https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027869152200206X

The vax destroys your immune system.

You bone heads are in for a rude shock. Carl I hope you really have taken this poo but I believe you are just a drunken troll.

There is no doubt the vaccinated like AusJeff the dopey bastard, Carl the Dunce and Buzz the arse fairy are more dangerous to us than we are to them. Billions of lives will be ended by this vax and I am glad its going to happen.

The fact you pack of dumb bastards fell for the fake vidoe of the people dropping dead on the streets in China goes to show how stupid you you are. Was/Is anyone dropping dead on the streets here? NO. Yet you dumb bastards believed everything the government and TV told you.

16. Conclusions

There has been an unwavering message about the safety and efficacy of mRNA vaccinations against SARS-CoV-2 from the public health apparatus in the US and around the globe. The efficacy is increasingly in doubt, as shown in a recent letter to the Lancet Regional Health by Günter Kampf (2021b). Kampf provided data showing that the vaccinated are now as likely as the unvaccinated to spread disease. He concluded: “It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission when deciding about public health control measures.” Moreover, the inadequacy of phase I, II, and III trials to evaluate mid-term and long-term side effects from mRNA genetic vaccines may have been misleading on their suppressive impact on the innate immunity of the vaccinees.

In this paper, we call attention to three very important aspects of the safety profile of these vaccinations. First is the extensively documented subversion of innate immunity, primarily via suppression of IFN-α and its associated signaling cascade. This suppression will have a wide range of consequences, not the least of which include the reactivation of latent viral infections and the reduced ability to effectively combat future infections. Second is the dysregulation of the system for both preventing and detecting genetically driven malignant transformation within cells and the consequent potential for vaccination to promote those transformations. Third, mRNA vaccination potentially disrupts intracellular communication carried out by exosomes, and induces cells taking up spike glycoprotein mRNA to produce high levels of spike-glycoprotein-carrying exosomes, with potentially serious inflammatory consequences. Should any of these potentials be fully realized, the impact on billions of people around the world could be enormous and could contribute to both the short-term and long-term disease burden our health care system faces.

Given the current rapidly expanding awareness of the multiple roles of G4s in regulation of mRNA translation and clearance through stress granules, the increase in pG4s due to enrichment of GC content as a consequence of codon optimization has unknown but likely far-reaching consequences. Specific analytical evaluation of the safety of these constructs in vaccines is urgently needed, including mass spectrometry for identification of cryptic expression and immunoprecipitation studies to evaluate the potential for disturbance of or interference with the essential activities of RNA and DNA binding proteins.

It is essential that further studies be conducted to determine the extent of the potential pathological consequences outlined in this paper. It is not practical for these vaccinations to be considered part of a public health campaign without a detailed analysis of the human impact of the potential collateral damage. VAERS and other monitoring systems should be optimized to detect signals related to the health consequences of mRNA vaccination we have outlined. We believe the upgraded VAERS monitoring system described in the Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. study, but unfortunately not supported by the CDC, would be a valuable start in this regard (Lazarus et al., 2010).

In the end, billions of lives are potentially at risk, given the large number of individuals injected with the SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines and the broad range of adverse outcomes we have described. We call on the public health institutions to demonstrate, with evidence, why the issues discussed in this paper are not relevant to public health, or to acknowledge that they are and to act accordingly. Furthermore, we encourage all individuals to make their own health care decisions with this information as a contributing factor in those decisions.

reggie1963 wrote on Dec 4^th, 2022 at 9:03pm:

LOL... I actually got the best laugh of my otherwise boring
day after I read this.

My only complaint?   Please spell my name correctly if you're
gonna insult me.    It's GEOFF.   Thank you.    

                    

AusGeoff wrote on Dec 4^th, 2022 at 10:15pm:


Geoff, meet Reggie.

Sir Nail's 'backup', alleged cyber security expert and assistant forum chew toy.

LOL. 

Carl D wrote on Dec 4^th, 2022 at 10:24pm:



Still no link Carl? LIAR

reggie1963 wrote on Dec 4^th, 2022 at 10:32pm:

The only author of the final paper in your list was Jérôme Barrière.  The other
scientists had no connection with the report  (where did you source the list?) 
Barrière reported fees all outside the submitted work.

This is a graphical representation of the errors made in https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027869152200206X.

a lot of this is impossible to assess.

one thing is for sure.

pharma companies are devoted to making profits, in that way they are as concerned about your health as tobaco companies or coal mining companies.

so there is NO WAY you can trust "their" science

the regulators at the fda and the tga are totally brought off.

16 of the last 20 directors and deputy directors of the FDA went on to work for big pharma companies when they left the FDA.

imagine if 16 out of 20 regulators of defence purchases went on to work for military manufactureres.

oh wait, they probably do.

this cant be sorted out until we get independant scientists to sort it out.

and when the universities and hospitals are also all brought off and profit driven, that wont be happening.

we still havent had an investigation into patient zero. the first step in investigating this.


all we can say for sure is that if you are unhealthy, you better work on your health because more variants are coming FOR SURE and the vaccines in no way stop the spread.

i expect big pharma to move over to the treatment model.

with paxlovid earning them about 100 bucks a tablet and covid remaining rampant, that would appear to be the new river of gold 

AusGeoff wrote on Dec 4^th, 2022 at 11:46pm:


Unlike you i don't cherry pick stats or call those who question anything conspiracy theorists.

Since you ignore this question in another thread how effective are these vaccines when our ABS statistics show a 99.9% survival rate for those under 60 who caught Covid?

Quote:


Was our vaccination rate below 20% when those under 60 had a 99.9% survival rate with the far more deadly Delta variant?

Does our CFR of over 50% for those over 90 show the epidemiologists from Harvard, Stanford and Oxford who wrote the Great Barrington Declaration were right with saying we should focus protection on the elderly? Did Fauci call these people fringe epidemiologists?
History shows the GBD nailed it and Fauci was a huge failure.

Have a look on CDC data thread i posted what are the major risks for Covid?
Did it say Age, Obesity and Diabetes were the 3 major risks?
Did it also show those who died had 3 or more comorbidities?

With our 99.9% survival rate for those under 60 i wonder how many of the 0.1% who died were Obese or had diabetes.