If you’re on an immunosuppressant you really should qualify for it now surely?
Covid-19 Who's planning on getting a COVID-19 vaccine? (Poll)
- Thread starter negrogesic
- Start date
So we are at around 70% compliance if we combine the yes's and probably's.
I suppose if we look at this as a representative sample of society as a whole (which of course it isn't) then I suppose the vaccines could make a dent in this (assuming the vaccines are effective and able to keep up with the variants).
However immediate compliance is only 58% based on this poll. Not sure what the implications would be if only 58% of people got vaccinated
I suppose if we look at this as a representative sample of society as a whole (which of course it isn't) then I suppose the vaccines could make a dent in this (assuming the vaccines are effective and able to keep up with the variants).
However immediate compliance is only 58% based on this poll. Not sure what the implications would be if only 58% of people got vaccinated
In my state it is only available for those 65 years of age and older. Those under 65 with preexisting conditions are not yet eligible. I'm guessing he is in the same boat.
Xorkoth
Bluelight Crew
My state hasn't even managed to vaccinate all of the healthcare workers and old people yet. America's vaccine rollout has been really poorly done, since Trump literally had no plan (and failed to order more vaccine when he had the chance to) so we only really have a plan now since Biden took office, and we don't have anywhere near enough vaccine.
That’s super shit dude, sorry to hear that. You would have been 2nd tier in Ireland for it. We are nearly through doing the 65+
Still not a great uptake for it, surprisingly moreso from the healthcare workers. Go figure. The Irish are a hard bunch to work with.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
very interesting, and concerning in the current context.
that makes sense. i wasn't suggesting that the vaccines were similar in my previous post, more they are both ssRNA viruses so you'd expert them to mutate in roughly similar ways (though accounting for differences in genome size). is there a reason that we haven't been developing analogous vaccines for SARS-COV2?
i get that. tbh the only time i've really looked at the immune system in detail is in regulation of antigen presentation pathways in a few types of cancer, so quite limited but enough to know its complicated as fuck.
i don't really blame immunologists and people selling vaccines for not giving the full story, of course there is politics driving things, but also most people's eyes glaze over or they change the subject when you try and talk about anything scientific in detail so you have to water things down and then they get so bastardised they're unrecognisable from the original material.
Iceman1216
Bluelighter
I want to wait for Johnson & Johnson
Best so far
Only one dose
Can be scaled with extra doses
Has made great reviews in Japan already
Does not have to be kept cold
yes there are a few out there that are in distribution
China did live testing from the get go
My son lives there and has friends who have told him that the choice was what shot do you want ?
in the arm
Or
In the HEAD
LOL
Best so far
Only one dose
Can be scaled with extra doses
Has made great reviews in Japan already
Does not have to be kept cold
yes there are a few out there that are in distribution
China did live testing from the get go
My son lives there and has friends who have told him that the choice was what shot do you want ?
in the arm
Or
In the HEAD
LOL
novaveritas
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2018
- Messages
- 991
Other than lack of time there is no reason why this approach wouldn't work.
I am pretty sure that live attenuated vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 are in pretty far along in development, the marketed cat coronavirus, feline infectious peritonitis vaccine is live attenuated and has been over a decade now. Whole killed whole vaccines are being developed by Valneva and others, The Chinese had a couple in trials early on and discovered there is a bit of an art to inactivating a virus without completely changing its structure. Sinovac is inactivated and has very mixed data.
Historically the most successful antiviral vaccines have all been live attenuated: Measles Rubella, Yellow fever OPV, living virus but not capable of causing disease. development is slower but the advantage is the live attenuated virus behaves exactly like the wild type, going where the wild type goes, doing the same thing as the wild type etc. I would expect that an attenuated vaccine would produce the level of protection and diversity of antibodies natural infection gives, which is very high. all without the risk of an initial natural infection. A live attenuated vaccine is likely to be administered as a nasal spray and provide local immunity in the throat and lungs rather than blood borne antibodies which would be much more likely to prevent infection full stop.
I think poliovirus simply mutates at much faster rate than coronavirus because it doesn't have the error proofreader protein which SARS-CoV-2 shares with the original SARS, NSP14 (ExoN) and the nsp14-nsp10 ribonuclease complex. The flip side to that is the damage to corona proofreader enables hugely increased mutation and recombination. I am closely following work on proofreader structure and looking for mutants in the ORF where the proofreader lies. It is slightly concerning that high affinity antibodies to nsp14 are cheaply available commercially, I am not going to spell out why this bothers me.
The current crop of vaccines are quick and dirty. Speed is probably the essential element, I hope most of the vulnerable will get sufficiently protected by the current vaccines and the virus will contine to run through the less vulnerable and mostly fade away.
Later vaccines will be better safer and broader in their protection because new vaccines will have to show non-inferiority to the current vaccines. It seems likely that as covid fades into obscurity it will be added the list of vaccines like pneumonia and flu recommended for people at increased risk but ignored by most.
Sadly that is the truth. people want simple answers to complex things.
cduggles
Bluelight Crew
Truth.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Feels like someone punched you in the shoulder after about 6 hours.
Xorkoth
Bluelight Crew
I call foul!! Unacceptable side effects profile!!
OpiateKiller
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2019
- Messages
- 2,370
Absolutely fucking not. First ever mRNA vaccine rushed through safety protocols. Just watched a healthy 24 year old be bed ridden sick as a dog for a week after his second dose of the Moderna vaccine.
I’d rather just get Corona...
I’d rather just get Corona...
Deleted member 210577
Bluelight Crew
Absolutely not. I will never consent to a vaccination ever again.
I'm quite surprised in fact that a drug forum would be more in favor of taking it. A central tenet of drug use is you should know what it is you're taking and what influence it will have on your physiology. That and psychedelic drug use should at least open your mind a bit, make you a bit more critical in your thinking and cynical of authority given they're the ones constantly telling lies about illicit drug harm (especially about psychedelics).
There's a whole list of reasons why this vaccine in particular is unnecessary, but to preface that something must be said about the practice of vaccination in general too;
Vaccination is touted as one of the pillars of our modern scientific age and people feel very sensitive about the subject, though I find they tend to not actually knowing any of the history or development behind it, which shows just how effective the propaganda has been. Everyone takes for granted the existence of viruses and the science of virology, but again I find they don't know any of the history or development behind it. Suffice to say if one does a little personal investigation it won't take long before they begin to see the holes in the godlike narrative of vaccination, the fraud and corruption in the science that supports it, and the trillion dollar medical enterprise that rests on its shoulders and will do anything to keep the money flowing at the expense of the public health.
The clearest evidence that the usefulness of vaccination is non-existent is seen in the historical data itself, and it's what changed my mind the instant I saw it. If you look at all the major diseases that ravaged the world from approximately 1850 to 1950, the era during which time various vaccines were developed, you'll see that the mortality rate for all of them was in decline long before the vaccines were introduced. In the case of measles the mortality rate had declined to near negligible levels. In the case of Scarlet Fever no mass vaccination campaign was even implemented and it all but vanished on its own - this disease had a worldwide pandemic and was one of the most feared in the 19th century! All the diseases were on clear downward trends long before vaccines were introduced, and the reasons for that are simply: improved sanitation, improved water quality, improved food quality,.. basically not living in our own filth, which is what life was like for the masses. We had no choice but to be factory fodder for the industrialists and live in cramped cities during that era. These diseases were the result of our own ignorance, and they appear and disappear accordingly.
The second point is one that demolishes the entire premise of vaccination altogether, and that is the scientific theory of 'the virus' (if there is no virus, what are you vaccinating for?). There's much history to cover on this, too much for one post to do justice. Without delving into that I'll instead focus on the proof of the concept itself. That is, the methodology of virology itself. Virus particles are so small that they can only be seen with an electron microscope, and moreover they can only be worked with by using indirect methods. You can't physically grab them, you can't see them in real-time within a sample (electron microscopy is static). Those facts alone should make one extremely cautious about accepting validity outright on trust - humans make mistakes! I think most people would be quite surprised if they examined the methodology and how it works. The word 'isolation', in reference to a virus, is quite simply the opposite of its dictionary definition. In the history of HIV for instance, viral particles have never been found directly in the blood sample of a supposedly positive patient. Samples are always passed through a cell culture first, which involves the addition of harsh chemicals, then the results of that examined. Quite simply it is laughable to suggest that such a bastard concoction could be analyzed in any way that results in a clear definition of that viral particle, and indeed this is the case; for HIV, for SARS-Cov-2, and for many other viruses, a purified isolated sample of the virus simply does not exist. The CDC, Public Health England, and other health authorities can't even hide that (but they don't advertise it either). It is scientific fraud, period.
Have you seen a virus, with your own eyes? Do you know anyone who has? It is quite convenient that the only method of visualizing these supposed particles is with an electron microscope, and only a few top virus labs can do the work, indirectly, with them. It is a modern day church with its demon that can only be exercised by the relevant authority, and anyone who denies this is a heretic.
SARS-Cov-2, having not been isolated and fully characterized in the fullest sense, which is public domain knowledge, is therefore assumed to exist based on a blind assumption and in my opinion a complete fabrication. Given that is so, then you have to ask yourself what on earth are the vaccines doing to your physiology? If they have no exact definition of the virus then how on earth can they accurately model a response to it, whether that a test or medical intervention? They are messing around with proteins, shooting in the dark, and hoping for positive results - this is nothing new in the history of western medicine at all.
Furthermore;
For a disease with a 99.9% recovery rate, why would you even consider taking a vaccination in the first place? That fact alone should kill the argument dead in the water.
But ok, so you want to inject an industrially produced concoction into yourself. Why? The act itself is unnatural, bypassing the bodies two main immunity organs/barriers, the skin and the gut, that moderate and are actively involved in the immune system. But ok, you don't care about that, but surely you would be slightly concerned by the fact that these medical products have been developed by industries, steeped in corruption and disaster, in under a year with the incentive of global financial rewards with complete indemnity from adverse reactions (i.e. death)? That's not even touching the mRNA based technology that is a live trial experiment! But ok, you don't care about that either, but surely you would question why you would need such a vaccine given it doesn't stop you catching or transmitting the virus, and only supposedly moderates your symptoms of infection.. which is basically what a healthy diet and not being vitamin deficient would do for you!
I honestly can't quite believe how foolish the majority of the public are, and how little memory people have. This isn't the first time an epidemic has been attempted to be foisted upon us, and then subsequent medical products sold at cost which later turn out to have not been tested thoroughly in double-blind placebo trials and cause severe effects (including death). HIV is a case in point again (AZT anyone?), but there's several others in the past twenty years at least.. Avian Flu (Tamiflu anyone?).
There's so many red flags on this it's astounding. I consider it a litmus test of basic intelligence to be frank. Back to that central tenet of putting anything into your body.. one must do the research and not rely on blind trust. There is far too much money involved for one to not be even remotely skeptical of the motives in this.
'Doctors are men who prescribe medicines of which they know little, to cure diseases of which they know less, in human beings of whom they know nothing.' - Voltaire
I'm quite surprised in fact that a drug forum would be more in favor of taking it. A central tenet of drug use is you should know what it is you're taking and what influence it will have on your physiology. That and psychedelic drug use should at least open your mind a bit, make you a bit more critical in your thinking and cynical of authority given they're the ones constantly telling lies about illicit drug harm (especially about psychedelics).
There's a whole list of reasons why this vaccine in particular is unnecessary, but to preface that something must be said about the practice of vaccination in general too;
Vaccination is touted as one of the pillars of our modern scientific age and people feel very sensitive about the subject, though I find they tend to not actually knowing any of the history or development behind it, which shows just how effective the propaganda has been. Everyone takes for granted the existence of viruses and the science of virology, but again I find they don't know any of the history or development behind it. Suffice to say if one does a little personal investigation it won't take long before they begin to see the holes in the godlike narrative of vaccination, the fraud and corruption in the science that supports it, and the trillion dollar medical enterprise that rests on its shoulders and will do anything to keep the money flowing at the expense of the public health.
The clearest evidence that the usefulness of vaccination is non-existent is seen in the historical data itself, and it's what changed my mind the instant I saw it. If you look at all the major diseases that ravaged the world from approximately 1850 to 1950, the era during which time various vaccines were developed, you'll see that the mortality rate for all of them was in decline long before the vaccines were introduced. In the case of measles the mortality rate had declined to near negligible levels. In the case of Scarlet Fever no mass vaccination campaign was even implemented and it all but vanished on its own - this disease had a worldwide pandemic and was one of the most feared in the 19th century! All the diseases were on clear downward trends long before vaccines were introduced, and the reasons for that are simply: improved sanitation, improved water quality, improved food quality,.. basically not living in our own filth, which is what life was like for the masses. We had no choice but to be factory fodder for the industrialists and live in cramped cities during that era. These diseases were the result of our own ignorance, and they appear and disappear accordingly.
The second point is one that demolishes the entire premise of vaccination altogether, and that is the scientific theory of 'the virus' (if there is no virus, what are you vaccinating for?). There's much history to cover on this, too much for one post to do justice. Without delving into that I'll instead focus on the proof of the concept itself. That is, the methodology of virology itself. Virus particles are so small that they can only be seen with an electron microscope, and moreover they can only be worked with by using indirect methods. You can't physically grab them, you can't see them in real-time within a sample (electron microscopy is static). Those facts alone should make one extremely cautious about accepting validity outright on trust - humans make mistakes! I think most people would be quite surprised if they examined the methodology and how it works. The word 'isolation', in reference to a virus, is quite simply the opposite of its dictionary definition. In the history of HIV for instance, viral particles have never been found directly in the blood sample of a supposedly positive patient. Samples are always passed through a cell culture first, which involves the addition of harsh chemicals, then the results of that examined. Quite simply it is laughable to suggest that such a bastard concoction could be analyzed in any way that results in a clear definition of that viral particle, and indeed this is the case; for HIV, for SARS-Cov-2, and for many other viruses, a purified isolated sample of the virus simply does not exist. The CDC, Public Health England, and other health authorities can't even hide that (but they don't advertise it either). It is scientific fraud, period.
Have you seen a virus, with your own eyes? Do you know anyone who has? It is quite convenient that the only method of visualizing these supposed particles is with an electron microscope, and only a few top virus labs can do the work, indirectly, with them. It is a modern day church with its demon that can only be exercised by the relevant authority, and anyone who denies this is a heretic.
SARS-Cov-2, having not been isolated and fully characterized in the fullest sense, which is public domain knowledge, is therefore assumed to exist based on a blind assumption and in my opinion a complete fabrication. Given that is so, then you have to ask yourself what on earth are the vaccines doing to your physiology? If they have no exact definition of the virus then how on earth can they accurately model a response to it, whether that a test or medical intervention? They are messing around with proteins, shooting in the dark, and hoping for positive results - this is nothing new in the history of western medicine at all.
Furthermore;
For a disease with a 99.9% recovery rate, why would you even consider taking a vaccination in the first place? That fact alone should kill the argument dead in the water.
But ok, so you want to inject an industrially produced concoction into yourself. Why? The act itself is unnatural, bypassing the bodies two main immunity organs/barriers, the skin and the gut, that moderate and are actively involved in the immune system. But ok, you don't care about that, but surely you would be slightly concerned by the fact that these medical products have been developed by industries, steeped in corruption and disaster, in under a year with the incentive of global financial rewards with complete indemnity from adverse reactions (i.e. death)? That's not even touching the mRNA based technology that is a live trial experiment! But ok, you don't care about that either, but surely you would question why you would need such a vaccine given it doesn't stop you catching or transmitting the virus, and only supposedly moderates your symptoms of infection.. which is basically what a healthy diet and not being vitamin deficient would do for you!
I honestly can't quite believe how foolish the majority of the public are, and how little memory people have. This isn't the first time an epidemic has been attempted to be foisted upon us, and then subsequent medical products sold at cost which later turn out to have not been tested thoroughly in double-blind placebo trials and cause severe effects (including death). HIV is a case in point again (AZT anyone?), but there's several others in the past twenty years at least.. Avian Flu (Tamiflu anyone?).
There's so many red flags on this it's astounding. I consider it a litmus test of basic intelligence to be frank. Back to that central tenet of putting anything into your body.. one must do the research and not rely on blind trust. There is far too much money involved for one to not be even remotely skeptical of the motives in this.
'Doctors are men who prescribe medicines of which they know little, to cure diseases of which they know less, in human beings of whom they know nothing.' - Voltaire
Last edited:
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
I stopped reading when you started arguing that viruses don't exist.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
a reference would do nicely.
have you ever seen your brain with your own eyes?
you obviously don't know what a plaque assay is, can you look it up then please explain what you see there?
Deleted member 210577
Bluelight Crew
Why? Have you even bothered to examine the science and history behind virology, allowing you to have even a remotely sufficient knowledge base to dismiss it so nonchalantly?
You're obviously confident in your position. You should therefore have absolutely no trouble demonstrating their existence and providing the source/original scientific paper that show the existence of a fully purified isolation, and characterization of the whole viral particle under electron microscopy from such a sample, for: SARS-Cov-2, HIV, Polio, Hepatitis C, the various Influenza strains, etc. Good luck!
This method was used first for phages (see below). You're putting what you assume are viral particles into a medium that is already under stress (and potentially contaminated) and then measuring the damage to the cells. And you're surprised cells become damaged in this arrangement when a mysterious concoction is added to it? Then when coming to image the sample, under electron microscopy, again it is damaged further during that method of preparation. This is all again subservient to the fact that the 'viral sample' added may not be what it is believed to be. If it has been generated through the cell line culture method, which it will have been because the virus is never isolated directly in the first place, then you are adding unknowns (proteins, cell debris, etc) into the medium. Only with phages is the plaque method relevant, because phages have been isolated and purified correctly;
A bacteriophage is assumed to be a type of bacteria virus. Assumed being the operative word - it is a scientific theory, not a fact. Phages are a world apart from the supposed infectious viral particles we're talking about in relation to CV19. For one thing, phages have been isolated in purified samples and have been fully characterized under electron microscopy. Phages are also part of the historical genesis of the pathogenic viral infection theory. The assumption that phages are bacteria viruses was then transferred in concept to the notion there are viruses that infect human cells too. Phages are part and parcel of the bacterial world and life-cycle, for transport of information (and genesis), in the much the same way exosomes are carriers of information between human cells - exosomes are what are commonly mistakenly identified as viral particles in electron microscopy in unpurified isolates.
It is simply our projection, our assumption, that there is a war going on under the microscope with 'evil invaders'. It makes for a good story, and stories involving fear often have profitable outcomes for the purveyor. It is an industry that has taken nature, bastardized it, then sold back the perverted and inverted results to us at cost. The history of western medicine is cringeworthy, and barbaric in many instances. It hasn't even been 100 years since the industry thought lobotomy was a great idea and awarded a Nobel prize for it (still not retracted).
Scurvy and beriberi were once thought to be infectious diseases. Turned out to be vitamin deficiencies.
The idea that western medicine is advanced is laughable. It's still in its infancy. Biology is incredibly complex and we've barely scratched the surface. To think we haven't made any mistakes is sheer arrogance.
I'm not interested in protracted debate with people who refuse to do some basic research and rely solely on blind faith in scientific institutions and dogmas. I came here to drop some information for perhaps the one or two individuals on this forum with open minds who might think twice before potentially damaging themselves with these vaccines. I left this forum in the first place because I assumed being amongst drug users I was in the presence of a higher percentage of open minds, and I then realized my assumption was incorrect.
Take the vaccine if it makes you feel better. If you believe doing so will ensure a return to normality, then unfortunately you are gravely mistaken, but that's a separate discussion entirely.
Good luck and take care all.
Last edited:
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
where did i mention bacertiophages? sure, plaque assays were developed to quantify bacteriophages but that was over 70 years ago and we can now use them to quantify animal viruses. can you please answer my original but now slightly reworded question- what do you see in a plaque assay with animal host cells?
exosomes transport miRNA- how do you explain the Baltimore classification then?
nobody is claiming biology is simple or scientists have never made mistakes. but it is really odd to jump from that to 'therefore viruses don't exist'- yet you seem to respect electron microscopes yet nobody has ever seen an electron by the naked eye either.
western medicine has increased life expectancy, it is no longer normal for children to die before the age of 5 or women to die of complications in childbirth. no one claimed its advanced but you have to look at the results its got us.
i am a researcher in viral genomics, i'm just confused as to how my job even exists under your theory lol. of course you're not interested in debating anyone who has actually devoted a significant portion of their life to this as you'd be forced to examine your theories.
cduggles
Bluelight Crew
Yes.
Deleted member 210577
Bluelight Crew
Self-deception and fraud. That doesn't stop your industry, or any others, from generating billions of dollars each year. Hasn't done at any point in history.
And no, I'm certainly not interested in debating it with someone who is the most unlikely person of all to be open minded to the possibility they're wrong. You're invested in the industry, financially and on a personal identity level - would you be prepared to walk away if you realized what I'd said was true? I doubt it. Few would be, especially if they have mortgages and families.
Your industry is built on fraud. Go and find the original scientific papers for the isolation of the various viruses (SARS-Cov-2, HIV etc) and examine them. If you're as scientifically and intellectually minded as you no doubt presume yourself to be, then you should have absolutely no trouble seeing through the bullshit.