F.D.A. Halts Coronavirus Testing Program Backed by Bill Gates

originally posted by: summer5

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: chr0naut
Conspiracy theories aside... do you support mandatory vaccinations?

Do I have a right to refuse a vaccine?...

As far as I have observed, vaccination has always been by assent. Why change things?

But, I do believe that those who abstain from vaccination are actually reducing the overall effectiveness of any vaccination campaign. It is an extremely anti-social thing to do to everyone else.

Nonetheless, if 20% abstain, that leaves a herd immunity of 80%, sufficient to overcome the pathogen - eventually. And those who abstain and catch the disease are naturally immunized (if they don't die, or become permanently disfigured by the illness), so there is a fudge factor even in those figures.

Especially if there has been no publicly independent review, the company is making a profit from the vaccine (creating a conflict of interest between their bottom line and my health) and I am not allowed to see the underlying data and research behind the vaccine?

Am I not allowed to raise my concerns, and refuse based on a gag on the information related to health choices that others are both profiting from and have made for me?

Governmental medical policies on vaccines have put me in a position where I am incapable of making an informed decision due to lack of information. Rather, I am expected to "take their word" on the expert medical advice that I am not allowed to question... scary.

Note: This post was posted in another vaccine thread, with zero responses... curious if you have a response, as the questions are not conspiracy related.

Vaccines aren't perfectly benign. The risk is small, but there is risk. As such, vaccination for trivial and transitory illness is wrong because it exposes people to unnecessary risk.

The issue to me is the monetization of medicine (not just immunization). In many countries of the world, immunization against deadly diseases are fully subsidized by governments. This allows medical advancement to make money but defrays end user costs as a fraction of taxation of the entire population. It also allows oversight panels to review the necessity of, and therefore the subsidy of, medicines. Not so in America where the pure profit motive drives medicine.

I did not vaccinate my children. I can tell you based on the chicken pox vaccine that the only thing the vaccine did was change the virus. How do I know that? Because every time the chicken pox was going around the elementary school I'd get a call from the school nurse informing me of the "outbreak" and informing me I could keep the kids home if I wanted to. I made play dates with the kids we knew that had them so my kids would catch them and get it over with. Wanna know what's even more interesting? I was unable to get my children to catch the chicken pox from the infected children who were vaccinated against it and passing it around to each other. Think about that. It's a new strain that ONLY vaccinated children pass around to each other. Those with no vaccine don't or can't catch it.

Want to know something. When your kids catch Chicken Pox, they don't actually ever get over the varicella zoster virus. Ever.

Chickenpox
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The same virus hangs around in their system and in some people, causes another set of even worse symptoms later in life, called "Shingles".

Shingles
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

That is the difference between getting a 'live' virus as an immunization or through a natural infection, and a 'dead' or inactive one. The real virus never gets the foothold if your immune system kills it before it takes hold.

Let's assume that those who have had decided to take said covid vaccine only spread around a "new vaccinated strain" to each other and those who don't have the injection are going to be the ones blamed for getting the vaccinated sick. It'll be some effed up bull# what ever the outcome.

And to say that vaccines are harmless is just not true. Look into vaccine injury cases which in the US alone has paind out over 4.2 Billion in rewards (that figure does NOT include attorney fee awards as well) from harm caused by vaccines. My nephew died after and because of round of vaccines he was given. I don't know if you've ever been to a child's funeral but when the casket is made for a baby it's pretty damn sad. I also have a niece and a nephew who are both autistic after having their 'mandatory' shots. They were perfectly fine prior to the injections and some how mysteriously stopped responding and making eye contact. They no longer tried speaking or playing with favorite toys.

Sorry, I got a bit off topic of the particular virus we are discussing but to say the risk is small (and that is on vaccines with lots of supposed research and testing) I would have to kindly strongly disagree.

Again, I don't think that vaccination should be mandatory. Nor do I think that we should immunize against absolutely everything we can.

Coronaviruses are very mutable. However, once the body starts to get a few identifiers of a coronavirus, even tough it might change, there is enough similarity that the immune response can (probably) get to work on eliminating it.

originally posted by: Gothmog
a reply to: chr0naut

They also didn't use the German manufactured tests, instead, they mandated that US made test kits would have to be used

And your point was what ?

It started the US mass public testing regime weeks after they had the German kits - on top of the delays in reacting that had already occurred due to no-one wanting to admit it was happening. A total bureaucratic bungle.

a reply to: mtnshredder

It was not shutdown because of surveillance but for the return of the surveillance data back to the testee. The FDA knew about the surveillance and was apparently ok with that.

This does not make a lot of sense. So someone tests positive, are people suppose to stay quite about that? With no one getting back to you from such a test it would be normal to assume that all is good.

Is the issue with just how surprised most people will be when they realize just how much surveillance data there is about them?

Trump said that when the Vaccine is ready he is going to mobilize the military to distribute it.

originally posted by: seeker1963
a reply to: dug88

Bill Gates, Bill Clinton and George Soros are the 3 big backers of H.R. 6666. The rabbit hole runs deep.

They are all on Santas list and have been counted twice...in some cases more than twice....LMAO....they have already received their "gifts" a wee bit early this year.

a reply to: dug88
I have been saying this for a while. A lot of the people are under the impression Bill Gates is innocent. It's sickening that they did over exposure of him on news channels to try and throw people off his trail. A huge majority has fallen for it hard...

"""It seems the coronavirus may give a long enough immunity to where it would work instead of a vaccine.

So, would you be in favor of either get the vaccine, or be purposefully infected and quarantined in order to become immune?

The risk isn't about you...its that you could catch it, show no symptoms, and give it to an elder or immune compromised that will die from it. This is the issue about people standing for their rights over their neighbors.

There needs to be a logcal, rational compromise.

The courts already decided back in the days of Polio that mandatory vaccines can be used in cases where there is a health threat...which this qualifies for. I think though we could all be adults and discuss things rationally. The vaccine can cause some questions on the safety when being rushed soo quickly and no long term studies. I get that, sure...but we can't just let tons of people die or have massive health issues simply because maybe there might be a problem potentially down the road.
So, where is the middle ground....do we discuss it like adults, or must the government pull their legally entitled iron boot out to keep the savages from eating each other.""""""

"Maybe there might be a problem down the road?" Yes, we CAN object to mandatory vaccination because it may cause problems down the road. The World Health Organization itself admits that 80% of polio cases in the third world are from the vaccine. That's....um.... a problem!

The only "health threat" here is not letting herd immunity do its job. It's the easiest, simplest way to end this entire crisis. The human race has done it with EVERY other virus. Protect the old and vulnerable and let the virus go through the population. Most people get it, recover from it and boom, virus gone! Now no one can transmit it. Viruses actually disappear that way FASTER than if we vaccinate for it. There are always some people the vaccine doesn't work for. There are always some people who GET the disease they're being vaccinated for. There are always some people who the vaccine doesn't work for. Vaccines perpetuate disease and slow down their eradication, while yes, if the vaccine is effective, protecting people from the disease THAT ONE year.

But with a mutating virus, you'll need another vaccine the next year, and the next, and they won't always get it right - just like the flu vaccine. So those who have never had covid before, and DO get it one year, might get very ill, whereas those who have naturally recovered from previous strains will not get very ill.

Nature has the whole thing planned out for a best case scenario. It's Gates and the rest of the idiots that think they can try to control EVERY SINGLE DEATH IN THE HISTORY OF HUMANS, which is impossible.

originally posted by: summer5

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: chr0naut
Conspiracy theories aside... do you support mandatory vaccinations?

Do I have a right to refuse a vaccine?...

As far as I have observed, vaccination has always been by assent. Why change things?

But, I do believe that those who abstain from vaccination are actually reducing the overall effectiveness of any vaccination campaign. It is an extremely anti-social thing to do to everyone else.

Nonetheless, if 20% abstain, that leaves a herd immunity of 80%, sufficient to overcome the pathogen - eventually. And those who abstain and catch the disease are naturally immunized (if they don't die, or become permanently disfigured by the illness), so there is a fudge factor even in those figures.

Especially if there has been no publicly independent review, the company is making a profit from the vaccine (creating a conflict of interest between their bottom line and my health) and I am not allowed to see the underlying data and research behind the vaccine?

Am I not allowed to raise my concerns, and refuse based on a gag on the information related to health choices that others are both profiting from and have made for me?

Governmental medical policies on vaccines have put me in a position where I am incapable of making an informed decision due to lack of information. Rather, I am expected to "take their word" on the expert medical advice that I am not allowed to question... scary.

Note: This post was posted in another vaccine thread, with zero responses... curious if you have a response, as the questions are not conspiracy related.

Vaccines aren't perfectly benign. The risk is small, but there is risk. As such, vaccination for trivial and transitory illness is wrong because it exposes people to unnecessary risk.

The issue to me is the monetization of medicine (not just immunization). In many countries of the world, immunization against deadly diseases are fully subsidized by governments. This allows medical advancement to make money but defrays end user costs as a fraction of taxation of the entire population. It also allows oversight panels to review the necessity of, and therefore the subsidy of, medicines. Not so in America where the pure profit motive drives medicine.

I did not vaccinate my children. I can tell you based on the chicken pox vaccine that the only thing the vaccine did was change the virus. How do I know that? Because every time the chicken pox was going around the elementary school I'd get a call from the school nurse informing me of the "outbreak" and informing me I could keep the kids home if I wanted to. I made play dates with the kids we knew that had them so my kids would catch them and get it over with. Wanna know what's even more interesting? I was unable to get my children to catch the chicken pox from the infected children who were vaccinated against it and passing it around to each other. Think about that. It's a new strain that ONLY vaccinated children pass around to each other. Those with no vaccine don't or can't catch it.

Let's assume that those who have had decided to take said covid vaccine only spread around a "new vaccinated strain" to each other and those who don't have the injection are going to be the ones blamed for getting the vaccinated sick. It'll be some effed up bull# what ever the outcome.

And to say that vaccines are harmless is just not true. Look into vaccine injury cases which in the US alone has paind out over 4.2 Billion in rewards (that figure does NOT include attorney fee awards as well) from harm caused by vaccines. My nephew died after and because of round of vaccines he was given. I don't know if you've ever been to a child's funeral but when the casket is made for a baby it's pretty damn sad. I also have a niece and a nephew who are both autistic after having their 'mandatory' shots. They were perfectly fine prior to the injections and some how mysteriously stopped responding and making eye contact. They no longer tried speaking or playing with favorite toys.

Sorry, I got a bit off topic of the particular virus we are discussing but to say the risk is small (and that is on vaccines with lots of supposed research and testing) I would have to kindly strongly disagree.

I would also strongly disagree. The endless problems with vaccines are documented all the time, people just don't want to see it, even here, where people are supposed to be more open to investigating these types of things. The vaccine paradigm has its roots deeply in most people.

One example: a 2013 study that has been replicated FIVE times in four different countries, never "debunked" just routinely ignored by the WHO, CDC, GOV and pharma and mainstream media. The study shows how getting a flu shot may keep you safe from the strain in that flu that year, but leaves you MORE open to other strains, and more open to other non-influenza respiratory viruses, including by the way, coronaviruses. The flu vaccine "primes" your immune system for THAT strain and your immune system is geared towards it in a way that makes it unable to react to other things. It may work for that strain in the shot, but it SCREWS UP your basic immune response to other viruses. So many unintended consequences. And they want to RUSH this one? No thanks.