• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

The Dive's Covid Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
especially when they kept denying that the covid jabs contained any DNA and now they're finding out that they do contain DNA fragments
 
Cheshire_Kat said:
Then maybe go out and spend some time on RNA, DNA and genetics. Not news releases or opinion pieces but biology books, etc. Then re-watch the VID I posted. The unbending model of genetics that schools teach (even 1st year med school) is overly simplified and puts too much emphasis on absolute outcomes using the current definitions of sequences, locations and functions. It's still a new field and there is much much to learn before reliable maps and functions are known and proven.

So they are real, but not understood.
Click to expand...
I don't know I already have a whole degree in biochemistry and none of the things that have been mentioned say anything about why its bad, just a lot of "we don't know things"

I'm well aware of things like splice variants and the nonlinearity of DNA-RNA-protein, but again nobody is saying why it is bad to be in a vaccine

we aren't talking about knowing the function of some human cellular gene, we are talking about recreating a small part of what a virus was already doing on invasion of cells so I don't know where all this info about "we don't understand a bunch of things" is meant to take me. How do you think vaccines worked before? Virus shells with that big scary DNA inside it modified to be weaker
 
Last edited:
Saw a covid shot tv commercial like 4-5 times today for moderna "spikevax"

That's actually what it's called

I don't remember a single Pfizer or Moderna commercial until now and am pretty sure they weren't allowed to do that kind of advertising until recently, maybe it's related to EUA or something, idk, but now there are TV commercials
 
Electrum1 said:
Saw a covid shot tv commercial like 4-5 times today for moderna "spikevax"

That's actually what it's called

I don't remember a single Pfizer or Moderna commercial until now and am pretty sure they weren't allowed to do that kind of advertising until recently, maybe it's related to EUA or something, idk, but now there are TV commercials
Click to expand...
They were all over the radio nearly from the beginning with it ramping up later as most people had vaccine fatigue. Gotta get rid of those old doses before expiration (as if anyone is actually keeping track of that shit) somehow.
 
In my country I think something like a million, all normally paid (I'm in EU) of doses would have gone to waste if it wasn't donated. Still hundreds thousands expired. And I'm not sure how much more could go bad soon. And my country has less than 4 million people.
 
Our recent editorial in STAT posits that Long COVID is a new name for an old syndrome. It is virtually indistinguishable from the condition long known in the medical lexicon as post-infectious syndrome or myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS)—in colloquial terms known simply as “chronic fatigue syndrome.” Logic and reason dictate that acute SARS-CoV-2 infection causes Long COVID. Or, more accurately, acute COVID-19 triggers ME/CFS in the same way many other infectious agents trigger ME/CFS
Click to expand...

time.com

How to End the Futile Long COVID Blame Game

A radical new paradigm is needed.
time.com time.com
 
F_ZynAIXkAAtPoA


Science is among humanity’s greatest achievements, yet scientific censorship is rarely studied empirically. We explore the social, psychological, and institutional causes and consequences of scientific censorship (defined as actions aimed at obstructing particular scientific ideas from reaching an audience for reasons other than low scientific quality). Popular narratives suggest that scientific censorship is driven by authoritarian officials with dark motives, such as dogmatism and intolerance. Our analysis suggests that scientific censorship is often driven by scientists, who are primarily motivated by self-protection, benevolence toward peer scholars, and prosocial concerns for the well-being of human social groups. This perspective helps explain both recent findings on scientific censorship and recent changes to scientific institutions, such as the use of harm-based criteria to evaluate research. We discuss unknowns surrounding the consequences of censorship and provide recommendations for improving transparency and accountability in scientific decision-making to enable the exploration of these unknowns. The benefits of censorship may sometimes outweigh costs. However, until costs and benefits are examined empirically, scholars on opposing sides of ongoing debates are left to quarrel based on competing values, assumptions, and intuitions.
Click to expand...

 
Mystery pneumonia.. in a country that is basically stewing in toxic smog and living under a stressful authoritarian digital prison with no real hope.

Definitely a virus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top