Do you trust and follow the science?

a reply to: Phage

funding like had never before been seen

imagine they would have had to tell them that the animal trial's outcome don't allow for human trial, like the last 4 time they applied? that would have been a real bummer with all that money on the line, I guess someone pulled two blind eyes for a never seen before paycheck, it happens...

don't trust science, follow the money...

a reply to: Xtrozero

I have posted earlier but forgot to ask the question.

Can you tell me if there were other mRNA vaccines which were rolled out and authorised for public use prior to December 2020? And for which infectious disease?

a reply to: Xtrozero


publichealth.jhu.edu...#:~:text=The%20first%20mRNA%20vaccines%20using,what%20happened%20then%3F

This is good article to read for general information.
It doesn't tell you the amount of time that takes for the Phase1,2,3 clinical trials to be completed but it gives some review of the history of the mRNA technology.

Messenger RNA, or mRNA, was discovered in the early 1960s; research into how mRNA could be delivered into cells was developed in the 1970s. So, why did it take until the global COVID-19 pandemic of 2020 for the first mRNA vaccine to be brought to market?

It clearly shows that there were no mRNA vaccines approved and used for any Infectious disease prior to the end of 2020.

But all of the above are already known.

One was to be developed for the Ebola virus but never made it to the market for a range of reasons.
The other for rabies but still didn't go through and was never developed.

Hence no mRNA vaccines that have been approved and used by humans prior to December 2020.

www.cnn.com...


The Cutter incident

On April 12, 1955 the government announced the first vaccine to protect kids against polio. Within days, labs had made thousands of lots of the vaccine. Batches made by one company, Cutter Labs, accidentally contained live polio virus and it caused an outbreak.

More than 200,000 children got the polio vaccine, but within days the government had to abandon the program.

Forty thousand kids got polio. Some had low levels, a couple hundred were left with paralysis, and about 10 died," said Dr. Howard Markel, a pediatrician, distinguished professor, and director of the Center for the History of Medicine at the University of Michigan. The government suspended the vaccination program until it could determine what went wrong

I wonder if one can compare the above standards of safety with today's standards given the many vaccines injuries and deaths and the unknown medium and long terms effects of an experimental 'vaccine'. It's just mind boggling that gene therapy will be renamed as used in such as way.

originally posted by: Phage

Trials were not done on people who had COVID (once infected, vaccination doesn't make much sense), but there were a lot of people willing to volunteer. That was a big factor. Thousands of people were available in a short period of time.

Other reasons the trials were able to be completed rapidly is because "Operation Warp Speed" (stupid name) provided a huge amount of funding (funding like had never before been seen) as well as facilitating the approval of the clinical trials themselves.

Thanks Phage and hi

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I already did. Zero side efffects.

It looks like your input is more of trying to support the narrative as I have seen a few of your replies in other threads.

The last thing we need is vaccine apologetics and denialism of truth.

Denial of truth works both ways, where are actual people's life experiences getting both vaccines and if there were complications and the complications were proved without a doubt to be from getting both vaccines at the same time, I can't find any?

Not vaccine . Biological weapon yes .


Intended Consequences: mRNA Vaccines were Designed to Cause Severe Disease and Be Resistant to Antibodies

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I already did. Zero side efffects.

It looks like your input is more of trying to support the narrative as I have seen a few of your replies in other threads.

The last thing we need is vaccine apologetics and denialism of truth.

Denial of truth works both ways, where are actual people's life experiences getting both vaccines and if there were complications and the complications were proved without a doubt to be from getting both vaccines at the same time, I can't find any?

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say here.
Do you say there are no vaccine injuries and deaths from the vaccines?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I already did. Zero side efffects.

It looks like your input is more of trying to support the narrative as I have seen a few of your replies in other threads.

The last thing we need is vaccine apologetics and denialism of truth.

Denial of truth works both ways, where are actual people's life experiences getting both vaccines and if there were complications and the complications were proved without a doubt to be from getting both vaccines at the same time, I can't find any?

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say here.
Do you say there are no vaccine injuries and deaths from the vaccines?

Show me relevant cases where people got both vaccines at the same time and it was proven their negative outcomes were directly related to getting both vaccines at the same time.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

I have already mentioned that this technology developed back in the 60s but mRNA vaccines were not developed for common use until the end of 2020 where Pfizer and Moderna weere given regency authorisation.

That isn't what you said or meant... You have basically said about 100 times that mRNA is an experimental vaccine because it has never been used prior to COVID. Now you are modifying your statement to say "for common use" not sure what that means either...

The examples you have given me which I already know by the way as well as others I can show you, describe mainly research in animals and some clinical trials in animals and humans in a very small scale. This isn't the same as rolling out an untested product to billions of people. There is a huge difference between these two, I e research and clinical trials in a small scale and rolling out these products to the public.

The word animal is not in anything I have ever posted so that area is not one I have used as an example, but you and others like it, I guess, and reuse it over and over when it has nothing to do with what we are talking about. You and others try to make it all look like mRNA was just invented for the CIVID vaccine and it has around a 20 year history of vaccine testing and human use. Also saying untested is incorrect as it was tested as any other drug is tested. Maybe you should define what you wanted to see with the rollout to disagree with how it happened, and leave it at that instead of pushing false talking points. The reality is you do not need to make anything up, the mandates, lockdowns and masks were already bad, so no need to invent false narratives too.

You must know the short, medium, and long term effects as well as the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups before you roll out the vaccines into the general population. You don't do this by rolling out these products to the entire population and wait to see what happens.

Are you an expert to make such claims? Your first sentence is once again incorrect, so let me say this again and maybe you will read it this time. EVERY drug is rolled out to the general public before knowing what effects over time are there. After Phase 3 trials the drug is approved for the general public and it is at that point that monitoring of the drug takes place to establish the ranges of short, mid and long term effects. As example, that huge list of effects at the end of a drug commercial are almost all discovered after Phase 3 when the drug is in general use during this long term monitoring phase. COVID vaccine is exactly the same here in we are now almost 2 years into the rollout. The interesting part is most of the issues have come from the non-mRNA vaccines.

And you are again mistaken if you think that testing was done long time ago. Research has started long time ago. Testing has just started by the very wrong rolling out of these products to billions of people.

You really do have a selective reading issue. Everything I have posted is about human testing and clinical trials long before COVID. I'm not sure why you keep sticking to your incorrect point when the data is out there in droves.

Let me help you in this with what I think you are trying to say...

" I think they should not have rolled out the vaccine to the masses and just used it for the high risk groups since any risk from the vaccine no matter how small was a risk too high once we understood the virus wasn't a big issue to the vast majority of the population."

a reply to: Xtrozero

Bravo. It's members such as yourself that actually deny ignorance.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

I have already mentioned that this technology developed back in the 60s but mRNA vaccines were not developed for common use until the end of 2020 where Pfizer and Moderna weere given regency authorisation.

That isn't what you said or meant... You have basically said about 100 times that mRNA is an experimental vaccine because it has never been used prior to COVID. Now you are modifying your statement to say "for common use" not sure what that means either...

The examples you have given me which I already know by the way as well as others I can show you, describe mainly research in animals and some clinical trials in animals and humans in a very small scale. This isn't the same as rolling out an untested product to billions of people. There is a huge difference between these two, I e research and clinical trials in a small scale and rolling out these products to the public.

The word animal is not in anything I have ever posted so that area is not one I have used as an example, but you and others like it, I guess, and reuse it over and over when it has nothing to do with what we are talking about. You and others try to make it all look like mRNA was just invented for the CIVID vaccine and it has around a 20 year history of vaccine testing and human use. Also saying untested is incorrect as it was tested as any other drug is tested. Maybe you should define what you wanted to see with the rollout to disagree with how it happened, and leave it at that instead of pushing false talking points. The reality is you do not need to make anything up, the mandates, lockdowns and masks were already bad, so no need to invent false narratives too.

You must know the short, medium, and long term effects as well as the benefit to risk ratio in all age groups before you roll out the vaccines into the general population. You don't do this by rolling out these products to the entire population and wait to see what happens.

Are you an expert to make such claims? Your first sentence is once again incorrect, so let me say this again and maybe you will read it this time. EVERY drug is rolled out to the general public before knowing what effects over time are there. After Phase 3 trials the drug is approved for the general public and it is at that point that monitoring of the drug takes place to establish the ranges of short, mid and long term effects. As example, that huge list of effects at the end of a drug commercial are almost all discovered after Phase 3 when the drug is in general use during this long term monitoring phase. COVID vaccine is exactly the same here in we are now almost 2 years into the rollout. The interesting part is most of the issues have come from the non-mRNA vaccines.

And you are again mistaken if you think that testing was done long time ago. Research has started long time ago. Testing has just started by the very wrong rolling out of these products to billions of people.

You really do have a selective reading issue. Everything I have posted is about human testing and clinical trials long before COVID. I'm not sure why you keep sticking to your incorrect point when the data is out there in droves.

Let me help you in this with what I think you are trying to say...

" I think they should not have rolled out the vaccine to the masses and just used it for the high risk groups since any risk from the vaccine no matter how small was a risk too high once we understood the virus wasn't a big issue to the vast majority of the population."

Yes it hasn't been used to humans. This is what I meant. No mRNA vaccines for humans that have been approved for use against other infectious diseases. The first mRNA vaccine was approved back in December 2020.

You seem to be conflating research with approved vaccines for wide use. These two are fundamentally different. There are many research projects at the moment we speak but that doesn't mean this type of research will materialise in the future.

I am aware of the research in mRNA technology.
I haven't changed what I have said. I have even mentioned that mRNA research started back in the 60s and there is a huge difference between research and clinical trials in animals and some small clinical trials in humans for establishing whether this product can be used as a vaccine.

But again no mRNA vaccines exist for other diseases other than Covid. Hence research existed but no vaccines for humans until the Covid one.

Furthermore the idea of the vaccine has been challenged as the products have been branded vaccines after the definition of the vaccine has changed....

Me and others as you say don't try to refuse there has been RESEARCH in mRNA gene therapy and potential applications. I will say again that I have stated research started back in the 60s

I have even mentioned that there was research to develop mRNA vaccines against Ebola virus and Rabies. But they didn't go ahead. As well as cancer related vaccines.

However there has been none until now.

And yes I am very much aware about the clinical phase trials1,2,3 and how long they take to be completed. You don't roll out an untested and potentially hazardous product to billions of people without having established safety and effectiveness and without knowing anything, not even the short term effects or the benefit to risk ratio.

How long it takes for the phase1,2,3 trials to be completed? It's a rhetoric question.

I don't think it is me or the others you have mentioned who are confused in this subject.

When was another time in the human history where an mRNA vaccine was approved for another infectious disease?


content.govdelivery.com...

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. – Today, State Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo has announced new guidance regarding mRNA vaccines. The Florida Department of Health (Department) conducted an analysis through a self-controlled case series, which is a technique originally developed to evaluate vaccine safety.

This analysis found that there is an 84% increase in the relative incidence of cardiac-related death among males 18-39 years old within 28 days following mRNA vaccination. With a high level of global immunity to COVID-19, the benefit of vaccination is likely outweighed by this abnormally high risk of cardiac-related death among men in this age group. Non-mRNA vaccines were not found to have these increased risks.

As such, the State Surgeon General recommends against males aged 18 to 39 from receiving mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Those with preexisting cardiac conditions, such as myocarditis and pericarditis, should take particular caution when making this decision

Not very safe and effective as it was advertised.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I already did. Zero side efffects.

It looks like your input is more of trying to support the narrative as I have seen a few of your replies in other threads.

The last thing we need is vaccine apologetics and denialism of truth.

Denial of truth works both ways, where are actual people's life experiences getting both vaccines and if there were complications and the complications were proved without a doubt to be from getting both vaccines at the same time, I can't find any?

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say here.
Do you say there are no vaccine injuries and deaths from the vaccines?

Show me relevant cases where people got both vaccines at the same time and it was proven their negative outcomes were directly related to getting both vaccines at the same time.

What kind of strawman is this one??

Who has discussed the above scenario before?

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Hence no mRNA vaccines that have been approved and used by humans prior to December 2020.

You keep moving the goal post... The COVID vaccine is the first fully approved mRNA based vaccine by the FDA, so since it is now approved can we stop using the term "experimental" since you are hanging on the whole FDA approved thing now.

These are your words... I have said a number of times that over the years there has been mRNA based clinical trials of other drugs. You seem to keep disagreeing, but then switched up to say fully approved by the FDA.

There is a difference between using mRNA research elsewhere and having mRNA vaccines. Such products are still experimental and have never been used before in humans.

There were no mRNA vaccines prior to December 2020

Of course it is an experimental product that was untested in human beings until now.

I can find more, but anyhow...

when I was young I did believe, but now?
I am grown up!
if its not a total lie then some is!
So much is fake.

They Can Not let us know the truth.
they would lose control.
we would just kill them and live as we please.
happy and free.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

Hence no mRNA vaccines that have been approved and used by humans prior to December 2020.

You keep moving the goal post... The COVID vaccine is the first fully approved mRNA based vaccine by the FDA, so since it is now approved can we stop using the term "experimental" since you are hanging on the whole FDA approved thing now.

These are your words... I have said a number of times that over the years there has been mRNA based clinical trials of other drugs. You seem to keep disagreeing, but then switched up to say fully approved by the FDA.

There is a difference between using mRNA research elsewhere and having mRNA vaccines. Such products are still experimental and have never been used before in humans.

There were no mRNA vaccines prior to December 2020

Of course it is an experimental product that was untested in human beings until now.

I can find more, but anyhow...

.

And I am correct.
Which mRNA vaccines existed before the Covid ones? When they were approved for use by the FDA? And for which infectious diseases?

You seem to be conflating the research on mRNA and applications with having mRNA approved vaccines.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: Asmodeus3

I already did. Zero side efffects.

It looks like your input is more of trying to support the narrative as I have seen a few of your replies in other threads.

The last thing we need is vaccine apologetics and denialism of truth.

Denial of truth works both ways, where are actual people's life experiences getting both vaccines and if there were complications and the complications were proved without a doubt to be from getting both vaccines at the same time, I can't find any?

I am not quite sure what you are trying to say here.
Do you say there are no vaccine injuries and deaths from the vaccines?

Show me relevant cases where people got both vaccines at the same time and it was proven their negative outcomes were directly related to getting both vaccines at the same time.

What kind of strawman is this one??

Who has discussed the above scenario before?

You had a stance all along and were only asking the initial question in your opening post as clickbait, example of true stance:

It looks like your input is more of trying to support the narrative as I have seen a few of your replies in other threads.

The last thing we need is vaccine apologetics and denialism of truth.

What kind of strawman is that above besides a misrepresented one?

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Xtrozero

Bravo. It's members such as yourself that actually deny ignorance.

I remember your account since the name is long...

It is not in topic but I think it is related somehow to the arguments you make.

You are the one who implied that biological sex can change in one my other threads. So a woman can become a man and vice versa.

Now I understand why your arguments here and questions don't make much sense.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: quintessentone
a reply to: Xtrozero

Bravo. It's members such as yourself that actually deny ignorance.

I remember your account since the name is long...

It is not in topic but I think it is related somehow to the arguments you make.

You are the one who implied that biological sex can change in one my other threads. So a woman can become a man and vice versa.

Now I understand why your arguments here and questions don't make much sense.

Twisting facts again? I gave you scientific studies of animals (non-human) where intersex happened. I have since provided you with neuroscience evidence-based studies on humans, which you obviously choose to ignore.

originally posted by: Asmodeus3
I am aware of the research in mRNA technology.
I haven't changed what I have said. I have even mentioned that mRNA research started back in the 60s and there is a huge difference between research and clinical trials in animals and some small clinical trials in humans for establishing whether this product can be used as a vaccine.

Research and human trials are not the same. You keep talking about research and mainly animal research and I have only talked about human trials. There has been human trials using mRNA for over 10 years now. Does this not give us any idea what longer effect with mRNA might be? I'm not sure what you are asking for here.

Also, most of the COVID vaccines are not mRNA based and were created using the more traditional ways, so are they also experimental? As I said most of the issues have been from the non-mRNA based vaccines, so what do you say to that?