Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
No bio...
User ID: 648
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
There is no experimental research finding heart damage in cadavers after receiving ibuprofen. Only mRNA. Not terrifying to me.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
I'm not so sure there's no way to enforce - couldn't non-compliance end up in lawsuits? I agree, but there will be SOME ability to prevent it after a decision against AA.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
4mo ago
It's a matter of comparison---the most direct analogue is the literal president of the US encouraging an attempted violent overthrow of the >legislative branch.
Didn't the Speaker of the House say there should be "uprisings all over." That means when a police station in Fort Green Brooklyn was overrun by a mob, and their vehicles torched with molotovs, it was a violent overthrow of the normal functioning of the judicial branch.
I just think leftists only apply this histrionic analysis in service of their own political goals, you are a great example.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
10mo ago
Inflammation from widely distributed nanoparticles. Look up inflammation, its complicated.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
An induction stove can affect some pacemakers if someone is COMPLETELY up against the stove and the pot is not covering the pad completely. Touching the pot creates a circuit (a long touch), and the pace maker will switch modes.
Interesting share.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
I guess that was part of the show. Vaccines were already so safe and bullet proof, people cannot notice when one that's 10x dangerous is released, and information censored online, and physicians told to be disinterested.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Most of my vitriol came from my education. I've been wear of mRNA since summer 2020 when it was announced as a candidate. I've taken undergraduate STEM, but most importantly, I worked with "science and technology studies," where we looked into a century of scientific ethical dilemmas.
So many people got the vaccine when they were told it would stop transmission - I had read the original clinical paper, and saw this was a messy conclusion. Then data from Israel came out that protection was waning, then the censorship began, and later on the mandating piggy backed on the censorship of waning efficacy.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Agree with this.
I think Omicron is a large narrative tool.
Omicron is so much more deadlier than Delta because of its transmissibility, but this translates to less threat to each individual. I always grin when I see people "celebrating" omicrons rise, or remark how they avoided nastier variants, and now play host to the most transmissible pathogen in recent years. If you can catch a cold, once again, that means a 90 year old in a nursing home can catch it too.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Thanks for coming in and adding your input. I would note to all readers that Chrisprattalpha and I had a more detailed vaccine back-and-forth that I thought was productive. Mr. Alpha linked to it in his post.
Overall I disagree with the idea of the "very safe" label. People should go look at our previous exchange to see where I disagree.
As for the vaccines, if they don't update them I'm not planning to bother unless forced to by my employer.
Well, once conventional vaccine alternatives are available to "tic" the box, I would much rather choose protein adjuvanted injections over job loss.
I have not been exposed to mRNA, so it makes a lot more sense for someone like me to be choosier, rather than someone who has taken a more novel method of vaccination.
And we're all getting Covid-19.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Well yes. But those last hold outs were the hardest to get. They resisted the "the vaccine protects you from other people" misconceptions of herd immunity being pushed. It's an important percentage, and without mandates, the data gaps would have been ammo for the "dissenters" of public health.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Yes. Imagine someone saying "Let's try injecting the antigens into their heart!"
Well, we know the mRNA enters the bloodstream, so it could transfect any cell...
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Well, the carbohydrates will not fold into a protein. Carbohydrates mainly going to enter the blood stream as glucose, simple principle of digestion and metabolism in human physiuology.
Using your muscle cells, vs. using one of your cardiac muscle cells, is why you do not want mRNA droplets in your blood stream interacting non-specifically with your organs
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
This is a strong candidate for a contributing factor to deaths. For example, I'd argue that loss of job due to a vaccine mandate will carry worse outcomes than actually receiving a vaccine, or getting Covid unvaccinated. So in a way, our own public health response could be responsible for causing harm to people
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
This is not all proven - the vaccine entering body tissues because there's no known characterization of nanolipid particle pharmacokinetics is the main issue her. There's no concentrated ACE2 receptor in testicles, but the nanolipid particle will be exposed to the testicles via the blood stream (at the testicle blood barrier, which the vaccine can cross).
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Good point, Sweden is doing well despite giving the mRNA vaccines. I'm happy you found a single western country that used mRNA and is not experiencing a precipitous increase in death. And they have excellent foresight to avoid giving risky vaccines to children.
I know Sweden acknowledges that the risks of the vaccines are only useful when comparing against the risks of the virus.
"Conspiracy theorists." Why are you drawing conclusion on a single countries demographics? This is not a good faith accusation to people who are worried the novel mRNA vaccine is causing unnecessary morbidity and mortality, even Sweden has decided to stop putting children at risk. Is this responsible for their better mortality statistics? Hard to tell but I know you need to update your priors here.
There is a radical difference in allowing 5 year olds, and 12 years olds, to receive nanolipid particle injections. And you failed to mention that.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
People entering the medical system and producing positive incidental Covid-19 infections are already likely to be sick.
"It was based upon nearly 154,000 patients with Covid (median age 60, 90% male)"
How can this be related to a 21 year olds decision to avoid getting a mRNA vaccine, known to have cardiac side effects, when the study looks at an already unhealthy patient population?
Not even trying anymore, Mr. Topol may be right that Covid causes problems, but his whole basis reeks of damage control.
The vaccines, with their side effects, need a deadly disease to be worthwhile giving. We are riding out the last days of accepting a chance of heart damage to be immunized against a contagious disease that you get exposed to at the bar, grocery store, and in your home.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Fair, I'm not going to rip off my wallpaper over elderly and at risk people receiving bivalent vaccines - precisely because I have a calculation of their quality life years remaining, that is very different from younger healthy people.
The exact people who benefit from a covid vaccine have less quality life years to live than those who do not.
The vaccine has a novel, not totally understood method of mRNA translation, and then goes through another not completely understood process of protein folding, and then enters the immune system (not completely understood). The pharmacokinetics of the nano lipid particle are not characterized or understood. And there is a concerning signal of a blood clot appearing in patient's brains.
I am not scare mongering, I am being highly critical, since I'm not the one defending the novel RNA transfection vaccines.
When they run trials for new vaccines, they will compare them to the harms that the RNA transfection vaccines caused, and the new vaccines are going to look amazing. My guess is they will use protein-adjuvanted methods.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Your response didn't address the crux of FDA and EUA labelling. The entire power structure of our country, legal recourse and all, rests along these lines. Sorry to bring Foucault into the mix, but he's the ultimate nightmare of a public health pandemicist.
There are no data available on the interchangeability of COMIRNATY with COVID-19 vaccines from other manufacturers to complete the vaccination primary series. Individuals who have received 1 dose of COMIRNATY should receive a second dose of COMIRNATY to complete the vaccination series.
Is this not VERY different from the medical advice given to people getting the EUA? Mix and match the first vial you can even get your hands on?
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
The vaccines are dangerous precisely because we are analyzing and looking for hidden harm, after we already administered a billion doses without fully understanding the consequences and outcomes.
mRNA cardiovascular toxicity is a severe problem and if it's at all likely, the hammer should drop. This "blip" is an 18 year old about to get mandated with mRNA bivalents before going to a community college.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
No there's a meaningful legal, judicial, and regulatory framework surrounding those vials. And the public health vaccination campaign.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Agreed. I personally have a high esteem for many people on both sides of the issue - that's what makes this query so incisive and important.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
I am much more worried about real, physiological implications of nanoparticle technology uptake. Not simple safety standard concerns (those already seem tattered).
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Since you can die suddenly from dysrhythmia after vaccine induced myocarditis, we need to reevaluate where we are in this campaign. This was not known at the EUA authorization in 2020.
Inflamed_Heart_Liberal
1yr ago
Everyone in the myocarditis study was not a young male. It just proves, that sudden death after vaccination can be downstream from the very "well understood" and "mild" myocarditis that the vaccine is associated with.
You are tricking out old Covid morbidity statistics against your best possible analysis of mRNA. For the right age group, you could see a 1 in 2,000 risk of heart damage.
Anyone who's heart stops after vaccination, could have died from the vaccine. The vaccinators did not study the vaccine long enough to even know this until part-way through the campaign, when it became "a known issue that doesn't hold up."
A lot of people had investment in mRNA stopping transmission, and that was why this rare side effect of "some heart damage to young people" was being hand waved. During the "we are getting herd immunity phase," It seemed like you would accept any risk to young patients to stop community spread. That's concept has collapsed, and you're trying to say that the vaccine is only somewhat as deadly as the disease you are actually trying to vaccinate against!
5 per 100k, 150 in 100k. Think of ALL the unreported covid cases that were mild or asymptomatic. You are showing me the best possible rate of myocarditis, and it holds up next to a disease. That's not great vaccine, even if you think an 85 year old in 2020 should have obviously received it (and then it wore off by mid 2021).
Fair, and yet here we are, 1/11/2023, and somehow there is disinterest in important Covaxin to increase the vaccination rate. All because they can't say "we have the real ones now."
Have you seen booster update? pitiful. This is the future for mRNA when held in a free and open market next to protein-adjuvanted vaccines.
More options
Context Copy link