[QUOTE=jswirs;2001483]Yep---you never know if 20 years from now you'll grow a second nose in the middle of your forehead:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

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.

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.

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"????:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

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?

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.

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

Myths and Facts about COVID-19 Vaccines | CDC

Way to go, GE. Thank you!

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.

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.

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

[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.

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001484]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.

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.

[QUOTE=Aces4;2001625]Correct---that was my point---we don't have good data.

What I have is an educated guess as to breakthrough rate for the delta variant based on the breakthrough rate for the original virus and my general knowledge of virology and epidemiology. And that guess is in the 2-8% range. If anyone has more medical education, experience and knowledge of virology, I'd like to hear their guess, because there is nothing to say mine is absolutely correct.

[QUOTE=jswirs;2001627]No, I read your post and did not take it out of context. There was a "widely used" aspect and a "sufficient time" aspect. I addressed the widely used with the FACT that hundreds of millions have received vaccines, and I don't see anything "snarky" in that highlighted text. I merely implied the "sufficient" time aspect knowing study designs do look for signs that would point to a some late side effects, but that we don't know yet. However, knowing how a mRNA vaccine works, it is unlikely to cause any long term effects but I could be wrong.(In which case I'm in good company). So if anyone was taking a post out of context, it wasn't me.

The numbers being used are not cherry picked or incomplete.

Do you dispute that over 90% of the hospitalizations are unvaccinated? Do you have an explanation for that other than the effectiveness of the vaccine?

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001634][QUOTE=Aces4;2001625]

Correct---that was my point---we don't have good data.



Agreed, that is the point to be made. We simply don’t have true data for this virus and why personally, I continue respect the fact that we are all spreaders until proven otherwise

Do you have the absolute data for complicated and numbers of breakthrough in the vaccinated? Data is missing including tracking and spread of covid from the vaccinated.

[QUOTE=Aces4;2001642][QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001634]Sure, that's safe, no problem. But realize it is EXTREMELY unlikely that a large percentage of those vaccinated are "spreaders", based on data for breakthrough from the original virus and the percentage of hospitalizations, ICU admissions, and deaths of the UNvaccinated. Yet, you are correct, any one given vaccinated person could still be a threat.

Do I have the private personal and medical details of the 14,115 vaccinated individuals who were hospitalized through 7 September? Absolutely not and I am glad that private data has not been made public. The counts and the limited demographics that are available are sufficient.

Do you dispute that over 90% of the hospitalizations are in the unvaccinated? If not, do you have an explanation for that other than the effectiveness of the vaccines?

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001484][QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001637]I would say nice try, but it really wasn't. I know better.

[QUOTE=jswirs;2001651][QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001484]

Do or do not, there is no try----Yoda, 1980

I did.

Y'all need to learn how to quote posts on this forum.

You described how the mRNA vaccines work to trick cells to make spike vaccines. Although that is not gene MODIFICATION, it is certainly gene MANIPULATION.

Here's the bottom line -- your cells don't know how to make ANY proteins without genetic instructions. The ONLY way to "teach" a cell to do anything is to manipulate its genes!

But you forgot to tell us how the J&J works. Its actually DOES manipulate the DNA genes found in the nucleus! It does this by injecting an (assumed) harmless LIVE VIRUS that has been genetically altered to carry the gene necessary to make a human cell produce the Covid "spike" protein. This is what ALL viruses do -- they insert their genetic material into the DNA of the host cell, to force it to make copies of the virus. In this case, J&J altered a benign virus to make it make copes of the spike protein instead of the virus itself.

The assumption with all of these gene manipulation vaccines is that the cells altered aren't likely to be eggs or sperm that would cause an inherited defect, and since the altered cells will soon die off anyway, there should be no lasting damage. But, of course, there is no way to be certain -- it's just unlikely that the vaccine mRNA or J&J virus could make it all the way to your ovaries before it encounters a cell (unlikely -- much like your odds of dying from a cold virus).

But there is no way to be certain that the genes altered or manipulated won't have unintended consequences in some of the trillions of possible combinations of human genes that exist in the wild. We have already discovered that some people develop the clotting disorder that nearly killed my neighbor. What about immune system disorders? What if your immune system suddenly decided that all muscle cells are a danger that must be destroyed because the ones in your arm where you got the shot are producing millions of foreign "spike" proteins?

But the side effect I'm worried about is sterility or birth defects. Nobody knows what happens to a 10-year-old child who's been exposed to this particular gene manipulation, 10 years from now, when they start having kids. Probably nothing. But I would rather we not commit the entire human race to this experiment. Why not just let adults make their own informed choices about themselves and their kids?

This is a disease of old people. We're the ones at risk, not the children. Why don't we take the chance on this risky new technology and leave our grand-kids out of it until we have a few years of history with it?

At this point, we don't know what we don't know.

Awful lot of words to again spread misinformation.

These vaccines are NOT gene manipulation. You made up your own definition of manipulation and then applied it to these vaccines. That's a big no-no:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

And J&J is a viral vector vaccine, not a mRNA vaccine like Pfizer and Moderna

And from the CDC website

"Facts about COVID-19 Viral Vector Vaccines
They cannot give someone COVID-19 or other infections.

Viral vectors cannot cause infection with COVID-19 or with the virus used as the vaccine vector.
They do not affect or interact with our DNA in any way.

The genetic material delivered by the viral vector does not integrate into a person’s DNA."

Game, set, match----not that you ever had a chance:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

However...........the fact remains that a large percentage (90%) of people who are hospitalized and dying are the UN-vaccinated. To me, this pandemic remains a pandemic of the UN-vaccinated.

[QUOTE=coffeebean;2001679]How did my post and that , well, questionable response get merged into one in the post you quoted? I disavow any responsibility for that last sentence.

Nobody ever said the "viral vector" J&J vaccine can give you Covid.

But YOU said that it doesn't modify the host DNA. So please explain how a "viral vector" vaccine works, because the available descriptive materials that I've been able to find indicate that it works exactly the same as any other viral gene editing technique, to insert genes into the nuclear DNA.

And by the way, why do you think this is some sort of game to be won? This argument over forcing people to accept experimental vaccines strikes me as an issue with far reaching ramifications beyond just protecting people from a minor death risk. You're basically just saying "take the shot, you're too stupid to understand why". Rule by "experts" has turned out to be one of the most deadly ideas humans have ever come up with. It killed about 100 million people over last century.

Look, I have respectfully offered an opinion, and backed it up with facts, directly from the CDC. Are you unable to do that without the rudeness? It just makes you sound like the kind of egotistical know-it-all whose opinions normal people just ignore. It certainly doesn't help your argument.

Please tell me you are not serious, please. The posts have gone from "gene manipulation" to now "inserting genes into DNA" Wow, it doesn't get any better than this. The "opinion expressed" has no factual basis whatsoever, much less from the CDC.

Yes, I said the vaccine does not modify host DNA in any way. The CDC also stated that, directly, in the excerpt from their website that I provided. If interested, they also have a little section on how viral vector vaccines work.

The best part, however, was the assertion that one set of posts was "respectful" and the other "rude". I can't think of anything more rude than posting a bunch of nonsense on this website that some poor person might read and believe

Sigh... it would help if you would read from the posts thoroughly. My discussion and point was that the vaccinated harbor and spread covid just as easily as the unvaccinated and anyone thinking otherwise was wrong. You do NOT have special powers to spare anyone from covid at this point even though you are vaccinated. We are all spreaders of covid at this point if we have it in our snouts and mouths, even though we may be unaffected.

[QUOTE=coffeebean;2001679]Golfing Eagles is right, you need to straighten up your quotes and I’ll add your blind allegiance and read. The vaccinated and and unvaccinated are spreading covid. It’s a fact, my point again was, the vaccinated should not waltz around and believe they cannot spread covid. That’s not true!

[QUOTE=coffeebean;2001679]QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001680][QUOTE=coffeebean;2001679

How did my post and that , well, questionable response get merged into one in the post you quoted? I disavow any responsibility for that last sentence.[/QUOTE]

It happened because none of y'all can figure out how to post quotes, nest quotes, or post quote-trees. (Do you see what I did there?)

C'mon guy, you're a man of science, numbers. Do it for Murika! :a040::boxing2::popcorn:

GE most certainly knows how to use the QUOTE function yet many of these messed up quotes are his posts. What is going on??

wish I knew. But it's not happening to the posts I quote, it's happening to others that are quoting my posts

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;2001680]There have been a run of incorrect quotes going on in this thread. Who knows why this is happening? I think it may have started up-thread and is just snowballing.

Actually, it was OBB who said we all need to straighten out our quotes. LOL.

I never said the vaccinated are not spreading Covid. I know we vaccinated people are capable of spreading Covid, just not at the same rate as unvaccinated people spread the disease. Vaccinated people are not contagious for as long as un-vaccinated people are. Right there is one reason why vaccinated people do not spread Covid at the same rate as UN-vaccinated.

Also.....my statement pointed out that those who are hospitalized and dying are mostly UN-vaccinated people; as many as 90% are UN-vaccinated. THAT is the reason I feel this remains a pandemic of the UN-vaccinated.

OBB........What is a quote tree?