No Jab for me...here's why...Web site

Bonnie

Super Member
(Natural News) Over 15 million doses of Covid-19 vaccines were halted and trashed after FDA inspectors found ingredients from other vaccines in the Johnson & Johnson jabs, and discovered ‘brown residue’ all over the floors and walls, and open bags of medical waste being dragged around the facility. continue to article.

Once again this is from Natural News and we have been told here by some that they can't be trusted.

But, like most Natural News articles they lead you back to their source. This one came from CBS.

The Baltimore factory contracted to make Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine was dirty, didn't follow proper manufacturing procedures and had poorly trained staff, resulting in contamination of material that was going to be put in the shots, U.S. regulators said Wednesday. Continue with article.

The scary thing...the article was dated April 22 2021.
Congratulations on using a reputable source, like CBS. I hope that Baltimore factory was severely fined for its negligence. I remember watching Forensic Files some time ago, about a facility that was dirty in manufacturing some medicine or other that was making people sick. Authorities managed to track down the source, a medical factory someplace in New England, and found that their practices in making and packaging the medicine were negligent and irresponsible. Heads rolled, people went to jail, and I think the facility closed.

But question: Does what happened here mean the medicine itself was bad? OR was it the facility that was bad?

It is deplorable what happened at this Baltimore facility and I hope that they suffer consequences for it.

Remember the polio Cutter incident?

In the era of modern medicine, some of the first concerns about vaccines causing death date to isolated, but high profile past vaccine safety incidents. The “Cutter Incident” in 1955 involved a flaw in the Salk polio vaccine manufacturing process at Cutter Laboratories that led to production of substantial amounts of what was thought to be inactivated vaccine that contained live poliovirus. The result has been called “…one of the worst pharmaceutical disasters in US history”[11], with 40,000 cases of polio resulting in 51 cases of permanent paralysis and five deaths among vaccinated individuals, and 113 cases of paralysis and five deaths among contacts of vaccinated individuals [11,12].


Now, did this incident mean that the vaccine itself was bad--or was it the manufacturing process that was flawed? Should the polio vaccine have been banned? This incident damaged Salk's reputation, even though it wasn't his fault, and led to a drop in vaccinations for polio until it was cleared up. Yet polio vaccines are highly successful in preventing the disease and have caused a sharp drop in incidences of the disease, worldwide. But back in the 50's it was a scourge and polls taken among Americans indicated that, after nuclear bombs, polio was what Americans feared most. But it has been largely eliminated worldwide due to the vaccine.
 
Last edited:

Bonnie

Super Member
A little history lesson. 1976 swine flu vaccine injuries.

Oh, absolutely. I remember that. I actually got the swine flu vaccine, because I was getting ready to move to Germany, and I didn't want to risk getting sick. But the disease didn't pan out. I felt sorry for Gerald Ford, though--it was one of those "darned if you do and darned if you don't" scenarios. IF he had done nothing and we had had a swine flu epidemic in this country, he would have been vilified. Here he did try to do something to prevent it and the disease didn't pan out. So he still was vilified.
 

CrowCross

Super Member
Congratulations on using a reputable source, like CBS.

Natural News used the source.
I hope that Baltimore factory was severely fined for its negligence. I remember watching Forensic Files some time ago, about a facility that was dirty in manufacturing some medicine or other that was making people sick. Authorities managed to track down the source, a medical factory someplace in New England, and found that their practices in making and packaging the medicine were negligent and irresponsible. Heads rolled, people went to jail, and I think the facility closed.

But question: Does what happened here mean the medicine itself was bad? OR was it the facility that was bad?

It is deplorable what happened at this Baltimore facility and I hope that they suffer consequences for it.

Remember the polio Cutter incident?




Now, did this incident mean that the vaccine itself was bad--or was it the manufacturing process that was flawed? Should the polio vaccine have been banned? This incident damaged Salk's reputation, even though it wasn't his fault, and led to a drop in vaccinations for polio until it was cleared up. Yet polio vaccines are highly successful in preventing the disease and have caused a sharp drop in incidences of the disease, worldwide. But back in the 50's it was a scourge and polls taken among Americans indicated that, after nuclear bombs, polio was what Americans feared most. But it has been largely eliminated worldwide due to the vaccine.

Natural news simply pointed out the conditions in the lab...did it have an effect on the jab? Who knows.

As to polio I oncve heard it was due to the conditions and construction of can in the canning industry. Around the time the vaccine came out they changed the way they made cans. Is that what really happened? Who knows.

Your link started out with....Vaccines are rigorously tested and monitored.

The covid 19 jab was not rigorously tested.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
Slim to none.
The article did not say that. It did say it was less efficient, due to the reasons stated. The biggest problem is that asymptomatic people feel fine and go out in public, and could unwittingly spread the disease if they happen to cough or sneeze. Plus, the disease has a rather long incubation period, up to two weeks. But again, another reason to wear face masks in public.


Jason Kindrachuk, a virologist at the University of Manitoba who was not involved with the study, said many viruses can spread from asymptomatic people, but usually in very small amounts, which doesn't appear to be the case for the novel coronavirus. He added that it's still not clear whether the new coronavirus spreads at large levels from asymptomatic people because of the scale of the pandemic, or because the virus is unique in that respect.
"There are all these small nuances about this virus that are coming to light each day," he said (Mandavilli, New York Times, 8/6

As I have stated before, knowledge of this virus and how it works is expanding all the time.

logo

 
Last edited:

Bonnie

Super Member
Natural News used the source.


Natural news simply pointed out the conditions in the lab...did it have an effect on the jab? Who knows.

As to polio I oncve heard it was due to the conditions and construction of can in the canning industry. Around the time the vaccine came out they changed the way they made cans. Is that what really happened? Who knows.

Your link started out with....Vaccines are rigorously tested and monitored.

The covid 19 jab was not rigorously tested.
I forgot to mention that the article was from 2015.

My point is, should one discontinue a vaccine due to the fault of a sloppy lab that produced it? Where does the fault lie--in the vaccine or the lab?

I have NO idea what canning has to do with the polio vaccine development--do you think the vaccine was produced in cans, or what?
 
Last edited:

Carol

Well-known member
Colds and flus are well known. There are tests for flu that distinguish it from other viruses. I had one such test in early 2019, when I got really sick from the flu. The nurse at the doctor's office tested me with a nose swab, and the results came back positive for type A flu.

Covid -19 is not the flu. There are different tests for it.

Some people may have had mild covid-19 that felt like a bad cold or a mild flu, and didn't bother to go to the doctor, but just stayed home and treated it themselves. That is entirely possible. But for someone to think all or most of the deaths attributed covid are really from the flu is plain silly.

Like "gullible and stupid"?
 

CrowCross

Super Member
I forgot to mention that the article was from 2015.

My point is, should one discontinue a vaccine due to the fault of a sloppy lab that produced it? Where does the fault lie--in the vaccine or the lab?

It makes you wonder...kinda like the turn of the century...1900's meat industry. I'm glad the industry is inspected.


I have NO idea what canning has to do with the polio vaccine--do you think the vaccine was produced in cans, or what?
I'll have to dig back into it...as from what I rember the problem was with the cans, the metals, the seams and so on.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
Like "gullible and stupid"?
Did I write that? Please show me where I wrote those words..

But I will amend my post so as not to offend anyone's delicate sensibilities. :rolleyes:

Still, according to Michael Adams, my husband and I are brainwashed, gullible, stupid, walking biological time bombs (slightly paraphrased)....this is someone we should get accurate covid/vaccine information from???
 
Last edited:

Bonnie

Super Member
It makes you wonder...kinda like the turn of the century...1900's meat industry. I'm glad the industry is inspected.



I'll have to dig back into it...as from what I rember the problem was with the cans, the metals, the seams and so on.
Oh, I see, thanks...I thought it was because they failed to properly deactivate the virus.
 
Last edited:

4Him

Administrator
Staff member
The article did not say that.

I don't care what it said.

It did say it was less efficient, due to the reasons stated.

Slim to none.

The biggest problem is that asymptomatic people feel fine and go out in public, and could unwittingly spread the disease if they happen to cough or sneeze.

Slim to none.

But again, another reason to wear face masks in public.

Face masks don't stop covid....but I'm sure you believe they do.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
I don't care what it said.



Slim to none.



Slim to none.



Face masks don't stop covid....but I'm sure you believe they do.
I know you do not care. That particular article shows that you are incorrect. And from a non-government source.. But it did not say "slim to none." Fauci said rare but then, curiously, you believe him there, but not elsewhere....and call him a "shill."

I never said masks stop covid. Please show me where I wrote that. Masks are not perfect, but if properly worn, and are the right kind, they can l
certainly lessen the amount of droplets coughed or sneezed into the air. And thus lessen the chance of spreading the disease. Why do you think surgeons wear them?
 
Last edited:

Harry Leggs

Super Member
Oh, absolutely. I remember that. I actually got the swine flu vaccine, because I was getting ready to move to Germany, and I didn't want to risk getting sick. But the disease didn't pan out. I felt sorry for Gerald Ford, though--it was one of those "darned if you do and darned if you don't" scenarios. IF he had done nothing and we had had a swine flu epidemic in this country, he would have been vilified. Here he did try to do something to prevent it and the disease didn't pan out. So he still was vilified.
Did you watch the interview with the television producer and the vaccine side effects which put her on her behind and recieved a diagnosis of vaccine caused sickness? Getting vaxxed is Russian Roulette and it sounds like it is getting harder and harder to keep it all covered up.

 

4Him

Administrator
Staff member
I know you do not care. The article shows that you are incorrect.

No, it doesn't. I can quote many articles to show your article incorrect. We can do this all day long.
Fauci said rare but then, curiously, you believe him there, but not elsewhere....and call him a "shill."

Because he is a shill.
I never said masks stop covid. Please show me where I wrote that. Masks are not perfect, but if properly worn, and are the right kind, they can l
certainly lessen the amount of droplets coughed or sneezed into the air. And thus lessen the chance of spreading the disease. Why do you think surgeons wear them?
Surgeons wear them to prevent BACTERIA from getting into an open wound on someone they have cut open. They don't wear them to prevent a virus.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
《《snip》》
Hi CC...I haven't had time to look at your link, as I had to make lunch, but I presume it refers to flaws that may have been in some of the equipment used to make the polio vaccine....is that it?

Nooooo...that is not It. I listened to a few minutes of it and it sounds totally....weird The guy in the interview says that polio is a "bacterial degeneration of the spine." And that it takes many years to show up. Both are false. Polio myleitis is a virus, not a bacterium. And it can show up quite quickly. In the Cutter incident, children who got the improperly deactivated virus ended up getting paralyzed in the arm first, where they received the shot. That is REALLY fast!

Secondly, this guy seems to think the polio outbreak after WWII was due to the heavy use of tin cans, with the metal getting into the body and acting like a free radical. He is wrong here both times. First, canned foods have been around since the 19th. century, including right before the war. Also, canned goods in this country are made from steel and aluminim, not tin. Tin is almost entirely absent in N. America. Maybe Europeans use tin, but not here.

Polio has been around for millenia. I even saw online a picture of a man from an Egyptian tomb, who presented classic polio--one leg nice and straight, the other pulled up and shriveled.

American Experience TV show had a story about polio and its history and the vaccine, in the late 1990's. Oddly enough, being too clean may have made Americans more susceptible to the virus. The show said children years ago would get partial immunity from their mother's milk, so if they got the disease when young, it was usually mild--like a bad cold with a stiff neck. They recovered and had lifelong immunity. Being exposed to a certain amount of unsanitary conditions in the centuries prior to the 20th actually protected children from the disease. Then came bottle feeding, and clean, clean, clean...and no exposure even to weakened viruses or collastrum in mother's milk.

I also don't think it is true that the Amish never got polio, or never use canned food. I would need to research a little....yes there was an outbreak in the Amish in 1997 and 2005, from the attenuated vaccine--the "live" vaccine, which was banned in this country in the late 90's, though it is still used in other countries.

I don't know about using canned foods. They make their own, though using canning jars, as I do. :)

Anyway, I think we can dismiss what this guy says in your link as being untrue.:)
 
Last edited:

Bonnie

Super Member
No, it doesn't. I can quote many articles to show your article incorrect. We can do this all day long.


Because he is a shill.

Surgeons wear them to prevent BACTERIA from getting into an open wound on someone they have cut open. They don't wear them to prevent a virus.
They still wear them to help keep from spreading any any kind of germs. That was my point. Common sense tells us that a properly made and worn mask will still cut back on the amount of droplets spewed out by the wearer, should he or she cough or sneeze, while carrying the virus, however unknowingly. And the virus would be in the droplets. It isn't perfect, but it still helps.
 

4Him

Administrator
Staff member
They still wear them to help keep from spreading any any kind of germs.

Right, to stop bacteria from their mouth from getting into an open wound.
Common sense tells us that a properly made and worn mask will still cut back on the amount of droplets spewed out by the wearer, should he or she cough or sneeze, while carrying the virus, however unknowingly. And the virus would be in the droplets. It isn't perfect, but it still helps.

That's what they want you to believe.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
No, it doesn't. I can quote many articles to show your article incorrect. We can do this all day long.

So can I. But I quoted from a non-government medical journal.
Because he is a shill.

Surgeons wear them to prevent BACTERIA from getting into an open wound on someone they have cut open. They don't wear them to prevent a virus.
But you still agree with Fauci about asymptomatic spreading the disease being rare. I think he said that before the JAMA Internal Medicine article was published. Research is still ongoing, and I suspect more info will be uncovered as time goes on. I know asymptomic people certainly do not spread the disease as easily as really sick people do, but that does not mean they cannot.

Here is a balanced report on 13 studies from several different countries on asymptomatic folks possibly spreading the disease--


Research early in the pandemic suggested that the rate of asymptomatic infections could be as high as 81%. But a meta-analysis published last month1, which included 13 studies involving 21,708 people, calculated the rate of asymptomatic presentation to be 17%. The analysis defined asymptomatic people as those who showed none of the key COVID-19 symptoms during the entire follow-up period, and the authors included only studies that followed participants for at least seven days. Evidence suggests that most people develop symptoms in 7–13 days, says lead author Oyungerel Byambasuren, a biomedical researcher at the Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare at Bond University in Gold Coast, Australia.

Seventeen percent is nowhere near 81%-- common--but neither is it "slim to none", i.e. extremely rare. The article says:

As part of a large population study in Geneva, Switzerland, researchers modelled viral spread among people living together. In a manuscript posted on medRxiv this month 2, they report that the risk of an asymptomatic person passing the virus to others in their home is about one-quarter of the risk of transmission from a symptomatic person.

Although there is a lower risk of transmission from asymptomatic people, they might still present a significant public-health risk because they are more likely to be out in the community than isolated at home, says Andrew Azman, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, Maryland, who is based in Switzerland and was a co-author on the study. “The actual public-health burden of this massive pool of interacting ‘asymptomatics’ in the community probably suggests that a sizeable portion of transmission events are from asymptomatic transmissions,” he says.

25% chance of an asymptomatic person spreading the disease is NOT "slim to none."

Of course, I never stated that asymptomatic people drive this pandemic. And Fauci denied that, as well. Symptomatic people drive pandemics.

I know surgeons wear masks to prevent bacterial infections. But that was not my point. The virus is in the droplets we breathe, cough, and sneeze out. Properly made and worn masks help to prevent their being spewed out,, and help contain the droplets. Not perfectly,, but still they help. That is my "point." I was speaking in general. Iam sorry for not being clearer.A surgeon with covid would not be operating on anyone, anyway. :)

The above article concludes with:

Although there is a now a better understanding of asymptomatic infections and transmission of COVID-19, Cevik says that asymptomatic people should continue to use measures that reduce viral spread, such as social distancing, hand hygiene and wearing a mask.

Now, to be fair and show the "other side", there is this article from BMJ--


It shows a low virus load in asymptomatic people. But other studies have shown that they CAN carry just as much a viral load as symptomatic people. This article notes this:

Findings not generally applicable
The researchers said that their findings did not show that the virus couldn’t be passed on by asymptomatic carriers, and they didn’t suggest that their findings were generalisable.

They said that strict measures—such as mask wearing, hand washing, social distancing, and lockdown—were successful in reducing the virulence of SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan and that asymptomatic people in Wuhan may have low viral loads. This means that the finding cannot be applied to countries where outbreaks have not been successfully brought under control.

Of course, this study comes from Wuhan, where it all began, where some think the virus was manufactured, so, one might ask, why should we believe anything that comes from Wuhan?

Finally, here is an article from last September that says asymptomatic people may be responsible for up to 50% of covod cases. This shows the difficulty in determining this:

The difficulty of distinguishing asymptomatic persons from those who are merely presymptomatic is a stumbling block. To be clear, the asymptomatic individual is infected with SARS-CoV-2 but will never develop symptoms of COVID-19. In contrast, the presymptomatic individual is similarly infected but eventually will develop symptoms. The simple solution to this conundrum is longitudinal testing—that is, repeated observations of the individual over time. Unfortunately, only 5 of our cohorts include longitudinal data. We must therefore acknowledge the possibility that some of the proportions of asymptomatic persons are lower than reported.


I have tried to show both sides on this.. What I take away from all this is that spread of covid from asymptomatic people IS certainly uncommon, but NOT extremely rare, i.e. "slim to none." But then, I never thought it was common, anyway.
 
Last edited:

Authentic Nouveau

Well-known member
Right, to stop bacteria from their mouth from getting into an open wound.


That's what they want you to believe.
How many times have you got it right and posted this?

CDC director criticized for now differentiating between dying 'from’ vs. dying 'with' COVID-19​


We know it was hair splitting diversion and stats manipulation.
 
Top