I'm in Pfizer's COVID vaccine trial, ask me anything.

[sniper97]

Appreciate the maturity. I was hangout with my kids, away from my phone for a while. Just had a friend vaccinated while he had bronchitis, in the hospital for 3-4 days, O2 levels dropped, thought he had lymphoma, still has tingling in fingers/arms and legs/toes. I can provide his phone number if you like to discuss it.

Peter McCullough is a top Dr in his field, published, at a big university with alot of experience who treated covid patients, we are still not following early treatment recommendations from his articles. He testified before the Senate, video provided, was not cross examined. They could have asked him any question they wanted.. 2nd Dr in Senate hearing had almost the same recommendations.

Your thread said to ask anything. Your 2 case studies are very small groups and both recently done, phase 1 only.

There is a Senate hearing video for proof that we are not treating covid early,, which we should be. I think it would save life's. 2 extremely experienced Doctors. Please explain the conspiracy. I have facts to back up my argument. Senate hearing video and medical journal published article.

[Diomedes]

First, goalpost move. Are those two studies I linked (not the only two, btw, just the first two I googled) within the last ten months? Or do they go back several years?

Second, are we supposed to put our stock in Senate testimony or data? The numbers speak for themselves. The vaccines are extremely safe, the vaccines are extremely effective. Do they have side effects? Yep. Do the prevent 100% of COVID cases? Nope! If that's what you're looking for, good luck. What we have works, and works well. I don't have anything to add to what I've said to you, or, frankly, interest in spending more time on it. "We all known US media is controlled" did it for me. Start getting into "the media is controlled" conspiracies, cash me out.

[sniper97]

You have offered no proof the mRNA vaccine is safe. You have ignored the Vacine/CDC self reporting website, with deaths and health issues. Last year I read a covid South Korea article about the spread of covid in a mixed use bldg (office and apts), the outcome was that until you are showing symptoms, you can spread covid. Tried to find it a week later and it was gone.

I have provide proof that covid can be treated early, yet as a country we are not doing it.

Just the fact the data from Israel is much different than the US data,, make me wonder which is true.

[lhamilton1807]

He’s provided tons of data. I’m sorry you’ve missed it. Reread the thread, there’s plenty of data available showing they’re safe and effective and he’s shared a lot of it.

Don’t know how a Korean article not being found a week after you read it proves the media is controlled and is deleting articles the government doesn’t like. It could have been taken down by the reporting agency itself if it felt it wasn’t factual after further review. We don’t know, so that isn’t proof.

Regarding VAERS, anyone can post anything to it. Years ago a guy posted that a flu vaccine turned him into the Hulk. Seriously.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/qjpmp7/anti-vaxxers-misuse-federal-data-to-falsely-claim-covid-vaccines-are-dangerous

The system was created to help provide transparency to those who thought drug companies weren’t providing clear testing information to the public and they’ve chosen to always keep it completely open for anyone to submit anything and to download the entire database. Read the first paragraph from their intro article:

http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/pdf/vaers_factsheet1.pdf

VAERS cannot determine if a vaccine caused an adverse event, but can determine if further investigation is needed.

.

Pretty clear it’s just preliminary data and a starting point for investigation. Not verified numbers by any stretch.

[Chappy]

More fun facts: out of 12 potential vaccines, only 2 are mRNA. This is Moderna's 1st and only "drug", Moderna was founded in 2010.

What is your point with this? Is this intended to be something nefarious? And what do you mean by “running the show?” They were asked to develop vaccines at “warp speed” and they did.
Fun fact Moderna is ModeRNA so yeah the first rna vaccine was their first product, funny that.

[sniper97]

What is your point with this? Is this intended to be something nefarious? And what do you mean by “running the show?” They were asked to develop vaccines at “warp speed” and they did.
Fun fact Moderna is ModeRNA so yeah the first rna vaccine was their first product, funny that.

2 fairly new drug companies, 1st drug in their pipeline. My point is they lack a history of making drugs. Lack experience.

If you go out and buy a car, do you do research? Read reviews? Brand new technology. The major drug companies have no mRNA drugs in their pipelines. Both partnered with established drug companies.

Moderna had only existed since 2010 and this is their 1st drug.

Nothing nefarious

[lhamilton1807]

Moderna launching its first drug is akin to Tesla launching electric cars. Musk is a savvy businessman with experience. Moderna is a new drug company with experienced business minds and a lot of deep experience. Here’s their leadership team. Hardly a bunch of college grads. They had a decade to work on mRNA technology and we’re able to kick out a viable product because they had done their homework. Doesn’t seem too far fetched to me.

https://www.modernatx.com/about-us/executive-committee-leadership

[Chappy]

For better or worse the pharma industry and the auto industry are completely different beasts, I could probably argue quite a bit for reform on both
But telsa seems a bit farther along on the electric car then the big 3.

[Diomedes]

In science, if one makes an affirmative claim, it is that party’s responsibility to provide support for that claim, rather than say “I’m right until and unless you definitively prove me wrong”. So if these vaccines are actually as dangerous as you insinuate, show. the. data. It’s that simple. Show how the rate of severe side effects are disproportionate to other types of vaccines, or disproportionate to the risk the vaccines mitigate. If you can’t do that, with hard data in published studies or public health agencies (like, put the numbers in your post and provide the source), then nobody has any reason to take seriously the notion that the costs outweigh the benefits.

And one last word on “early treatment”: Treatment will not end the pandemic. Vaccines, and only vaccines, will.

[woouulf]

I got the 2 Moderna shots just because I want to go places and do things. first shot sucked, 2 shot really fed me up...Chills , Headaches , loss of apatite and so on,,,, I got the card under duress ... I was told to have my Vax card for a flight I'm taking ... Booster shots next????

[lhamilton1807]

Getting the vaccine was your choice, not an enforcement or a decision made at gunpoint. Come on 😂

The potential (temporary) side effects were all disclosed to you before getting the shot I’m sure. They’ve been publicly plastered everywhere for months. Booster shots are a consideration if the virus is allowed to spread for long enough that it mutates to the point the current vaccines aren’t effective anymore. That ISN’T the case right now - the three vaccines available on the US are highly effective at dealing with the Delta variant. How have you missed all of this? Oh wait…

[lhamilton1807]

We all known US media is controlled.

I felt that way years ago. Then I started reading more broadly in the US Media and found a vast array of opinions, reporting styles, editorials, and coverage options and angles. The US reporting agencies are mostly privately funded (NPR and VoA are two exceptions) but they’re both quite free to (and do in fact) criticize US government agents, policies, and elected officials across the board. They aren’t perfect and certainly come with bias. All human-generated information will have some bias at least. I learned to move from complaining about bias to understanding there’s no way to get information except through biased sources and to understand the bias in the reporting as I read it. Instead I focus more on whether the reporting uses credible sources and whether those sources are cited. I also look for opinions mixed in with (or in place of) facts. Most media platforms across the spectrum mix opinion shows and news reporting, and audiences seem to take both as factual reporting. Doesn’t mean they’re controlled - it means we’re not very good at telling the difference.

[sniper97]

For better or worse the pharma industry and the auto industry are completely different beasts, I could probably argue quite a bit for reform on both
But telsa seems a bit farther along on the electric car then the big 3.

After how many years and how many recalls. If Johnson and Johnson can't get sunscreen right...

Also Musk founded and sold 2 successfully companies prior to Tesla, PayPal is one.

[Chappy]

Nothing nefarious

Just to be clear, from reading you posts, you believe that early treatment was repressed in order to allow for emergency use authorization to be granted so new biotech companies with little experience can inject us with unproven material. Am I misrepresenting this in any way?

[sniper97]

I felt that way years ago. Then I started reading more broadly in the US Media and found a vast array of opinions, reporting styles, editorials, and coverage options and angles. The US reporting agencies are mostly privately funded (NPR and VoA are two exceptions) but they’re both quite free to (and do in fact) criticize US government agents, policies, and elected officials across the board. They aren’t perfect and certainly come with bias. All human-generated information will have some bias at least. I learned to move from complaining about bias to understanding there’s no way to get information except through biased sources and to understand the bias in the reporting as I read it. Instead I focus more on whether the reporting uses credible sources and whether those sources are cited. I also look for opinions mixed in with (or in place of) facts. Most media platforms across the spectrum mix opinion shows and news reporting, and audiences seem to take both as factual reporting. Doesn’t mean they’re controlled - it means we’re not very good at telling the difference.

Any Doctor who disagrees with Fauci, their post is removed. I feel like free speech is threatened. Watching an interesting video, I'll share once I am finished.

[lhamilton1807]

Free speech can’t be (i.e. isn’t supposed to be) curtailed by the government. Private parties have always been able to curb speech. We have moderators on this forum that do just that and it’s perfectly legal and appropriate. Sorry if you misunderstood how that worked. Free speech doesn’t mean you can post whatever you want whenever and wherever you want. A lot of companies, like Google, have decided it’s in the public’s best interest to not have misinformation spread on their sites. Not to say I agree with their policies on all things - but Google is not a government agency and can set its own usage policies. Doesn’t mean you can’t post it or find anti-Faucci articles anywhere, it means you Google might not spit it out when you search for it.

[sniper97]

Just to be clear, from reading you posts, you believe that early treatment was repressed in order to allow for emergency use authorization to be granted so new biotech companies with little experience can inject us with unproven material. Am I misrepresenting this in any way?

I feel like I have proven that early treatment options are still ignored today. The reason why is a bigger question. Emergency use is only allowed when there are not treatments. The prior examples by the OP were only phase 1.

With cause and effect, I am not 100% sure of the reason why. I have ideas, hopefully not that sinister.

How about untested material?

[sniper97]

In science, if one makes an affirmative claim, it is that party’s responsibility to provide support for that claim, rather than say “I’m right until and unless you definitively prove me wrong”. So if these vaccines are actually as dangerous as you insinuate, show. the. data. It’s that simple. Show how the rate of severe side effects are disproportionate to other types of vaccines, or disproportionate to the risk the vaccines mitigate. If you can’t do that, with hard data in published studies or public health agencies (like, put the numbers in your post and provide the source), then nobody has any reason to take seriously the notion that the costs outweigh the benefits.

And one last word on “early treatment”: Treatment will not end the pandemic. Vaccines, and only vaccines, will.

There are now articles on how Covid will last 7 yrs, Spanish Flu didn't last that long.

Also, why get a boster vs. an anti-body test.

[Fubarius]

Any Doctor who disagrees with Fauci, their post is removed..

Post? Not research paper? Not thesis? Not article in a scientific journal?

Post. Hmmm....

As in facebook? Maybe twiiter? Or worse, one of the "alternatives"?

Yeah. Those "posts" are all lies. With out exception.

First rule of social media. Everything shared is a lie. Scrolling through a feed isn't research. "Interesting" videos on youtube isn't research. Just more lies. The truth is boring, or depressing. But lies trigger emotion, make you feel angry, or vindicated, or special. So lies spread. No one gets a million views by simply stating the truth.