[golfing eagles]

[QUOTE=jswirs;2001483]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And the problem with your post is the original premise------THIS VACCINE IS NOT "EXPERIMENTAL GENE MANIPULATION". PERIOD!!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!![/QUOTE

It may not be gene manipulation, but at present, as far as I am concerned, it is still experimental, because it simply has not been widely used for a sufficient amount of time. Therefore, no one knows what the long term effects may be. PERIOD!!!

Yep---you never know if 20 years from now you'll grow a second nose in the middle of your forehead

BTW, hundreds of millions vaccinated is probably considered "widely used", and the study designs will weed out some, not all of the potential long term effects, if any, which is doubtful.

[Blueblaze]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And the problem with your post is the original premise------THIS VACCINE IS NOT "EXPERIMENTAL GENE MANIPULATION". PERIOD!!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!!

Look it up. That is exactly what CDC told me it was, a year ago when it was first announced, and I googled "mRNA vaccine".

In fact, I just typed "how does the mrna vaccine work" into google and got that exact same PDF document from the CDC website. It doesn't mention the "experimental" part. Instead, it gives you this innocent-sounding explanation for gene manipulation:

"The mRNA in the vaccine teaches your cells how to make copies of the spike protein. If you are exposed to the real virus later, your body will recognize it and know how to fight it off".

PERIOD!!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!!

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

Look it up. That is exactly what CDC told me it was, a year ago when it was first announced, and I googled "mRNA vaccine".

In fact, I just typed "how does the mrna vaccine work" into google and got that exact same PDF document from the CDC website. It doesn't mention the "experimental" part. Instead, it gives you this innocent-sounding explanation for gene manipulation:

"The mRNA in the vaccine teaches your cells how to make copies of the spike protein. If you are exposed to the real virus later, your body will recognize it and know how to fight it off".

PERIOD!!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!!

That is not an "innocent-sounding explanation for gene manipulation." That is not an explanation of gene manipulation at all. The explanation does not once mention any change in your genes because there IS NO CHANGE IN YOUR GENES.

It will take me a while to find the correct term for this (hopefully someone will jump in with it) but it is NOT gene manipulation.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

Look it up. That is exactly what CDC told me it was, a year ago when it was first announced, and I googled "mRNA vaccine".

In fact, I just typed "how does the mrna vaccine work" into google and got that exact same PDF document from the CDC website. It doesn't mention the "experimental" part. Instead, it gives you this innocent-sounding explanation for gene manipulation:

"The mRNA in the vaccine teaches your cells how to make copies of the spike protein. If you are exposed to the real virus later, your body will recognize it and know how to fight it off".

PERIOD!!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!!

So, let's repeat what you just posted:

"The mRNA in the vaccine teaches your cells how to make copies of the spike protein. If you are exposed to the real virus later, your body will recognize it and know how to fight it off".

This is what you took to mean that the vaccine is "gene manipulation"????

OMG, a perfect example of regurgitating something found on a web page with absolutely zero understanding of what it means.

OK, time for remedial genetics 101:

A gene is a sequence of DNA that resides at a specific location on a chromosome and codes for a single protein/enzyme. We have over 100,000 of these genes, and they are separated by sequences of DNA that we do not fully understand, called intercalated DNA. The DNA, when needed to produce its end product, gets "unzipped" by a specific enzyme (RNA polymerase) and transcribes its code to a template known as mRNA. The mRNA then exits the nucleus of the cell, enters the cytoplasm and a ribosome finds it and copies the mRNA to its invers, tRNA. The tRNA then assembles amino acids into a protein chain according to the code.

Follow so far?????

The mRNA vaccines simply enter cells and their code gets translated on ribosomes via the same mechanism to its end product, which in this case is the spike protein of the COVID virus.

IT DOES NOT TOUCH YOUR DNA, IT DOES NOT ALTER ANY GENES, IT SIMPLY ACTS LIKE YOUR OWN mRNA. CLEAR ENOUGH?

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

Look it up. That is exactly what CDC told me it was, a year ago when it was first announced, and I googled "mRNA vaccine".

In fact, I just typed "how does the mrna vaccine work" into google and got that exact same PDF document from the CDC website. It doesn't mention the "experimental" part. Instead, it gives you this innocent-sounding explanation for gene manipulation:

"The mRNA in the vaccine teaches your cells how to make copies of the spike protein. If you are exposed to the real virus later, your body will recognize it and know how to fight it off".

PERIOD!!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!!

Fact check from Reuters........
Fact Check-mRNA vaccines are distinct from gene therapy, which alters recipient’s genes | Reuters

There are many more credible sources that debunk the "gene therapy manipulation" misinformation. Look for yourself.

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

Look it up. That is exactly what CDC told me it was, a year ago when it was first announced, and I googled "mRNA vaccine".

In fact, I just typed "how does the mrna vaccine work" into google and got that exact same PDF document from the CDC website. It doesn't mention the "experimental" part. Instead, it gives you this innocent-sounding explanation for gene manipulation:

"The mRNA in the vaccine teaches your cells how to make copies of the spike protein. If you are exposed to the real virus later, your body will recognize it and know how to fight it off".

PERIOD!!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!!

Here is more information that debunks the "gene therapy" misinformation from a credible source, the CDC........

Myths and Facts about COVID-19 Vaccines | CDC

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

So, let's repeat what you just posted:

"The mRNA in the vaccine teaches your cells how to make copies of the spike protein. If you are exposed to the real virus later, your body will recognize it and know how to fight it off".

This is what you took to mean that the vaccine is "gene manipulation"????

OMG, a perfect example of regurgitating something found on a web page with absolutely zero understanding of what it means.

OK, time for remedial genetics 101:

A gene is a sequence of DNA that resides at a specific location on a chromosome and codes for a single protein/enzyme. We have over 100,000 of these genes, and they are separated by sequences of DNA that we do not fully understand, called intercalated DNA. The DNA, when needed to produce its end product, gets "unzipped" by a specific enzyme (RNA polymerase) and transcribes its code to a template known as mRNA. The mRNA then exits the nucleus of the cell, enters the cytoplasm and a ribosome finds it and copies the mRNA to its invers, tRNA. The tRNA then assembles amino acids into a protein chain according to the code.

Follow so far?????

The mRNA vaccines simply enter cells and their code gets translated on ribosomes via the same mechanism to its end product, which in this case is the spike protein of the COVID virus.

IT DOES NOT TOUCH YOUR DNA, IT DOES NOT ALTER ANY GENES, IT SIMPLY ACTS LIKE YOUR OWN mRNA. CLEAR ENOUGH?

Way to go, GE. Thank you!

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Yes, a point was missed, but not by me. Again, the vaccinated can spread the virus, but RARELY. How rare---breakthrough cases for the original virus was 0.07%. That's breakthrough----the chances of someone contracting the virus FROM that breakthrough case is much lower. Since that number was last published by the CDC in May, they have stopped counting breakthrough cases, so we don't have numbers for the delta variant, but empirically it is thought to be much lower than the unvaccinated.
An anecdotal case as was described proves absolutely nothing.

You’re getting skewed numbers in my opinion, the breakthrough numbers are much higher than that. There are so many cases in and spread by the vaccinated and anyone who believes total vaccination with eliminate covid 19 is dreaming. I don’t trust it at all anymore and take steps to avoid exposure from everyone. I think there is a head in the sand posture from those that totally believe the numbers being shoved at us.

How about the couple who each made different vaccination decisions. He is out and about more than she and he opted for vaccination. She opted to pass on vaccination. Yes, HE got covid and infected her. Don’t waste time telling the vaccinated they are now the anointed, we can still carry and spread the virus to others as well as develop covid infection.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Aces4

You’re getting skewed numbers in my opinion, the breakthrough numbers are much higher than that. There are so many cases in and spread by the vaccinated and anyone who believes total vaccination with eliminate covid 19 is dreaming. I don’t trust it at all anymore and take steps to avoid exposure from everyone. I think there is a head in the sand posture from those that totally believe the numbers being shoved at us.

How about the couple who each made different vaccination decisions. He is out and about more than she and he opted for vaccination. She opted to pass on vaccination. Yes, HE got covid and infected her. Don’t waste time telling the vaccinated they are now the anointed, we can still carry and spread the virus to others as well as develop covid infection.

And yet another anecdotal story that means nothing.

The post states "so many cases". HOW MANY??? I don't know, do you???? And if so, where can I find that number?

There have been several posts of anecdotes, I like the ones that state "so and so got COVID from a vaccinated person"---How did they know that? Could have gotten it anywhere.

I just wish the CDC didn't stop counting breakthrough cases, then we would have a better idea of vaccine effectiveness against delta.

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And yet another anecdotal story that means nothing.

The post states "so many cases". HOW MANY??? I don't know, do you???? And if so, where can I find that number?

There have been several posts of anecdotes, I like the ones that state "so and so got COVID from a vaccinated person"---How did they know that? Could have gotten it anywhere.

I just wish the CDC didn't stop counting breakthrough cases, then we would have a better idea of vaccine effectiveness against delta.

Isn’t it interesting when factual cases are dismissed because they don’t conform to one’s ideology. This is what is scary, sweep the truth under the rug and listen to the mantra.

Those statistics should be totally public. But if those numbers are as skewed and manipulated as were the actual deaths from Covid19 numbers, why bother? All the people who were dying and got covid, died as anticipated but were tallied as covid deaths because there was a bonus for those.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Aces4

Isn’t it interesting when factual cases are dismissed because they don’t conform to one’s ideology. This is what scary, sweep the truth under the rug and listen to the mantra.

Those statistics should be totally public. But if those numbers are as skewed and manipulated as were the actual deaths from Covid19 numbers, why bother? All the people who were dying and got covid, died as anticipated.

This is medical science, "ideology" has nothing to do with it. I don't know your ideology and you don't know mine.
So, scientifically, how is anyone to know that these anecdotes are "factual cases". Where's the proof, the scientific proof? Is the whole world just supposed to take someone's word for it? And even if they are trying to be truthful, their facts and conclusions are probably way off the mark

What needs to be done to answer to question would be a large, multi-centered, randomized, double blind study. Take 5,000 people who have been vaccinated and 5,000 that refused and test them weekly for COVID and interview them for symptoms. Keep a chart of when they were vaccinated. Then we could get a better idea of the breakthrough rate as well as the time course of immunity from the vaccine. I don't know of any group that is actually conducting such a study. The unethical study would be to take the 2 groups and expose them at the same time. Much better data, would never get through an ethical review board NOR SHOULD IT

[Aces4]

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001624]This is medical science, "ideology" has nothing to do with it. I don't know your ideology and you don't know mine.
So, scientifically, how is anyone to know that these anecdotes are "factual cases". Where's the proof, the scientific proof? Is the whole world just supposed to take someone's word for it? And even if they are trying to be truthful, their facts and conclusions are probably way off the mark

What needs to be done to answer to question would be a large, multi-centered, randomized, double blind study. Take 5,000 people who have been vaccinated and 5,000 that refused and test them weekly for COVID and interview them for symptoms. Keep a chart of when they were vaccinated. Then we could get a better idea of the breakthrough rate as well as the time course of immunity from the vaccine. I don't know of any group that is actually conducting such a study.[/


Then you have no grounds on which to base your facts because statistics are missing and most people dealing with covid are not being tracked! It’s all hyperbole.

[jswirs]

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001484]

Originally Posted by jswirs

Yep---you never know if 20 years from now you'll grow a second nose in the middle of your forehead

BTW, hundreds of millions vaccinated is probably considered "widely used", and the study designs will weed out some, not all of the potential long term effects, if any, which is doubtful.

OK, GE, I'll take a page out of your book....... Time for remedial reading and comprehension 101.... go back to my post and you will see I said "It has not been widely used for a sufficient amount of time". Please notice there is no period after the word "used", therefore, you took my statement out of context, and your snarky remark, as highlighted above, is foolishly misplaced. And, speaking of "growing a second nose", maybe, someday, some of us will grow less egotistical...but I doubt it.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Aces4

Isn’t it interesting when factual cases are dismissed because they don’t conform to one’s ideology. This is what scary, sweep the truth under the rug and listen to the mantra.

Those statistics should be totally public. But if those numbers are as skewed and manipulated as were the actual deaths from Covid19 numbers, why bother? All the people who were dying and got covid, died as anticipated.

The statistics are public and are not skewed or manipulated.

The factual cases DO conform to expectations. No vaccine is 100% effective and there will be breakthrough cases. In fact, as discussed several times before, during the trials the count of the number of vaccinated individuals who became hospitalized was needed to calculate effectiveness. A VERY SMALL NUMBER of hospitalizations and even deaths in vaccinated people is expected.

The number of vaccinated people becoming infected with Covid cannot be tracked accurately. Counting the number of positive test results in vaccinated people would only capture those that came in for testing which most would not. Rather than provide a number that would immediately be criticized as an undercount the CDC chose to capture a more meaningful number. Since the vaccine was designed and tested to prevent sickness, they now count the number of vaccinated who are hospitalized. This would show a true breakthrough case since it is a case where the disease broke through the protection against illness that the vaccine was providing. This number is available on the CDC website.

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by Bill14564

The statistics are public and are not skewed or manipulated.

The factual cases DO conform to expectations. No vaccine is 100% effective and there will be breakthrough cases. In fact, as discussed several times before, during the trials the count of the number of vaccinated individuals who became hospitalized was needed to calculate effectiveness. A VERY SMALL NUMBER of hospitalizations and even deaths in vaccinated people is expected.

The number of vaccinated people becoming infected with Covid cannot be tracked accurately. Counting the number of positive test results in vaccinated people would only capture those that came in for testing which most would not. Rather than provide a number that would immediately be criticized as an undercount the CDC chose to capture a more meaningful number. Since the vaccine was designed and tested to prevent sickness, they now count the number of vaccinated who are hospitalized. This would show a true breakthrough case since it is a case where the disease broke through the protection against illness that the vaccine was providing. This number is available on the CDC website.

Thank you for making my case, incomplete and cherry picked numbers are being utilized. How can anyone with analyzation skills swallow the synopsis provided to the public?

It might help here if the fellow poster who developed covid after full vaccination would share with us how intensely he was questioned, evaluated and tracked following his harrowing case of covid. I could use his name but respect his privacy if he desires.