Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Rushed Covid 19 vaccine

13567…19

Comments

  • #62
    5GMadeMeDoIt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37 ✭5GMadeMeDoIt


    A question for the ones who wont take the vaccine. If after 9 months to a year after the release and billions of people have taken the vaccine with little or no negative side effects, will you take it then?


  • #63
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    I've highlighted it as an issue because it is showing that someone could have potentially already have suffered an adverse reaction to one of the vaccines in production.

    Obviously if the issue is resolved and the cause is proven to not be related to the vaccine then the trials can resume.

    You've already stated you will not be taking the vaccine. So it doesn't matter about the trials, the results, further development, regulatory response, etc. You've judged it before we know anything about it's effectiveness or safety.

    As you've said this is based on your personal opinion about things that are "rushed", that's fine, but it's a bias and preconceived notion. The vaccine could turn out to be one of the safest in history, but as mentioned you aren't interested in that, you have already pre-judged it.


  • #64
    FutureTeashock
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 439 ✭✭FutureTeashock


    5GMadeMeDoIt wrote: »
    A question for the ones who wont take the vaccine. If after 9 months to a year after the release and billions of people have taken the vaccine with little or no negative side effects, will you take it then?

    Bill Gates himself said the negative effects could take 2 years or more to manifest, so the answer is no, nay, never.


  • #65
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    5GMadeMeDoIt wrote: »
    A question for the ones who wont take the vaccine. If after 9 months to a year after the release and billions of people have taken the vaccine with little or no negative side effects, will you take it then?

    Yes. Although at that stage there may be no reason to


  • #66
    5GMadeMeDoIt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37 ✭5GMadeMeDoIt


    FutureTeashock wrote: »
    Bill Gates himself said the negative effects could take 2 years or more to manifest, so the answer is no, nay, never.

    You believe what Bill Gates says?


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    An excuse to cover themselves overall if the vaccine causes serious side effects. Dreamt up by lawyers and board members.

    Which is your personal take. I also read the article, and it appears they are trying to cover themselves against particular liabilities.


  • #68
    Dionaibh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 734 ✭✭✭Dionaibh


    Jose Substantial Armada wrote: »
    Indeed, would agree, all I've ever said is that it's exactly that: "an interesting coincidence". Also that there "may be something in it, and also...
    ....that there might not".

    Never have I said that Bill was a Satanist (this is a false claim from both KM & Joe), they (both athiests) appear to lump religion into every one of their posts, perhaps to avoid, and distract from looking at actual uncomfortable science based evidence.

    Also, Gate's patent for QDT (covid immunity certification) isn't in itself the MOTB, it's simple a digital 'identifer of the person' that is all, (by digitally scanning the point of vaccine) https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2019018301A1/en

    Now, anyone actually really interested in the (seperate) topic of MOTB, would look elsewhere e.g. Microsoft's other, seperate (i.e. non covid) patent: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020060606

    What you're saying sounds reasonable to me. I fear that the issue is more with the Bible and religion being invol


  • #69
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Jose Substantial Armada wrote: »
    Indeed, would agree, all I've ever said is that it's exactly that: "an interesting coincidence". Also that there "may be something in it, and also...
    ....that there might not".

    Never have I said that Bill was a Satanist (this is a false claim from both KM & Joe), they (both athiests) appear to lump religion into every one of their posts, perhaps to avoid, and distract from looking at actual uncomfortable science based evidence.

    Also, Gate's patent for QDT (covid immunity certification) isn't in itself the MOTB, it's simple a digital 'identifer of the person' that is all, (by digitally scanning the point of vaccine) https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2019018301A1/en

    Now, anyone actually really interested in the (seperate) topic of MOTB, would look elsewhere e.g. Microsoft's other, seperate (i.e. non covid) patent: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2020060606

    As has been established in other threads you do believe in biblical prophecies. So what's your take on a Corona vaccine, will it be used to "mark" people as part of some plan to "control" them somehow?

    Or will it just be a plain vanilla vaccine against the virus


  • #70
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    Which is your personal take. I also read the article, and it appears they are trying to cover themselves against particular liabilities.

    I cant imagine they would get protection if they applied by directly saying if the vaccine goes wrong it's not our fault.

    This is complete protection through the back door and gives an opportunity to have a team of corporate lawyers pick any admission of fault apart in a courtroom

    Like Johnson and Johnson and a host of other giants who have payed and are continuing to
    pay out multi million euro settlements these companies will naturally look to protect themselves.

    The vaccine is being rushed. It's no secret. Protection from lawsuits will be no1 priority with these companies.

    Remember Monsanto and their weed killer? Nobody wants a repeat of that on that scale.


  • #71
    Dionaibh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 734 ✭✭✭Dionaibh


    5GMadeMeDoIt wrote: »
    You believe what Bill Gates says?

    His predictions have a habit of coming true, and he has extraordinary influence on global health.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,358 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    You've already stated you will not be taking the vaccine. So it doesn't matter about the trials, the results, further development, regulatory response, etc. You've judged it before we know anything about it's effectiveness or safety.

    As you've said this is based on your personal opinion about things that are "rushed", that's fine, but it's a bias and preconceived notion. The vaccine could turn out to be one of the safest in history, but as mentioned you aren't interested in that, you have already pre-judged it.

    No you're the one that is judging me and my opinions based on me not wanting to take a vaccine.

    As I've already stated: In a perfect world the vaccines would be developed without anyone suffering side effects and the people that want to take would be free to do safe in the knowledge that their won't be any potential negative consequences to their health as a result of them taking the vaccine.

    I'd rather a safe vaccine was developed as it would obviously provide comfort and reassurance to many people and to suggest otherwise is a lie and an unfair assumption.

    Like I've said above a safe vaccine is better for everyone and I'm not wishing or hoping that the vaccine is unsafe or will cause side effects but don't let that stop you for making those false and unsubstantiated allegations against me.

    Do you really believe that a rushed vaccine or consumer good is just as safe as a vaccine or consumer good that has undergone a longer and more comprehensive development process?


  • #73
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,358 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    5GMadeMeDoIt wrote: »
    A question for the ones who wont take the vaccine. If after 9 months to a year after the release and billions of people have taken the vaccine with little or no negative side effects, will you take it then?

    No because if the vast majority have taken the vaccine then the risk of me getting covid would be even lower than before the vaccine was administered and if there are little or few negative side effects associated with the vaccine I stilll wouldn't take it as I've stated previously I'd be more worried about the side effects from taking the vaccine rather than from getting covid which I would be at a lower risk of getting due to most people being vaccinated.


  • #74
    FutureTeashock
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 439 ✭✭FutureTeashock


    5GMadeMeDoIt wrote: »
    You believe what Bill Gates says?

    The Bill and Melinda gates foundation is ploughing billions of dollars into these vaccines and the WHO.


  • #75
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    I cant imagine they would get protection if they applied by directly saying if the vaccine goes wrong it's not our fault.

    This is complete protection through the back door and gives an opportunity to have a team of corporate lawyers pick any admission of fault apart in a courtroom

    Like Johnson and Johnson and a host of other giants who have payed and are continuing to
    pay out multi million euro settlements these companies will naturally look to protect themselves.

    The vaccine is being rushed. It's no secret. Protection from lawsuits will be no1 priority with these companies.

    Remember Monsanto and their weed killer? Nobody wants a repeat of that on that scale.

    They aren't allowed to give themselves blanket protection. As the article says they are looking to protect themselves from lawsuits arising from e.g. unrelated illnesses, which makes sense.


  • #76
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »
    No you're the one that is judging me and my opinions based on me not wanting to take a vaccine.

    I'm pointing out the lack of logic in your position. You have made a personal decision not to take a Covid-19 vaccine despite the fact that the vaccine isn't finished yet and we don't know it's effectiveness.

    It's final effectiveness ans safety is irrelevant to you, as you've already made the decision. You've decided that because the vaccine is being fast-tracked, that alone rules it out. Which is absurd when you think about it, because it could turn out to be an effective, relatively safe vaccine.

    A much more logical position would be to judge the final product


  • #77
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    They aren't allowed to give themselves blanket protection. As the article says they are looking to protect themselves from lawsuits arising from e.g. unrelated illnesses, which makes sense.

    That is what I mean. A team of corporate lawyers will pull any lawsuit apart stating it is an unrelated illness .

    Anyone who believes that these pharma giants haven't done their legal homework and dont have a robust defense at the ready are fooling themselves or are very naive.
    It's a potential vaccine being rushed. It has the potential to sell hundreds of millions of doses at a minimum. A golden goose.

    I don't mean you but people in general


  • #78
    Dionaibh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 734 ✭✭✭Dionaibh


    FutureTeashock wrote: »
    The Bill and Melinda gates foundation is ploughing billions of dollars into these vaccines and the WHO.

    Exactly right. Gates controls the WHO.


  • #79
    LessOutragePlz
    Registered Users Posts: 1,358 ✭✭✭LessOutragePlz


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    I'm pointing out the lack of logic in your position. You have made a personal decision not to take a Covid-19 vaccine despite the fact that the vaccine isn't finished yet and we don't know it's effectiveness.

    It's final effectiveness ans safety is irrelevant to you, as you've already made the decision. You've decided that because the vaccine is being fast-tracked, that alone rules it out. Which is absurd when you think about it, because it could turn out to be an effective, relatively safe vaccine.

    A much more logical position would be to judge the final product

    My logic is based on the fact that any consumer good but especially a vaccine that is rushed is at a higher risk of being less effective and runs a greater risk of causing more negative side effects.

    It would be helpful if you could answer the question below as it is the basis for my logical conclusion.

    Do you believe that a rushed vaccine or consumer good is just as safe as a vaccine or consumer good that has undergone a longer and more comprehensive development process?

    If the vaccine turns out to be safe then that's great and I hope it does but me saying that it is at a higher risk of it having more negative side effects is a perfectly logical conclusion when you take into consideration the fact that it will be a rushed vaccine in comparison to all other previous vaccines that have been produced.


  • #80
    Sconsey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭Sconsey


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    I cant imagine they would get protection if they applied by directly saying if the vaccine goes wrong it's not our fault.

    This is complete protection through the back door and gives an opportunity to have a team of corporate lawyers pick any admission of fault apart in a courtroom

    Like Johnson and Johnson and a host of other giants who have payed and are continuing to
    pay out multi million euro settlements these companies will naturally look to protect themselves.

    The vaccine is being rushed. It's no secret. Protection from lawsuits will be no1 priority with these companies.

    Remember Monsanto and their weed killer? Nobody wants a repeat of that on that scale.

    Yes and what about World War 1? we don't want to see a repeat of that either, it's about as relevant to the vaccine as Roundup.


  • #81
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Sconsey wrote: »
    Yes and what about World War 1? we don't want to see a repeat of that either, it's about as relevant to the vaccine as Roundup.

    Its corporations covering their arse. Vaccine is rushed. Much money to be made. Hurry hurry


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Sconsey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,554 ✭✭✭Sconsey


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    Its corporations covering their arse. Vaccine is rushed. Much money to be made. Hurry hurry

    If that is how you choose to view it then yeah sure. Thankfully most people don't, and this view is relegated to Conspiracy Theories where it belongs.


  • #83
    FutureTeashock
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 439 ✭✭FutureTeashock


    Sconsey wrote: »
    If that is how you choose to view it then yeah sure. Thankfully most people don't, and this view is relegated to Conspiracy Theories where it belongs.

    The pharmaceutical industry is now the most poorly regarded industry in Americans' eyes, ranking last on a list of 25 industries that Gallup tests annually. Americans are more than twice as likely to rate the pharmaceutical industry negatively (58%) as positively (27%), giving it a net-positive score of -31.

    https://news.gallup.com/poll/266060/big-pharma-sinks-bottom-industry-rankings.aspx?


  • #84
    Smee_Again
    Registered Users Posts: 1,985 ✭✭✭Smee_Again


    FutureTeashock wrote: »

    It is absolutely right to question not just the "warp speed" at which these vaccinations are being thrown together, but the very nature of the experimental technology, which involves altering the DNA of those who choose to take it.

    Still waiting on a source for this DNA altering claim.


  • #85
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    LessOutragePlz wrote: »

    Do you believe that a rushed vaccine or consumer good is just as safe as a vaccine or consumer good that has undergone a longer and more comprehensive development process?

    I don't know the processes behind, so I can't answer on specifics. In my job we took a one month process and compressed it into a week, why? because it was an exceptional situation, how? by taking expensive measures to triple shift and speed up every aspect of that process. There were no issues. Another type of process might have suffered. It all depends on what aspects are being sped up and how.

    Could there be a higher risk due to the faster process? yes, but I'm not in a position to judge those as a lay-person

    Could it be just as safe as a vaccine that undergoes the normal process? possibly not, but again, I don't know the details

    Could the vaccine be less effective due to the faster process? possibly

    However it would be illogical for anyone to write it off now when we don't know the final results or effectiveness. As mentioned a Covid 19 vaccine could be highly effective despite this exceptional faster process

    Your position is that you don't care how effective it turns out to be - you've already written it off before it's finished because according to your beliefs: if anything is "rushed", it's automatically more risky


  • #86
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Sconsey wrote: »
    If that is how you choose to view it then yeah sure. Thankfully most people don't, and this view is relegated to Conspiracy Theories where it belongs.
    To be fair to the poster, the Pharma industry have made millions/billions on the back of the opiod epedemic already in the US. As a result just of this single action of profit-seeking, the population lifespan of the world's wealthiest nation is, and has been, in decline for some years as a direct result.

    This is not a wild theory, that is a sad statistic.


  • #87
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Jose Substantial Armada wrote: »
    To be fair to the poster, the Pharma industry have made millions/billions on the back of the opiod epedemic already in the US. As a result just of this single action of profit-seeking, the population lifespan of the world's wealthiest nation is, and has been, in decline for some years as a direct result.

    This is not a wild theory, that is a sad statistic.

    According to the CDC there has been a decrease in life expectancy in the US due to suicides and drug overdoses (namely abuse of fentanyl, fentanyl analogs and tramadol)

    Implicating pharmaceutical companies is like implicating rope producing companies in suicides.


  • #88
    ExMachina1000
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,748 ✭✭✭ExMachina1000


    Sconsey wrote: »
    If that is how you choose to view it then yeah sure. Thankfully most people don't, and this view is relegated to Conspiracy Theories where it belongs.

    This is a race for a vaccine like never seen before. This is also a race for a product that can potentially sell to every individual on the planet if governments provide the money. The profit to be made here is eye watering.

    If you dont believe that the potential for profit is a motivating factor possibly the most motivating factor you are a very naive individual.


  • #89
    4068ac1elhodqr
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,586 ✭✭✭4068ac1elhodqr


    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    As has been established in other threads you do believe in biblical prophecies.

    News to me, I have said (again....) they're 'very interesting', and that there may be something in them, and also, that there may well not be.

    A bit like if a weather forcaster 2kyrs ago forecasting heavy rain, SSW wind at 20knts, and 17oC for exactly 15:00hrs tommorow, at a very specific geographical location.
    It does not happen: fine. It happens: well that does appear to be an accurate, timely and precise prediction. Let's wait, without bias, and see tommorow.
    Dohnjoe wrote: »
    So what's your take on a Corona vaccine, will it be used to "mark" people as part of some plan to "control" them somehow?
    A vaccine 'injection' by itself, won't visually mark someone in the technical or meaningful sense, how can it.

    However the best of class, Gates paid-for solution, to the huge issue of immunity certification (combined with any vaccine, using nano technologies, not injection) is by it's very technical definition a 'mark', in fact it's desbribed here as an embodiment (in and on) the person.

    It is also by it's detailed description, importantly, a unique 'digital identifer of a person', along of course with their medical history stored as digital scanable data point, very similar to a QRCode which many of us will shortly be scanning as a means of entry processing, to physical locations and services.


  • #90
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    ExMachina1000 wrote: »
    This is a race for a vaccine like never seen before. This is also a race for a product that can potentially sell to every individual on the planet if governments provide the money. The profit to be made here is eye watering.

    If you dont believe that the potential for profit is a motivating factor possibly the most motivating factor you are a very naive individual.

    Businesses and companies make revenue, what's your point?

    This comes across as an empty appeal to motive fallacy. Just because there's money to be made doesn't automatically mean that something nefarious is afoot.

    For example, if a company makes positive net revenue from life-saving drugs, or ventilators or dialysis machines doesn't necessarily mean... anything. If, however, you are accusing Covid-19 vaccine makers of taking shortcuts for profit, okay, but what are they?

    If that's not it, then what are you actually suggesting?


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Dohnjoe
    Registered Users Posts: 17,747 ✭✭✭✭Dohnjoe


    Jose Substantial Armada wrote: »

    A vaccine 'injection' by itself, won't visually mark someone in the technical or meaningful sense, how can it.

    However the best of class, Gates paid-for solution, to the huge issue of immunity certification (combined with any vaccine, using nano technologies, not injection) is by it's very technical definition a 'mark', in fact it's desbribed here as an embodiment (in and on) the person.

    It is also by it's detailed description, importantly, a unique 'digital identifer of a person', along of course with their medical history stored as digital scanable data point, very similar to a QRCode which many of us will shortly be scanning as a means of entry processing, to physical locations and services.

    Any Covid related vaccine made by Bill Gates will contain some sort of mark or any vaccine endorsed by Gates or any vaccine (partially) funded? which?

    To be clear, if I receive a vaccine approved/endorsed/funded by Bill Gates, I will also be receiving some sort of "mark", correct?

    What does this "mark" do, and what's it's purpose?

    Do you believe the bible prophesized people being "marked" with something in this century, yes or no?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement