Algor
Well-known member
They have lots of other foreign proteins in their body though, every time you catch a cold. Are you one of those "Artificial stuff is bad!" hippies? Wouldn't have predicted that about you myself, but whatever.
No Jab for me...here's why...Web site
- Thread starter CrowCross
- Start date
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
Went to CDC website and found safety data sheet on Moderna vaccine. Google SM-102 it is in that vaccine. The company that makes SM-102 says it is for experimental use only not for humans, and yet it is in the vaccine I would post the safety data sheet but not supposed to post pics so I added the link. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/moderna/downloads/prep-and-admin-summary.pdf
Algor
Well-known member
And when you looked up the safety profile for SM-102 what did you find?
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
The company that makes that poison says it is for experimental use only not for humans.
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
Hippie lol ! At 17 I joined the USMC at a young 18 I deployed to Vietnam so while others were smoking dope and throwing their morals away I was dodging bullets, rockets ,and mortars. Hippie lol.
Algor
Well-known member
The chloroform is toxic, but the lipid is not. But the vaccine doesn't contain chloroform. So are you worried about the lipid?
Algor
Well-known member
I figured. So what's your issue with the mRNA?
Magdalena
Well-known member
Basically the article admits that there is genetic modification going on. They’re just trying to convince you that it’s ok. I spite of the fact that all the ferrets in their trials died. So they stopped animal testing and started human experimentation, with you and our children as the subjects.This is incorrect.
Yes, some COVID vaccines use genetic engineering. Get over it. - Alliance for Science
We’ve all heard the conspiracy theories about COVID-19. Now a whole new set is emerging around COVID vaccines — and spreading as virulently as the pandemic they are meant to control. Though the public health community tends to resort to reassurances about some of the more reasonable concerns —...allianceforscience.cornell.edu
I checked with mediabias/factcheck and it rated this publication as least biased and also it is science-based.
So, no, those of us who got the vaccine are not walking GMO's.
If you had two potatoes, would you be able to recognize which one had been genetically modified? Or would you just believe if it someone said they had been, but it’s ok. Or would you not believe that people are genetically engineering our food?
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
It contains SM-102 which the company that makes it says for experimental use only not for humans. I don’t want to be part of an experiment using chemicals that are not for humans. SM-102 can cause a host of bad things like cancer, blood clots etc.
Algor
Well-known member
Where did you get the information that all the ferrets in their trials died?
(Yes, people are genetically modifying food. Not by injecting labile isolated sequences of mRNA though)
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
SM-102 is listed as an ingredient in the vaccine.
The chloroform is toxic, but the lipid is not. But the vaccine doesn't contain chloroform. So are you worried about the lipid?
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
From your posted article:SM-102 (Item # 33474) accurately represents that the mixture of chemicals in the product are 90% chloroform (a common solvent) and 10% SM-102. While it is a common solvent, chloroform has several known serious hazards, which have been included on Cayman’s SDS. Looks like 90% chloroform to me.
Algor
Well-known member
I posted the link to the company. You can also look up the toxicity sheet. The toxicity is due to the chloroform, not the lipid. The chloroform is the vehicle for the lipid, and it has to be extracted to make the vaccine. The lipid has no known toxicity.
I can agree with not wanting to be experimented on. I further agree that the vaccine is still pretty novel. I'm not trying to convince you of what is safe and what is not, that's your stew, I don't care. But I do think the basic facts are important: the way that sm102 is used in the vaccine is objectively pretty low risk, and can be anticipated to have low toxicity. How well has that been shown in humans? Jury's out, I agree, but I got jabbed myself, and if you are in a high risk category, or you have a family member who is high risk, then the short term reduction in mortality and morbidity from Covid-19 is substantial. It is a dice roll, wouldn't argue with that, but these things always are.
Last edited:
Algor
Well-known member
It is, but the chloroform has to be extracted before the lipid can be used in the nanoparticles that allow the mRNA to enter the cells. And I agree, the chloroform is toxic.
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
I have zero problem with anyone who wants to get vaccinated for doing so my problem is with those who want to force others to be vaccinated.
Magdalena
Well-known member
I heard about it in this video. In further reading, it looks like the ferrets survived the shots, but then died when exposed to the virus. And they are on the list of extinction. So I don’t know why they would use 129 of them to experiment on.
inertia
Super Member
It's my understanding that there are two formulations of SM-102. One of them uses a mixture of 90% chloroform and is labeled: " For research use only, not for human or veterinary use " directly on their safety data sheet. It's common to package chemicals in solvents for use. The other formulation used in the Moderna vaccine does not contain chloroform ( here is the breakdown ).
- 1,2-dimyristoyl-rac-glycero3-methoxypolyethylene glycol-2000 [PEG2000-DMG]
- cholesterol
- 1,2-distearoyl-snglycero-3-phosphocholine [DSPC]
- Acids
- Acetic acid
- Acid Stabilizers
- Tromethamine & Tromethamine hydrochloride
- Salts
- Sodium acetate
- Sugar
- Sucrose
Last edited:
Leatherneck0311
Well-known member
Why would they list chloroform on the safety data sheet for the vaccine if it had been extracted ?
Algor
Well-known member
The va
I'd say that if you were a health care worker, or you worked in (for instance) an old folks home, or a prison, or something like that, I'd favor making the vaccination mandatory for those people. For instance, doctors and nurses have to get flu shots and all kinds of things in lots of places already. But other folks running stores or doing pulmbing or driving trucks or whatever, no, wouldn't support that. We're on the same page there.
That makes sense.
I'd say that if you were a health care worker, or you worked in (for instance) an old folks home, or a prison, or something like that, I'd favor making the vaccination mandatory for those people. For instance, doctors and nurses have to get flu shots and all kinds of things in lots of places already. But other folks running stores or doing pulmbing or driving trucks or whatever, no, wouldn't support that. We're on the same page there.
Algor
Well-known member
The way I read it is that they buy the lipid in the solvent. Then they extract the chloroform in the preparation of the vaccine (I could be wrong: they may buy it without the solvent but the inclusion of the product number sm 102 by moderna seems to imply differently). So the sm-102 is the ingredient they are required to list. So the way I see it its like using eggs to make a meringue. The cookbook says it uses 4 eggs, but only the whites are actually in the meringue. In any event, there's negligible chloroform left in the vaccine.