Magdalena
Well-known member
Only the fact that you might be infecting other people with possibly deadly side effects of the vaccine without them even taking it.And what are the negative consequences of that?
Nothing much.
Only the fact that you might be infecting other people with possibly deadly side effects of the vaccine without them even taking it.And what are the negative consequences of that?
Nothing much.
What does the pseudo-science say about a guy rasing himself from the dead on day 3?That seems about right in each case, with regard to the pseudo-science aspect.
Money, money, money, money....money.\Yep. Pfizer has already said you'll need a booster in 6 months. You think this isn't going to be every year now?
Lets say you have covid...and you're outside walking down the driveway to pick up the mail....wearing your mask...and you sneeze in it. Then on your next breath you suck a lot of the expelled virus back into your lungs...Masks affect child development in many ways. Children learn by taking visual cues from others. If they can’t see your facial expressions it’s confusing to them. It can interrupt the bonding process and cause fear and lack of trust. Depression has been a big problem among children the past year. Masks have been a factor, along with isolation, no school, etc. So the health risk of masks is only a part of the problem.
Lets say you had the vaccine...and are making spikes like crazy. You're in the supermarket when you sneeze and create a spike cloud. You turn and walk down isle 4....along comes a non-infected young woman wearing a mask and she sucks in some of your spikes through the leak in the side of her mask and around the nose bridge. Her body recognized the spikes as foreign and her body begins to attack the spike sequence...as well as attacking the other sequences in her body that are part of a larger sequence that resemble the spike.....Only the fact that you might be infecting other people with possibly deadly side effects of the vaccine without them even taking it.
See post 807 above.And what are the negative consequences of that?
Nothing much.
How do you infect people with a protein unconnected to a viral pathogen? Details, please.Only the fact that you might be infecting other people with possibly deadly side effects of the vaccine without them even taking it.
What sequences in the human genome resemble the covid virus spike protein closely enough to elicit an immune respone? Please be specific.Lets say you had the vaccine...and are making spikes like crazy. You're in the supermarket when you sneeze and create a spike cloud. You turn and walk down isle 4....along comes a non-infected young woman wearing a mask and she sucks in some of your spikes through the leak in the side of her mask and around the nose bridge. Her body recognized the spikes as foreign and her body begins to attack the spike sequence...as well as attacking the other sequences in her body that are part of a larger sequence that resemble the spike.....
Should vaccinated people be forced to stay home as there is a possibility they have become harmful to the population?
Where exactly are you reading about such things? And please provide links with evidence of such incidents that have been confirmed.See post 807 above.
To add to that I was reading about vaxadents....people who have had the jab are driving their car down the road...and have a mild...or major...stroke due to the spikes making it past the brain/blood barrier..they lose control of their car..and I think you can figure out the rest.
Should vaccinated people be forced to stay home as there is a possibility they have become harmful to the population?
There would be nothing wrong with that as a religious belief. But making that part of the scientific study of biology or archeology would be pseudoscience. And this from one who definitely does believe in the guy who raised himself frpm the deaf on day 3.What does the pseudo-science say about a guy rasing himself from the dead on day 3?
And trust me Magdelena I certainly don't want to do that. And I certainly don't want my words to be any encouragement or discouragement to take a vaccine. I wouldn't want to carry the guilt either way of what could happen. But I'm trying to look at another picture too and that is drug side effects in other things likewise can be negative. Here's one articles which suggests taking drugs (regular kinds) can take out 40,000 a year. But then do those drugs really help the greater number of people and they'd be worse off without them? I'm open to learn here but all things need to be considered right?Why would you ignore the thousands of people who are being terribly affected by the vaccines just because you don’t personally know any of them? It’s a big world out there.
Now here's a question for you. You seem to have considerable knowledge of medical things. So tell me if you were to pick which vaccine your got would there be a preference of one over another and why? Do you have any concerns about any of them?My husband got his first Moderna shot at the VA hospital in February and a month later, got the second one. I got the Pfizer one in late February and the second one 3 weeks later, through the county health department.
My husband got a delayed reaction from the second one--the area around the vaccinated site on his arm turned bright red and itched a little, but it disappeared in a couple of days. I had a bad reaction to the second dose--fever, body aches, and the worst chills I have ever had in my life. As soon as Tylenol kicked in, the chills abruptly stopped. The adverse reaction lasted about 18 hours. I have had worse flus, that lasted 4 days and gave me a fever of almost 103. So, it was no big deal to me, and I was prepared for it.
My husband's slightly swollen glands and slight anemia were not caused by the vaccine, if that is what you are implying. They are part of the disease, which was discovered last November. Night sweats are another side effect of the disease. He hasn't had those yet. And the rate at which symptoms start to show up varies wildly--it can be a few months, to literally years. It's a crap shoot, really.
You need to get out more and do some looking around.Where exactly are you reading about such things? And please provide links with evidence of such incidents that have been confirmed.
So would an event such as a world wide flood..and you don't need pseudoscience to show it happened as the bible said it happened.There would be nothing wrong with that as a religious belief. But making that part of the scientific study of biology or archeology would be pseudoscience. And this from one who definitely does believe in the guy who raised himself frpm the deaf on day 3.
start here...take your time.What sequences in the human genome resemble the covid virus spike protein closely enough to elicit an immune respone? Please be specific.
So, I should only believe right-wingers who post information??
I would caution you to do the same thing, about the right.
And I don't believe every conspiracy theory that comes down the Internet. But I do thank you, and I do my best to check sources.
You can't show us a case you have worked with that was asymptomatic and spread infection. You are a medical and surgery distant outsider and rely on political sources.Which is great if know you are sick. But covid is also spread by those with no symptoms or very mild symptoms.
prove it.Which is great if know you are sick. But covid is also spread by those with no symptoms or very mild symptoms.
Actually you do. There is no legitimate science that shows there was a world-wide flood any time in recorded human history. The description of the flood in the bible should be taken figuratively for its moral message, not as a science textbook.So would an event such as a world wide flood..and you don't need pseudoscience to show it happened as the bible said it happened.
With reference to the first miracle you mentioned - the resurrection of Christ - any website that claims the facts of the resurrection can be established through science alone is not only pseudo-science, but it is also anti-Christian, and should be rejected by all faithful Christians. That is because the resurrection was not natural event. It did not follow the normal laws of nature. Since science is the study of the laws of nature, anyone who says that science confirms the resurrection is saying that the resurrection was a natural event, which is contrary to Scripture. That is why I say it is anti-Christian. The truth of the resurrection can only be known through faith, not science.But, judging from your response, I gotta ask...are you a pick and choose miracle guy?