gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
did you even watch the video?
I watched the first 5 minutes, and there were so many claims that were verifiablely false and absolutely absurd I decided not to waste any more time with it, and if you think its credible I would seriously recommend getting a psych evaluation, because you lack the ability to think critically and separate reality from fantasy. This is not an insult, but a genuine recommendation.
It gets better, there you will see 500,000 Indian kids getting paralysis, and millions in Africa becoming infertile. And other things. You may not agree or think all of it is true, and maybe its not, but that does not mean all of it is false either... Just hidden behind very big corporations and billions of dollars.
And yes the Phizer and moderna are experimental... it goes until 2023 and anyone getting them made themselves part of that study.
In the phizer study they only had a chance to look at 9 people that tested positive with the virus and had a symptom... that does not even say how many tested positive without symptoms, but that is hardly a number to determine what will happen with the virus actually inside people, and whether or not it will cause Vaccine dependent illnesses, cause mutations, is transmissible, how long the antibodies last etc... so many questions.... all they had to prove was the number would be less than the control as to how many tested positive with a symptom. Barely any testing was done in my opinion....
And even though AZ may be pulled from western markets, it may still be used to on people in lesser developed countries.... A friend of mine in Zambia justtold me they announced vaccines had arrived in country and it was AZ. thats how these dirty corporations roll... will just find new markets to sell the poisons.
4 out of a million people get bloodclots from AZ, pretty shitty poison if you ask me. 500k indian kids arent getting paralysis from vaccines and neither are millions in africa becoming infertile, you're literally just making things up.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Do you also think smartphones should have been banned?
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Do you also think smartphones should have been banned?
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Do you also think smartphones should have been banned?
No, But I do think you are missing the point.
I'm pretty sure I do get the point. Those smartphones hadn't been tested for long term side effects either. There's no way to be sure that smartphones don't give you cancer.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Do you also think smartphones should have been banned?
No, But I do think you are missing the point.
I'm pretty sure I do get the point. Those smartphones hadn't been tested for long term side effects either. There's no way to be sure that smartphones don't give you cancer.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Do you also think smartphones should have been banned?
No, But I do think you are missing the point.
I'm pretty sure I do get the point. Those smartphones hadn't been tested for long term side effects either. There's no way to be sure that smartphones don't give you cancer.
This is a pretty bad faith argument.
Why so? You talk about new technology not being tested for potential side effects after 10 years, but for some reason this doesn't apply to some technology and does apply to vaccine. Why?
As long as you're using the smartphone according to manufacturers instructions, they will be liable for cancer caused by it. (i don't believe in this nonsense btw)
So good luck making your phone calls while holding your phone at least 5cm away from your face.
POC wrote:Also I most likely know a whole lot more than you.
POC wrote:Also as an objective third party, and near 100% accuracy of giving correct information, I would say my opinions are more reliable than yours.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Do you also think smartphones should have been banned?
No, But I do think you are missing the point.
I'm pretty sure I do get the point. Those smartphones hadn't been tested for long term side effects either. There's no way to be sure that smartphones don't give you cancer.
This is a pretty bad faith argument.
Why so? You talk about new technology not being tested for potential side effects after 10 years, but for some reason this doesn't apply to some technology and does apply to vaccine. Why?
eh? I am not particularly talking about new tech mRNA vaccines. My reasoning extends to all types of vaccines. I was just pointing out that people have every right to be cautious about the vaccines specifically more so for the new experimental ones.
Goodspeed wrote:To be fair we're not injecting smartphones into our bloodstream. It's not exactly comparable
They do radiate though. I tried not to bring it up because I'm afraid of the bullshit hwp will spew out. But for all we know, the radiation might cause cancer somehow.
also heard from an insider that bill gates is trying to get the andromeda galaxy to collide with the milky way, which could potentially destroy our galaxy as well as our planet
any idea how we can put a stop to this? open to all ideas.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game
Another bad faith argument. Developing cancer from a vaccine is infinitely more likely and realistic than from 11th gen intel processor. Besides Processors are built on previous tech and we are using them for over 2 decades, so it is already proven. In case of vaccines each vaccine needs to be proven individually regardless of how its made. If we believe the theory that virus originated from labs then why it isn't possible that vaccine made in same labs can cause cancer?
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game
Another bad faith argument. Developing cancer from a vaccine is infinitely more likely and realistic than from 11th gen intel processor. Besides Processors are built on previous tech and we are using them for over 2 decades, so it is already proven. In case of vaccines each vaccine needs to be proven individually regardless of how its made. If we believe the theory that virus originated from labs then why it isn't possible that vaccine made in same labs can cause cancer?
Why? There's already studies that show that bluetooth headphones drastically increase the likelihood in getting brain cancer. You are the one making bad faith arguments.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game
Another bad faith argument. Developing cancer from a vaccine is infinitely more likely and realistic than from 11th gen intel processor. Besides Processors are built on previous tech and we are using them for over 2 decades, so it is already proven. In case of vaccines each vaccine needs to be proven individually regardless of how its made. If we believe the theory that virus originated from labs then why it isn't possible that vaccine made in same labs can cause cancer?
Why is it infinitely more lkely? What do you base that on? So far the argument is entirely in good faith, because it uses the logic and arguments you have demonstrated to argue that all new things are bad because their long term effects haven't been tested.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game
Another bad faith argument. Developing cancer from a vaccine is infinitely more likely and realistic than from 11th gen intel processor. Besides Processors are built on previous tech and we are using them for over 2 decades, so it is already proven. In case of vaccines each vaccine needs to be proven individually regardless of how its made. If we believe the theory that virus originated from labs then why it isn't possible that vaccine made in same labs can cause cancer?
Why? There's already studies that show that bluetooth headphones drastically increase the likelihood in getting brain cancer. You are the one making bad faith arguments.
Source. Scientists are divided on this. If any discussion about this, it should've happened years ago. Now we have practical result that it is safe to use. Not saying it may not increase the risk but it is significantly lower and even lower number of people actually develop and die. The math is simply not enough to stop billions from using and making life magnitudes better/easier. You are the one doing bad faith arguments by comparing apples to oranges.
gibson wrote:If you understood science, you would realize that what you just spewed in regard to vaccines was horseshit and is in direct contrast with reality. Vaccines = good . The fact that this is even still a discussion in 2021 is mind boggling.
I don't think anyone denies vaccines are good. But on the other hand you can't also deny that these vaccines are 1) experimental ( some of them are) 2) rushed 3) effectiveness is still unknown. Then you have AstraZeneca and J&J facing the hammer. If even 1 in 100 person develops serious side effect to vaccine that is literally similar to the virus. That doesn't mean these are bad or have to be, but if someone wants to exercise caution, so be it.
They are not experimental, and the effectiveness is not unknown(for Pfizer, which I took). AZ had relatively big issues, but 6 people out of 6.8 million died from J&J. You're literally 10,000 times more likely to die from a carcrash. They were rushed for obvious reasons, but that in and of itself isn't a negative. I don't blame people if they aren't rushing out the door to get it, I myself read several peer reviewed articles in scientific journals before choosing to get vaccinated. But thats a far cry from the bullshit that a certain someone is peddling in his thread.
mRNA vaccines are experimental as far as I am aware . Secondly it's simply not possible to predict the side effects you can have say 4 years or 10 years later. And this is a scientific fact. There effectiveness is unknown in the sense that its unclear how long the effects last. It could be as low as 6 months. It's true you are more likely to die in car crash but that doesn't stop you from driving the car does it? Rushing any medicines in and itself is a very negative thing, no matter the circumstances. There is precedence for this. Most medicines for diseases since 1900 haven't lasted more than 40 years in use. It's actually very hard to make a very effective and side effect free cure or vaccine for that matter.
Well it depends on your definition of experimental I guess, but by traditional definitions it isn't, having gone through vigorous testing and being in its final form, as far as we know at this point. What point are you trying to make, that there's potential for side effects in 10 years? Okay? You don't know how anything you do today will effect you, negatively or positively, in 10 years. It feels like you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of 5g is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, what happens if in 10 years the side effect of having a computer with an Intel 11th gen processor is cancer and now you have billions with cancer? Just a hypothetical, but what happens if in 10 years the side effect of eating vegetables in 2021 is cancer and now you have billions with cancer?
2 can play the "lets create absurd and completely baseless hypotheticals" game
Another bad faith argument. Developing cancer from a vaccine is infinitely more likely and realistic than from 11th gen intel processor. Besides Processors are built on previous tech and we are using them for over 2 decades, so it is already proven. In case of vaccines each vaccine needs to be proven individually regardless of how its made. If we believe the theory that virus originated from labs then why it isn't possible that vaccine made in same labs can cause cancer?
Why is it infinitely more lkely? What do you base that on? So far the argument is entirely in good faith, because it uses the logic and arguments you have demonstrated to argue that all new things are bad because their long term effects haven't been tested.
There is precedence for medicines developing cancer and getting suspended. Do you really lack the common sense that you fail to see how ridiculous comparisons you are making?
RefluxSemantic 
princeofcarthage 
harcha 
