UPDATE: Against all expectation, they did indeed publish my comment.
____________________________________________________________
Oh, how silly Covid-worriers are, according to Open Culture:
I comment:
'Does this imply that there are no reasonable grounds for concern about the mRNA injections invented to combat Covid?
'Please direct us to evidence to show that these novel treatments (a) are as safe as vaccines that have been tested and cleared for medical use in the ordinary way, and (b) that they offer effective protection against the virus to the recipient, and help prevent onward transmission to others.
'Or are we simply expected to submit to groupthink? Perhaps a test for that will be whether you allow this comment to appear.
'I write as someone who has been 'double-jabbed' and is about to get the 'booster' - as a personal calculation of the balance of risks - but feel that there are risks which have been downplayed (and benefits that have been exaggerated) under the pressure to nudge us into a rushed mass acceptance of a still-experimental intervention.
'You mention Thalidomide: coincidentally, this very week sees the 60th anniversary of West German pediatrician Widukind Lenz's public report of the association of the drug with phocomelia cases in Hamburg. In that case, the print media were quick to publish, starting with the Welt Am Sonntag.* How different from today, with widespread suppression of news and views that do not fit the official narrative.'
Well now, let's see how open Open Culture are; or will they turn out to be more like the ignorant and arrogant Remainers in the Brexit debate?
26 comments:
"The deep distrust of institutions now seems intractable and fully endemic in our current political climate, and much of it may be fully warranted. But viruses have not evolved — since the time of the Jenner’s first smallpox inoculation — to care about our politics, religious beliefs, or feelings about authority and individual rights. Without widespread vaccination, they are more than happy to take advantage of our lack of immunity, and they will.!"
Yes, viruses although simple organisms evolve in order to replicate and maintain their existence.
Some of the higher organisms (supposedly more intelligent) seem to lack the basic understanding of life and biology!
@CherryPie - well said.
@Sackerson - In answer to your questions.
a) These vaccines and delivery systems have been developed over 30 years, and extensively tested. The data is available in scientificpublications.
b) The fact that Covid is spreading mostly in areas in the US with low vaccine uptake might be a clue. In addition, something like 95% of those who have been hospitalized for the disease in the past 6 months were unvaccinated.
@P: The anti-Covid vaccines have been developed over 30 years? And what is this I read about Pfizer fudging results, with more dying in the test group than the control group?
I think it has also been shown that bad reactions to the 'vaccines' are running at a much higher rate than for ordinary well-established vaccines.
@S: Yes. They started developing the mRNA techniques 30 years ago, and were testing them on such Covid viruses as MERS and the original SARS outbreak from Hong Kong. That is how Pfizer were able to produce a vaccine in January of 2020 and begin testing it.
There is no need to put vaccine in quotes. The Pfizer, Moderna and other mRNA products are vaccines by any measure. The difference is that, rather than using denatured virus shells to trigger an immune response, they make the body produce spike proteins to which the body reacts. In theory, that would make them much more targeted.
The bad reactions that you mention as 'shown to have bad reactions' wouldn't be from VAERS, would it? If so, you should know that a) there has been a growing anti-vaccine movement in the US and UK for at least two decades and b) VAERS is a self-reporting system, where anyone can report any reaction. On doctor got them to publish that a vaccine had turned him into the Incredible Hulk. What it does do is give a broad picture to point out possible problems. It enabled epidemiologists to discover a rare clotting reaction in 1 in several million (compared with that due to Covid itself, 1 in several thousand). At least here in the US, this and other moves by legislatures are attacks on the entire process of Science.
@all The mRNA research started in the 1960's and was discontinued because of bad results. The studies in the 1990's were discontinued for the same result, all of the lab rats died if exposed to the virus after the test ended. The mRNA vaccine worked, but all of the lab rats died after the tests were concluded. The conclusion was, that that problem needed to be addressed before they used the mRNA vaccine.
The amount of misinformation and censorship on the net is incredible. try this web site: thehighwire.com Link
"The mRNA research started in the 1960's and was discontinued because of bad results. The studies in the 1990's were discontinued for the same result, all of the lab rats died if exposed to the virus after the test ended. The mRNA vaccine worked, but all of the lab rats died after the tests were concluded. The conclusion was, that that problem needed to be addressed before they used the mRNA vaccine."
Jim in San Marcos - The link you provided does not work, however I managed to find the website you refer to. Could you provide a link the research you quoted above?
Thank you.
Some links to digest...
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/different-types-of-covid-19-vaccines/art-20506465
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd.2017.243
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7831080/
@CherryPie: I can only find those comments on right wing anti-vaccine sites. I did find a piece in Nature with a history https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w
@Paddington: Thank you for the interesting link about the history.
I find the anti-vaccine & Covid-Denial and other conspiracy theory sites annoying. They provide no evidence to support their theories. They play on peoples vulnerabilities and fears.
During the second lockdown in England a "Covid Denier" spray painted seemingly innocuous messages along local pathways that lead to nature areas, schools and the pathway leading into the local shopping area.
In-between the friendly messages were what I would call political propaganda along with offensive (and anti state) messages. In addition to this, although most people wouldn't have noticed (but as a photographer I did) stickers posted at eye level that led to a website that promoted the anti-vax covid denial propaganda.
I wasn't curious enough to visit that website ;-)
@CherryPie:
It isn't that they don't have evidence. They don't understand the concept. It's the same with the Flat Earthers and Young Earthers.
@Paddington:
You are right about them not understanding the concept.
That does not excuse people turning their misunderstandings into a political movement to influence others, based on no scientific evidence to promote their viewpoint.
Or maybe those people do understand and it gives them a kick when others follow and believe the information they have presented...
@CherryPie:
Look at what Qanon achieved last week. They had hundreds convinced that JFK Jr. came back from the dead to declare that Trump was still President, and they stood in the rain for hours to wait for it.
@CherryPie:
It's actually more than that. The conspiracy mind appears to believe a trusted source over any physical evidence. It is about belief, and reality does not intrude on that.
@Paddington
"The conspiracy mind appears to believe a trusted source over any physical evidence."
Those with a conspiracy mind choose to support their own belief, it makes them comfortable in their personal choices.
This is the reason they choose a a source of information that makes them feel comfortable, rather than think outside their comfort zone¬
@CherryPie:
The bane of my existence. I always wanted to know what the facts were. From age 11 or so, at least.
@ Paddington:
It seems you and I are kindred spirits.
@CherryPie:
Sadly, I am living in the US, where about 50% of the population appears to have lost its mind over Covid, CRT in schools, Flat Earth, Young Earth, fake claims of voting fraud, and so much more.
Funny how today there are two sides to every story, but now separated by a light-year. Not all who worry about the novel jabs - as I do - can be lumped together as 'anti-vaxxers'. It seems we are in an age where every subject is an excuse for bitter, deep division.
My wife and I are about to have the booster this miorning, but we know a number of people who have had reactions to the 'vaccine', one requiring hospital treatment. So wish us luck.
@Sackerson:
When there are two sides to a story, rather than dozens, it is sometimes hard to decide which is the path to take.
In those cases, I go with the side which has the fewest lies.
In this particular case, the anti-vaxx/vaccine hesitant PR forces have repeatedly lied about just about everything.
That double x is really irritating. And there are rational grounds for concern; a nuanced approach would accept that it is a question of balance of risks and that the balance may vary according to cases. "You must choose!" is war-cry, not a debate.
@ Sackerson I personally don't consider someone who chooses not to have a vaccination an Anti-Vaxer. I believe it is a personal choice whether or not to be vaccinated against anything, not just Covid. I am disturbed that care workers have recently been mandated to have a Covid 19 Vaccination to remain working. Constructive dismissal?
I do however have a problem with Anti-Vax movement sharing what I think of propaganda rather than facts and information. The movement spreads disinformation, most of which can easily be debunked.
I hope that neither you or your wife suffer with side effects from your vaccinations.
@Sackerson:
The 'vaxxer' is the spelling often used here in the US.
As for the idea of 'you must choose', I never said that.
I do say that every single criticism of the current vaccines has been a set of lies, or completely overblown, in terms of risk. For example, the clotting issue is at least 100 times more likely with Covid than with the vaccine. Ditto with the cardiac issues in children.
There is also the issue of putting others at risk.
@P: I'll accept overblown; my position all along is that it's a matter of calculated risk - with the numbers still not as clear as on dice.
As to putting others at risk, again it's a question of where to draw the line. Roads would be much safer if no-one was allowed to drive.
There is a self-righteous, bullying, groupthink tendency among some pro-vaxxxxxers and blind, rock-throwing hysteria among some anti-vaxxxxxers.
@CherryPie: thanks for your good wishes, unfortunately my wife had a bad reaction, so much so that we'll think twice before her having Pf*ck*ng Pfizer again.
I am sorry to hear that your wife had a bad reaction. I hope she feels better soon.
Post a Comment