Create account

replied 1193d
They are vaccines. You can not redefine words as an argument. You have moved to using general anti-vaxxer arguments. Likely your sources are pushing you in that direction.
1 / 22
replied 1193d
They aren't vaccines. Do you know what therapy means? That's what this is, gene therapy, a medical treatment. Therapy. To affect disease outcome. Nobody redefined any terms.
replied 1193d
Prove mRNA jabs stimulate immunity and disrupt transmission, then I'll accept your accusation of being "anti-vaxxer". Until then you're anti-science. Discrediting doctors isn't science
replied 1192d
It is not a gene therapy at all. It affects the disease outcome by having shown your immune system an inactive form of the virus to let your body develop immunity. Aka a vaccine.
replied 1192d
Vaccines disrupt transmission only through reaching your body to have a faster immune response. No vaccine has some secondary mechanism for preventing transmission.
replied 1192d
That's not an acceptable answer. You're still the anti-science for discrediting over 10k health pros advocating focused protection, and everyone else who doesnt fit your believe system
replied 1192d
It's stimulating cell to become a pathogen creator. mRNA gene therapy. "Waning" immunity ad doesnt transmit disruption. They don't work. Your 20 times safer story is just some bullshit
replied 1191d
Your false dichotomy doesn't fit. Focused protection was always going on, as well as general protection.
How the vaccine provides the important spike protein is irrelevant.
replied 1191d
I think it's important.
https://www.swfinstitute.org/news/91484/scientists-discover-dna-chunk-in-covid-that-matches-moderna-patented-sequence-from-before-pandemic
replied 1191d
Why do you think that?
replied 1191d
You're so good at making assumptions, but you can't figure out the relevance? There's only a one-in-three-trillion chance that sequence randomly appeared through natural evolution.
replied 1190d
I was asking you to link it to what we were discussing, but I get that you deflect and distract when you realise your argument failed.
replied 1190d
As for this article making claims about some study, it is meaningless. As with most articles the scientists likely are not saying what the article claims.
replied 1190d
You need to learn to listen to scientists rather than articles making claims about studies.
replied 1190d
Quoting an article is not making claims. Bad bot.
replied 1189d
You quoted the claim. It is a claim.

Poor advertising is irrelevant. It is misleading as well, immunity doesn't wane. The current antibody count does though, as it should.
1Q6Y3jfWN4YMc8cF
replied 1189d
"Among the 4,206 Germans infected with Omicron for whom their vaccination status was known, 95.58% were fully vaccinated. More than a quarter of them had booster shots."
replied 1188d
"Given that the overall background rate for vaccination in Germany is 70%, this means that the shots now have a -87% effectiveness rate against Omicron".
replied 1188d
I am surprised their vaccination rate is so low, at 75% fully vaccinated.
Bow look at the numbers in the ICU's, and that vaccination rate. That is how you see the vaccine effectiveness
replied 1188d
In BC, Canada, about 91% are fully vaccinated, and while most people in the hospital are vaccinated, it is the ICU's that have mostly unvaccinated people. That is the point of vaccines
replied 1188d
No that's not the point of vaccines. You're proving my point again. You can't prove that the mRNA gene therapeutics provide immunity and disrupt transmission.
replied 1188d
Yes, that is the point of all vaccines. To prepare your immune system to do the work. The data proves the vaccine works. Your attempt to deny the numbers is amusing though.
replied 1191d
My 20 times safer number comes from a doctor who investigates and litigates against big pharma. He pushes for more healthy living than medicine. He acknowledges the vaccines effective.


About Privacy Terms Stats