MRNA from corona vaccines found in breast milk.

a reply to: thethinkingman

That makes no sense, at all?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

I think he's suggesting that all biological life is interdependent and nature will find a way to balance through adaptation. Our species is the only one that now depends on artificial means to ensure survival. Billions of years of development and an evolving equilibrium with our environment, thrown away to line the pockets of those who aim to shape our future. Trying to play God will not end well, my faith will remain in the creator rather than the flawed disposition of man. Nothing can be created, only discovered.

"We sailed across the air before we learned to fly. Reaching for the stars, we blind the sky"

a reply to: JBHemi

I also wonder, with how healthy my wife and I are, that maybe this vaccine only targets certain types of people with genetic markers?! Because I do not know anyone who has died or become sick from the vaccine. Everyone I know is vaccinated.

It's possible I recon but a lot of people seem to keep forgetting that the main concern of the vaccine was long term side effects, not short term. So if the vaccine causes a slow decline of health, or a person gets cancer in a few years, this will never be traced back to the vaccine even if it was a contributing factor.

Like you I know a lot of vaccinated people who are fine at present. But the majority of vaccinated folks I know only got it for work back in October/November of last year. That's here in Australia, which means we are only close to a year in.

Though I do know of a few who have had ongoing health issues since the vaccine. One having heart problems, and my bestie had 3 jabs for work, has had the flu twice this year and has complained about feeling as though her body took longer to fight it off. When I asked if she thinks her immune system has been compromised by the jab she said, "maybe yeah, I never got sick so often before and I never took so long to recover."

That's not to say anything bad is going to happen to everyone per se but the effects overall are varied and at different levels of severity, with some exhibiting no symptoms at all. I think continuing to monitor your health is a very good idea, just in case.

The reason I refused to take it is because I didn't feel I needed it, it doesn't stop transmission. Then the government's ferocious attack on the unvaccinated literally startled me. I have not seen such a co-ordinated attack on a group of people who won't take a vaccine that doesn't stop transmission. It was the stuff of dystopian nightmares -- cafe owners getting dragged away by police from their store and locked out for allowing an unvaccinated person to sit down and drink the coffee they had purchased. 20% of the workforce forced out of employment over this crap. Families torn apart over the propaganda. There are job vacancies everywhere now and the medical establishment here is not coping anymore.

Now you have to ask yourself, was all that really about a virus that the majority would recover from just fine at home? Eventually I did get covid and it was a 3 day head cold for me and many other unvaccinated folks I know.

Why were basically no medical exemptions allowed? Even people who had reactions to the first jab were told to go and get a different version of the vaccine. They even closed the loophole doctors were using here to grant temp exemptions for those who could prove they tested positive to covid and had natural immunity.

I don't know what is truly in that vaccine, and my government, the same government I don't trust, was determined to get this stuff into my body. That's enough to make me suspicious.

Then they dropped the mandates all of a sudden, for most industries except healthcare, despite cases of covid supposedly exploding and hospital admissions rising! We also know that the vaccine only protects for a certain period of time and the majority of vaccinated folks only got the 2 they were required to have, for the earlier strains, which means they technically aren't even considered vaxed anymore! Hence all the propaganda about getting the booster etc.

Personally, I think if it hadn't been for the major protests and the smaller portion of the populace absolutely refusing, they would be still pushing mandates and we'd be getting notified to get yet another booster. I think there was still too many of us to shuffle off to "quarantine camps" so in the end they had to start a strategic withdrawal. Now so many people are left scratching their heads over what the point of it all was.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Kurokage

Absolute gibberish.

I don't debate with people who use fact check websites as some kind of vindication for their arguments, that's the indicator that there's no point debating them. It's a sign that people can't think for themselves and are too far down the indoctrinated path of orthodoxy.

I don't know how many times i need to be correct in my assessments before people start listening with regard the pandemic.

As an example of your compromised sources please see the following page:

www.politifact.com...

Couple of rather concerning conflict of interests:

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation: $126,650 (To fact-check claims about global health and development in partnership with Africa Check)

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation: $70,000 (To fact-check claims about global health and development in partnership with Africa Check)

Not to mention it's heavy ties to Craig Newmark and the Democratic party.

Your other link is totally debunked by the VAERS system. The credibility of AP is also up for debate:

en.wikipedia.org...

The only way to confirm or refute the narratives of experts is to analyse the data yourself, something i've done.

Fact-check websites are truly terrible and the masters of misinformation and disinformation. Those fact-checkers are usually individuals with no credentials, no academic qualifications, no knowledge and understanding of scientific and medical matters and are driven by political activism. Usually on the far left of the spectrum.
Left wing activism masquerading as science and truth. Same people who support that a woman is whoever identifies as a woman and that the end of the world is coming if we don't abandon fossil fuels for 'green' energies and energy from peanut butter.... Doom n gloom scenarios and alarmism that has no merits whatsoever.

New mRNA Harms Revealed on Fertility & Reproduction

rumble.com...

Discussion with Dr james thorp.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Fact-check websites are truly terrible and the masters of misinformation and disinformation. Those fact-checkers are usually individuals with no credentials, no academic qualifications, no knowledge and understanding of scientific and medical matters and are driven by political activism. Usually on the far left of the spectrum.
Left wing activism masquerading as science and truth. Same people who support that a woman is whoever identifies as a woman and that the end of the world is coming if we don't abandon fossil fuels for 'green' energies and energy from peanut butter.... Doom n gloom scenarios and alarmism that has no merits whatsoever.

In your opinion they may be terrible but ATS is full of people posting biased opinion pieces and stating them as fact, with most being from the "anti-vaxer" perspective.
If everyonre claims bias then nothing posted to ATS can be trusted, some fact-checker sites do offer an unbiased opinion and as a lot of papers posted here tend to be un-validated, and worse still just opinions, then a counter view is just as valued.
Your comment of "no academic qualifications, no knowledge and understanding of scientific and medical matters and are driven by political activism." can be applied to most threads in this section of the forum and tend to lean to the far right not left, go and read most threads posted in this part of the forum and you'll find its "doom porn" from right-wing websites not left claiming things like 40% of the UK are dying after the jab and such.
If you truely believe what you've posted please go and link to all these left wing threads with the claims you're attempting to make, or are making genearalized assumptions?

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Fact-check websites are truly terrible and the masters of misinformation and disinformation.

But they're not always wrong.

They're usually pretty reliable when it comes to things like Googling the names of people who supposedly died from the vax and showing that they died from something else. Like that BA pilot who died in a mountain bike accident.

If you disagree with what a fact checking website says then you're 100 percent free to post the evidence up here with sources and logical arguments.

If you're just blanket going to say that they're wrong without backing it up then maybe this isn't the forum that you should be posting on.

I tend to find that people who don't post any content or arguments that they can personally be fact checked on tend to be on the wrong side of the argument.

Me, I've got my sources in my signature so you're free to fact check them.

originally posted by: thethinkingman
New mRNA Harms Revealed on Fertility & Reproduction

rumble.com...

Discussion with Dr james thorp.

How does he determine that the vax did this, and not covid, did he isolate and sequence the proteins?

a reply to: AaarghZombies

I tend to find that people who don't post any content or arguments that they can personally be fact checked on tend to be on the wrong side of the argument.

I agree, we tend get a lot of people who state "facts" with either a link to an opinion piece video which they try to use as their evidence or worse, just their assumption that its correct.

a reply to: Kurokage

The best way to sort the wheat from the chaff is that there is a hard core of people on this forum who do their level best to avoid posting anything that they could possibly be fact checked on.

So, no names, no dates, no statistics.

They will happily tell you that we're already knee deep in dead, but they won't define what this actually means, and they won't put a number on it.

My sources are in my signature, so anybody can see them.

a reply to: AaarghZombies

Your sources are always tied to government or big pharma, not like they've ever been caught lying.

Here's a source you can fact check.

violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org...

Historical crimes which fall into the following categories to name a few:

TOP 5 OFFENSE GROUP
safety-related offenses
healthcare-related offenses
government-contracting-related offenses
competition-related offenses
environment-related offenses

Nothing to see here:


TOP 5 PRIMARY OFFENSE TYPES
drug or medical equipment safety violation
off-label or unapproved promotion of medical products
False Claims Act and related
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act
kickbacks and bribery

Essentially they're repeat offenders in every crime that we're accusing them of in this pandemic. If you can't see why people don't trust Pfizer then you're blind or wilfully ignorant.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: AaarghZombies

Your sources are always tied to government or big pharma, not like they've ever been caught lying.

Here's a source you can fact check.

violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org...

What sources would you find acceptable?

What other entities have the experience, technology/equipment, and resources to undertake independent studies?

a reply to: Overseeall

You nailed it, independent studies.

They've refused to release the raw data meaning the only studies we have are from the companies with vested interests. They've refused demands for a local safety and immunogenicity study in India as an example.

Reuters a good enough source?

Pfizer - India


I notice you completely ignored the rest of the post.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Fact-check websites are truly terrible and the masters of misinformation and disinformation.

But they're not always wrong.

They're usually pretty reliable when it comes to things like Googling the names of people who supposedly died from the vax and showing that they died from something else. Like that BA pilot who died in a mountain bike accident.

If you disagree with what a fact checking website says then you're 100 percent free to post the evidence up here with sources and logical arguments.

If you're just blanket going to say that they're wrong without backing it up then maybe this isn't the forum that you should be posting on.

I tend to find that people who don't post any content or arguments that they can personally be fact checked on tend to be on the wrong side of the argument.

Me, I've got my sources in my signature so you're free to fact check them.

I am not the one who has to post evidence in this case, as I am not a self proclaimed arbiter of truth. You are confused on this issue and where the burden of proof lies.

Those who proclaim themselves as arbiters of truth have to be able to prove that they are and not assert it as fact and/or that they are dealing with the truth.

And yes I use a lot of links and sources if you see my posting history. But I don't need any for self proclaimed arbiters of truth, ghosts, spirits, God..

Imo fact checkers are politically motivated. Left leaning. and hence there is plenty of bias in their quest for the truth.

Not only I disagree with what they say and claim but I don't recognise the validity of their service and I strongly argue that fact checkers shouldn't even exist as nobody can decide what the truth is or present themselves as arbiters of truth. As this is absurd.

I think you need to re-evaluate in which side the burden of proof lies. Imagine that it should be to the reader who has to disprove their delusions and or whatever unqualified and unsubstantiated claims the make?!

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: AaarghZombies

I tend to find that people who don't post any content or arguments that they can personally be fact checked on tend to be on the wrong side of the argument.

I agree, we tend get a lot of people who state "facts" with either a link to an opinion piece video which they try to use as their evidence or worse, just their assumption that its correct.

You should time your posts differently. I can literally read 6 posts of you and zombies rapid fire posting back and forth and it reads like a long post from the same person.

originally posted by: Grenade
a reply to: Overseeall

You nailed it, independent studies.

They've refused to release the raw data meaning the only studies we have are from the companies with vested interests. They've refused demands for a local safety and immunogenicity study in India as an example.

Reuters a good enough source?

Pfizer - India


I notice you completely ignored the rest of the post.

"The decision means the vaccine will not be available for sale in the world’s two most populous countries, India and China, in the near future. Both countries are running their immunisation campaigns using other products."

www.reuters.com...

I wonder why?!

Refusing to release data? Why? What do they have to hide?

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - Pfizer Inc said on Friday it had withdrawn an application for emergency-use authorisation of its COVID-19 vaccine in India, after failing to meet the drug regulator’s demand for a local safety and immunogenicity study.


Did it say emergency-use authorisation?
Are these products safe to use?
Do we know the short, medium, and long term effects? Do we know the benefit to risk ratio in every age and risk group?

Or maybe we should ask the fact-checkers?!
Hahaha

Doesn't appear to be good for male fertility and reproductivity either...

Pfizer’s own documents and other medical studies show:

mRNA vaccine ingredients can be transferred from one person to another via skin-to-skin contact, inhalation and via “sexual intercourse,” through bodily fluids. That is to say, vaccine “shedding” can occur via sexual contact, including via exposure to semen. [“A Phase 1/2/3, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized, Observer-Blind, Dose-Finding Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 RNA Vaccine Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals,” Protocol Amendment 14, www.phmpt.org... pp. 213, 246, 398, 431, 575, 607, 751, 783, 918, 948, 1073, 1103, 1226, 1255, 1378, 1406, 1522, 1549, 1663, 1688, 1813, 1836, 1949, 1969, 2081, 2100, 2211, 2228, and 2337.] In other words, according to Pfizer’s own internal documents, a vaccinated man can expose his sexual partner to the vaccine ingredients, via ejaculation.

Pfizer did not test “male reproductive toxicity”. Male reproductive toxicity is defined as adverse effects (negative impacts) related to sexual function and fertility in adult male [“Summary of the Public Assessment Report for COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech.” GOV.UK, GOV.UK, www.gov.uk... tech-covid-19-vaccine.]

Pfizer also did not test for adverse effects from vaccinated men’s semen, on the development of their offspring. [“Reproductive Toxicity March 2017 - SCHC.” org, SCHC-OSHA Alliance GHS/HazCom Information Sheet Workgroup, Mar. 2017, www.schc.org...]

mRNA vaccine ingredients travel throughout the body and gather in organs, including in the testes. ["A Tissue Distribution Study of a [3H]-Labelled Lipid Nanoparticle-mRNA Formulation Containing ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 Following Intramuscular Administration in Wistar Han Rats," www.phmpt.org... p. 24.]

mRNA vaccines resulting in “anti-sperm antibodies” - that is to say, antibodies that treat sperm as an “invader”, and damage or kill it – is a known adverse event related to this form of vaccination. [“5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports of PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) Received Through 28-Feb-2021,” www.phmpt.org... p. 30.] [Salvador, Zaira, and Sandra Fernández. “What Are Antisperm Antibodies? - Causes & Treatment.” InviTRA, 8 Jan. 2019, www.invitra.com...]

mRNA vaccines cause a staggering drop in semen concentration and total motile count. [Gat, Itai, et al. “Covid-19 Vaccination BNT162B2 Temporarily Impairs Semen Concentration and Total Motile Count among Semen Donors.” Wiley Online Library, Andrology, 17 June 2022, onlinelibrary.wiley.com...]

By suppressing discussion of this information, public health agencies, medical professionals, and governments globally denied and continue to deny men true informed consent.

behindthefdacurtain.substack.com...

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Fact-check websites are truly terrible and the masters of misinformation and disinformation. Those fact-checkers are usually individuals with no credentials, no academic qualifications, no knowledge and understanding of scientific and medical matters and are driven by political activism. Usually on the far left of the spectrum.
Left wing activism masquerading as science and truth. Same people who support that a woman is whoever identifies as a woman and that the end of the world is coming if we don't abandon fossil fuels for 'green' energies and energy from peanut butter.... Doom n gloom scenarios and alarmism that has no merits whatsoever.

In your opinion they may be terrible but ATS is full of people posting biased opinion pieces and stating them as fact, with most being from the "anti-vaxer" perspective.
If everyonre claims bias then nothing posted to ATS can be trusted, some fact-checker sites do offer an unbiased opinion and as a lot of papers posted here tend to be un-validated, and worse still just opinions, then a counter view is just as valued.
Your comment of "no academic qualifications, no knowledge and understanding of scientific and medical matters and are driven by political activism." can be applied to most threads in this section of the forum and tend to lean to the far right not left, go and read most threads posted in this part of the forum and you'll find its "doom porn" from right-wing websites not left claiming things like 40% of the UK are dying after the jab and such.
If you truely believe what you've posted please go and link to all these left wing threads with the claims you're attempting to make, or are making genearalized assumptions?

Yes it's my opinion that they are terrible and dont need much more than this when I criticise self-proclaimed arbiters of truth. Even the idea of a fact checkers is so absurd and ludicrous. Yes scientific illiteracy doesn't only come from the left, it can come from the right too. But I wasn't discussing them. I was commenting on the fact checkers which in my view they are just ludicrous. Nobody is an arbiter of truth.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

What we are seeing is unprecedented unless you lived under Stalin. Total censorship of all major platforms which do not agree with the current government narrative., and those same governments' refusal to have an open discussion, with all Western governments acting in the same manner. This really is the end game whichever way you want to spin it. Fact check that.

originally posted by: MaxxAction
Doesn't appear to be good for male fertility and reproductivity either...

Pfizer’s own documents and other medical studies show:

mRNA vaccine ingredients can be transferred from one person to another via skin-to-skin contact, inhalation and via “sexual intercourse,” through bodily fluids. That is to say, vaccine “shedding” can occur via sexual contact, including via exposure to semen. [“A Phase 1/2/3, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized, Observer-Blind, Dose-Finding Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Immunogenicity, and Efficacy of SARS-CoV-2 RNA Vaccine Candidates Against COVID-19 in Healthy Individuals,” Protocol Amendment 14, www.phmpt.org... pp. 213, 246, 398, 431, 575, 607, 751, 783, 918, 948, 1073, 1103, 1226, 1255, 1378, 1406, 1522, 1549, 1663, 1688, 1813, 1836, 1949, 1969, 2081, 2100, 2211, 2228, and 2337.] In other words, according to Pfizer’s own internal documents, a vaccinated man can expose his sexual partner to the vaccine ingredients, via ejaculation.

Pfizer did not test “male reproductive toxicity”. Male reproductive toxicity is defined as adverse effects (negative impacts) related to sexual function and fertility in adult male [“Summary of the Public Assessment Report for COVID-19 Vaccine Pfizer/BioNTech.” GOV.UK, GOV.UK, www.gov.uk... tech-covid-19-vaccine.]

Pfizer also did not test for adverse effects from vaccinated men’s semen, on the development of their offspring. [“Reproductive Toxicity March 2017 - SCHC.” org, SCHC-OSHA Alliance GHS/HazCom Information Sheet Workgroup, Mar. 2017, www.schc.org...]

mRNA vaccine ingredients travel throughout the body and gather in organs, including in the testes. ["A Tissue Distribution Study of a [3H]-Labelled Lipid Nanoparticle-mRNA Formulation Containing ALC-0315 and ALC-0159 Following Intramuscular Administration in Wistar Han Rats," www.phmpt.org... p. 24.]

mRNA vaccines resulting in “anti-sperm antibodies” - that is to say, antibodies that treat sperm as an “invader”, and damage or kill it – is a known adverse event related to this form of vaccination. [“5.3.6 Cumulative Analysis of Post-Authorization Adverse Event Reports of PF-07302048 (BNT162B2) Received Through 28-Feb-2021,” www.phmpt.org... p. 30.] [Salvador, Zaira, and Sandra Fernández. “What Are Antisperm Antibodies? - Causes & Treatment.” InviTRA, 8 Jan. 2019, www.invitra.com...]

mRNA vaccines cause a staggering drop in semen concentration and total motile count. [Gat, Itai, et al. “Covid-19 Vaccination BNT162B2 Temporarily Impairs Semen Concentration and Total Motile Count among Semen Donors.” Wiley Online Library, Andrology, 17 June 2022, onlinelibrary.wiley.com...]

By suppressing discussion of this information, public health agencies, medical professionals, and governments globally denied and continue to deny men true informed consent.

behindthefdacurtain.substack.com...

There is more to this from Dr Malhotra
on another thread where some users became increasingly agitated as his peer reviewed paper doesn't really fit with their worldview, their beliefs, and their vaccine ideology.

At least Dr Malhotra was honest enough to say that his mind changed after reviewing more data and in the light of new evidence. He used to promote vaccinations for all but made the U-turn.

His stance isn't the greatest thing happened for the pharmaceutical companies and the vaccine ideology.

Here is the paper

insulinresistance.org...


"Results: In the non-elderly population the “number needed to treat” to prevent a single death runs into the thousands. Re-analysis of randomised controlled trials using the messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) technology suggests a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19. Pharmacovigilance systems and real-world safety data, coupled with plausible mechanisms of harm, are deeply concerning, especially in relation to cardiovascular safety. Mirroring a potential signal from the Pfizer Phase 3 trial, a significant rise in cardiac arrest calls to ambulances in England was seen in 2021, with similar data emerging from Israel in the 16–39-year-old age group.

Conclusion: It cannot be said that the consent to receive these agents was fully informed, as is required ethically and legally. A pause and reappraisal of global vaccination policies for COVID-19 is long overdue."


I am interested in the part where there is "a greater risk of serious adverse events from the vaccines than being hospitalised from COVID-19."

That's the most interesting part so far.