expand...

What straw man argument? I’m using his own criteria. His argument is inconsistent and nonsensical if he only applies it arbitrarily and only to make a argument against the COVID vaccine but then takes HIV seriously even though his own criteria applies to HIV (low to no symptoms and high survival rate, since modern treatment is highly effective and non-intrusive).

Let’s even say that his argument then may be why he would go get it in the first place because he doesn’t trust pharmaceuticals and thus just wants to avoid getting medicated because he thinks it’s some sort of big pharmacy conspiracy. Well, then that argument is just a joke not based on data or facts because that’s just a irrational fear of pharmaceuticals.

I love how you claim that I used a straw man argument when clearly you do not understand what a straw man argument is. Since I’ve addressed his argument directly, presented him with a same for same scenario, that’s not a straw man argument. A straw man argument would have been something like if I responded with “But what about GMOs?” I need to not have addressed his argument to begin with for it to be a straw man argument. The fact that you came on here claiming that it was a straw man argument and not addressing the actual argument and counter points being discussed, is the closest thing to a straw man argument here.
 
Good convo in here and everyone stayed respectful. Good for you guys.

I will say this. Vaccines have become so weaponized and politicized. You can't have a decent conversation about them.

What blows my mind is that Vaccines are one of the only things people are brainwashed to think are 100% safe. Zero side effects and zero repercussions. To the degree not only will they believe this, but they will fight you tooth and nail, having ZERO medical experience and call other people names or say "cognitive dissonance" is on the part of the person questioning the vaccine.

I hear people all the time say that this Covid vaccine is xyz% effective and safe. Sorry to tell you that NO ONE KNOWS the long term effects of this vaccine and that is the one fact that no one can question.

I did find it amusing someone called the deaths from the covid vaccine "SELF REPORTED" on Vaers.

That did get a laugh out of me.

Invalid Link Removed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top