Despite warning, WHO OK with Thai plan of mixing vaccines

[BookShe]

It's also quite controversial that many people snore, inject, inhale drugs purchased from a reliable dealer, but at the same time, these people are quite picky to get a vaccine from a shady biotech company.

[Stonker]

37 minutes ago, BookShe said:

I'm surprised that you are still explaining the cheese-moon rabbit hole :))))))

So am I!

[andytime]

The authorities seem to be doing a great job at dividing society.  If you believe in big pharma, bureaucrats, health officials and governments -  great, and good luck.  There seem to be lots of porky pies in stories to date. Others don't believe the official narrative for many good reasons - we are not anti vaxxers per se... but probably listened, believed or experienced what George Carlin talks about when describing government and big business.  Reuters is Rothschild owned so I suggest getting medical or factual news from someone else.  The suppression of any outpatient treatment protocol should be a concern to one and sundry -  period.  Good luck if you think that is not big pharma and government driven.  If you think mRNA vaccines are safe great and good luck - check back soon as officially killed tens of thousands after they had a go (normally most drug trials stopped after killing 20-50). Given some of the potential outcomes noted that may end up being many multiples more in the not too distant future.  Equally, I think others (myself included) have the right to believe in experienced doctors who are not compromised, not bought and have little or no benefit to gain (only harassments) from speaking their mind.  Anyone who wants to vaccinate children (et al) with "experimental" no liability drugs really belongs in jail.  Interesting times indeed...

[BookShe]

32 minutes ago, andytime said:

but probably listened, believed or experienced what George Carlin talks about when describing government and big business.

 

Carlin was the best. On the other hand, I'm not a big fan of big pharma or an advocate for this or that vaccines. "We" don't want to change your opinion either.

But. If somebody makes a bold statement parroted by the right-wing media, we have the right to point out the obvious lies and misinformation. Opinions yes, claims and statements from civilians no.

 

Edited July 17, 2021 by BookShe

[Stonker]

2 hours ago, Thaichris said:

Stonker is suggesting to us that mRNA in a vaccine  is somehow different to mRNA in normal life.

No I'm not.

 

2 hours ago, Thaichris said:

He claims that vaccine mRNA cannot incorporate into DNA because ‘that’s not what it was designed to do’.

And no, neither have I claimed that.

 

I may be giving "us" too much credit, but I think that most people here are able to make up their own minds on what's been said without needing your novel interpretation.

2 hours ago, Thaichris said:

I gave one example of his flawed theory- The Thomas Jefferson University article (and yes I have been to the submission AND the University Website)

You evidently didn't read it very carefully, if at all, otherwise you couldn't fail to have noticed that what you'd said was "unique" wasn't, as that was just bad reporting.

 

2 hours ago, Thaichris said:

I don’t think the statement could be much clearer.

It would be if it was in context, but that's clearly a concept that's alien to you!

 

2 hours ago, Thaichris said:

It is ludicrous to suggest that as soon as it is a vaccine mRNA it is somehow different and 'safe'.

Which is very probably why nobody ever has!

2 hours ago, Thaichris said:

The question from people was ‘Is it possible that it could be incorporated into your DNA. And the answer is ‘Yes’. Not highly likely, but possible.

No it wasn't!

 

That's not even remotely correct,, and as accurate as the rest of your comment.

 

There was no "question".

 

There was a statement from @mic that "Nobody knows what happens with your DNA after vaccinated with mRNA vaccine.

Even experts are not sure what will happen."

 

The statement was easily verifiable as incorrect on all counts, so rather than try to support it the thread was de-railed yet again by the usual suspects and yet again I was stupid enough to follow them chasing Russell's teapot down the rabbit hole.

[Stonker]

34 minutes ago, andytime said:

Equally, I think others (myself included) have the right to believe in experienced doctors who are not compromised, not bought and have little or no benefit to gain (only harassments) from speaking their mind.

Even if they're a convicted felon who pled guilty to 13 counts of fraud, who's had their licence suspended indefinitely???

 

On that note, I think I'll move on ...

[SickBuffalo]

1 hour ago, JohninDubin said:

During the COVID-19 pandemic, misinformation was widely spread claiming that ivermectin was beneficial for treating and preventing COVID-19.[15] Such claims are not backed by sound evidence.[16][17][18][19][20]

John, I am pro vaccine, in particular the Pfizer shot, and I have very little patience for people recycling nonsense that has been thoroughly disproven.

It is, however, true that the whole question of using existing prophylactics and treatments to augment vaccines in the fight against Covid has been ludicrously politicized. Wikipedia, usually a good resource, is one of the frontlines for what is, effectively, a culture war.

There are also significant financial interests in discouraging the use of any cheap, out-of-patent medicine. This pandemic has revealed how broken our system of science and medical administration is. I believe that regulatory capture is going to be a huge issue in the aftermath.

In my opinion, the evidence for Ivermectin is credible, widespread, and compelling. The people I listen to are not whackos but, in the current climate, any scientists who try to discuss this are hit pretty hard with the ban-hammer. It is actually fascinating to watch the suppression because there is a very good chance that they will shortly have to perform a complete reversal.

My prediction is that if, as appears to be already happening, the effectiveness of the vaccines falters in the face of Delta, within a year Ivermectin, or a stack containing Ivermectin, will be in widespread use throughout the world to bolster the vaccines and to provide some level of protection to the billions of people who do not have any access to vaccines.

[ThaiFoodGuy]

13 hours ago, bushav8r said:

Canada has been mixing and matching vaccines.

When I went for my 2nd dose, the nurse just readied her syringe without saying a word about which vaccine she was about to administer. I had to ask. And then, when she told me it was Moderna, I told her my first dose was Pfizer and that I won't be allowed into Thailand if I receive a mixed dose. She rolled her eyes and sighed dramatically, but she went and got a Pfizer dose for my wife and I.

She then lectured us about how we should be grateful to get whatever we can get and shouldn't be so entitled. I pointed out that getting a mixed dose isn't a 2nd dose, it's two FIRST doses, and she again rolled her eyes and said "whatever".

[JohninDublin]

2 hours ago, Stonker said:

Because there aren't.

It's like saying we didn't need a polio vaccine because we already had the iron lung.

True story: I had polio as child and was caught in the last great epidemic in 1956, and recall being in an Iron Lung. To give you some idea of how much things have progressed since that time, I mentioned thos to my doctor, and was amazed to discover that he had never heard of an Iron Lung.

[SickBuffalo]

17 minutes ago, ThaiFoodGuy said:

she told me it was Moderna, I told her my first dose was Pfizer and that I won't be allowed into Thailand if I receive a mixed dose. She rolled her eyes and sighed dramatically, but she went and got a Pfizer dose for my wife and I.

She then lectured us about how we should be grateful to get whatever we can get and shouldn't be so entitled. I pointed out that getting a mixed dose isn't a 2nd dose, it's two FIRST doses, and she again rolled her eyes and said "whatever".

Shocking incompetence and ignorance which almost had dire consequences for you. She should be bounced right out of that job.

[BookShe]

24 minutes ago, JohninDubin said:

True story: I had polio as child and was caught in the last great epidemic in 1956, and recall being in an Iron Lung. To give you some idea of how much things have progressed since that time, I mentioned thos to my doctor, and was amazed to discover that he had never heard of an Iron Lung.

For some reason, we called the iron lung in Hungary iron maiden. Long before the great band. The iron maiden was a torture device everywhere else. :)

[BlueSphinx]

38 minutes ago, ThaiFoodGuy said:

When I went for my 2nd dose, the nurse just readied her syringe without saying a word about which vaccine she was about to administer. I had to ask. And then, when she told me it was Moderna, I told her my first dose was Pfizer and that I won't be allowed into Thailand if I receive a mixed dose. She rolled her eyes and sighed dramatically, but she went and got a Pfizer dose for my wife and I.

She then lectured us about how we should be grateful to get whatever we can get and shouldn't be so entitled. I pointed out that getting a mixed dose isn't a 2nd dose, it's two FIRST doses, and she again rolled her eyes and said "whatever".

Thanks for sharing your experience.  For sure if you had mentioned 'informed consent' that nurse's eyes would have popped out of her head...

[JohninDublin]

8 minutes ago, SickBuffalo said:

John, I am pro vaccine, in particular the Pfizer shot, and I have very little patience for people recycling nonsense that has been thoroughly disproven.

It is, however, true that the whole question of using existing prophylactics and treatments to augment vaccines in the fight against Covid has been ludicrously politicized. Wikipedia, usually a good resource, is one of the frontlines for what is, effectively, a culture war.

There are also significant financial interests in discouraging the use of any cheap, out-of-patent medicine. This pandemic has revealed how broken our system of science and medical administration is. I believe that regulatory capture is going to be a huge issue in the aftermath.

In my opinion, the evidence for Ivermectin is credible, widespread, and compelling. The people I listen to are not whackos but, in the current climate, any scientists who try to discuss this are hit pretty hard with the ban-hammer. It is actually fascinating to watch the suppression because there is a very good chance that they will shortly have to perform a complete reversal.

My prediction is that if, as appears to be already happening, the effectiveness of the vaccines falters in the face of Delta, within a year Ivermectin, or a stack containing Ivermectin, will be in widespread use throughout the world to bolster the vaccines and to provide some level of protection to the billions of people who do not have any access to vaccines.

Regarding my views on Ivermectin, as I said in my response to @BlueSphinxI have only just heard of the drug. My quick researches suggests that the evidence is controversial. I am not committed one way or another to passing judgement in such a short time.

You and i both appear to be on the same page wondering how much of the anti-vax stories is being funded by Big Pharma worried that they might lose out on the CV gold rush. That is not to to say that we should dismiss the posts of contributors like @BlueSphinxBut there is at least one poster on here, whose willingness to believe every anti-vax story when a few minutes research would reveal would reveal the flaws in his belief system are beyond belief.

I am a great believer in vaccines, but I do start out as mildly agnostic to the extent that my initial response  is  "Lets see what happens when they have jabbed a few million people in 6 months time. I know that this will not protect me in cases such as I mentioned in my wife's cases of drugs taking 20+ years to show their worst characteristics. On the other hand I have underlying health conditions which suggest that Iwill npt be around long enough to find out about this. Alternately, the risk of my catching CV  and it possibly killing me, is very real.

So that people understand my general enthusiasm for vaxxes, I will tell you of my own experiences. I was quite a sickly child. and 1956-7 was a terrible time for me. As well as the childhood diseases of measles and whooping cough which could be fatal or lead to permanent disability, in 1956/7 I spent 5 months in hospital with meningitis. I was home a month, and then spent 6 months back in the hospital, just about the time, Salk developed his vax. That vax in itself, is a tribute to the effectiveness of vaccines. 1956 was the last epidemic of polio in the UK. A year later, cases were in the handfuls due to widespread vaxxing.

At the age, I caught mumps. That has made me sterile, and it's one of the saddest things in my life that I never could become a father. 

There is now a vax available for all 5 of these diseases. I have no doubts about the emotional harm that my illnesses inflicted on my parents at the time and I am sure that as they got older and heard about these new vaxxes, they would probably have thought, "I really wish we had them when our son was a child"

[JohninDublin]

2 hours ago, Stonker said:

You've fallen for the BS, JiD - I'm surprised at you.

It's got nothing to do with "Indian courts". 

It's a private case where she's being sued, nothing more - and so far the case has only been registered, which means that she's onlyrequired to give a reply / answer / response, and it probably won't even get to court at all and will end with statements - it's just Indian politics.

I think you misunderstood my post. It was @BlueSphinxwho raised the issue, and my response was effectively, "And I should take this seriously based on my expectations of the Indian courts"? I agree with your view of the likely outcome.

I don't know if it's the case in India, but in a lot of jurisdictions, there are stringent rules against what advertising lawyers may indulge in. One of the ways to get around this is by telling the media of a high profile case you are involved. It may not have happened in this case, but it is not unusual to see the  interview given to the media, something along the lines if, "Mr Singh, a partner in the legal firm of Patel and Gupta said..." and suddenly lakhs of free advertising,

[JohninDublin]

1 hour ago, ThaiFoodGuy said:

When I went for my 2nd dose, the nurse just readied her syringe without saying a word about which vaccine she was about to administer. I had to ask. And then, when she told me it was Moderna, I told her my first dose was Pfizer and that I won't be allowed into Thailand if I receive a mixed dose. She rolled her eyes and sighed dramatically, but she went and got a Pfizer dose for my wife and I.

She then lectured us about how we should be grateful to get whatever we can get and shouldn't be so entitled. I pointed out that getting a mixed dose isn't a 2nd dose, it's two FIRST doses, and she again rolled her eyes and said "whatever".

Wow!  Even is she had been having a bad day, that was inexcusable.

[bushav8r]

8 hours ago, SickBuffalo said:

Shocking incompetence and ignorance which almost had dire consequences for you. She should be bounced right out of that job.

She is just the one  poking you with the needle.  She is following government policy and doing her job.

[SickBuffalo]

8 hours ago, bushav8r said:

She is just the one  poking you with the needle.  She is following government policy and doing her job.

There is actually a fair amount of attention-to-detail required. The ultimate responsibility for double-checking that the recipient is getting the right shot always falls upon the vaccinator.

That is why you have to bring along your card from the first shot, and why they ask questions that you have already answered several times.

At this time, there is no Thai government policy to mix Moderna and Pfizer. Thaifoodguy was quite correct that it would cause him serious travel problems. It would also render him unable to board any international flight once countries start refusing entry to the unvaccinated at the end of this year.

If this is typical of how the vaccinator does her job, she is a time-bomb. Most of the thousands of people she scuppers won't even realize it until they turn up at an airport.

[Objectivance]

On 7/16/2021 at 11:22 PM, Stonker said:

Sorry, but I can't be bothered to prove the moon's not made of cheese to you or anyone 

You may have gained some traction with "well I can't prove it, I just have faith" as your profound rebuttal, instead. 

[bushav8r]

15 hours ago, SickBuffalo said:

There is actually a fair amount of attention-to-detail required. The ultimate responsibility for double-checking that the recipient is getting the right shot always falls upon the vaccinator.

That is why you have to bring along your card from the first shot, and why they ask questions that you have already answered several times.

At this time, there is no Thai government policy to mix Moderna and Pfizer. Thaifoodguy was quite correct that it would cause him serious travel problems. It would also render him unable to board any international flight once countries start refusing entry to the unvaccinated at the end of this year.

If this is typical of how the vaccinator does her job, she is a time-bomb. Most of the thousands of people she scuppers won't even realize it until they turn up at an airport.

No cards here in Canada.  Many people simply get up and leave if they are not  getting the vaccine that they want.  Pfizer seems to be the vaccine of choice. The Canadian government maintains that it's policy of mixing vaccines will be accepted by foreign governments as international standards are developed and put in place.  It appears other countries are now allowing vaccines to be mixed in a desperate attempt to get as many people vaccinated as possible.  I have had two shots of Moderna, but don't have a Covid "passport".  I hope as things get sorted out I will be free to travel sometime later this year.

[SickBuffalo]

5 hours ago, bushav8r said:

No cards here in Canada. 

That is astonishing. It is standard practice globally to give people a paper card with the details of their first shot, so that they have the info to hand when they go for their second shot. They are also meant to put the sticker from the vial onto your card, so they can track the batch if necessary. Not sure why Canada would deviate from a simple standard system that works.

5 hours ago, bushav8r said:

The Canadian government maintains that it's policy of mixing vaccines will be accepted by foreign governments as international standards are developed and put in place.

There are no international standards. Each country or bloc only accepts as vaccinated foreigners who received the vaccine they, themselves, have authorized. Right now, there are people in the UK who cannot travel to the EU as fully-vaccinated because they had AstraZeneca produced in a country that the EU does not yet source AstraZeneca from (India).

5 hours ago, bushav8r said:

It appears other countries are now allowing vaccines to be mixed in a desperate attempt to get as many people vaccinated as possible.

Yes, the priority of the governments is to be able to point to a successful vaccination campaign. The ability of people to travel later is not something most governments are worrying about right now. It is up to individuals to think ahead.

5 hours ago, bushav8r said:

I have had two shots of Moderna, but don't have a Covid "passport". 

Many less developed countries have not yet introduced a national covid certification system. Most will probably base their system on the EU one. Japan, for example, has already done this.
 

[m3oody]

On 7/16/2021 at 11:20 AM, Stonker said:

Yes, that's what the JFU research showed last month, but what's the relevance?

I said that "they've  said repeatedly and consistently that mRNA vaccines cannot affect DNA - that it's simply impossible."  As has been said elsewhere, that's not what they're designed to do and not what they can do.  You've now said that what I said is "not correct".

On what basis? 

The JFU research doesn't claim to have anything to do with the recent mRNA vaccines, nor that they have the "polymerase theta"  -  or similar, as if you read the actual JFU report rather than media reports it's the most efficient but not unique as you described it.  

What they're saying is that hypothetically it can be done, that RNA can alter DNA - not that it's ever been done in a vaccine, or that it can be done with the mRNA vaccines as they are now, or that it's possible to do with the vaccines as they are now.

Sorry, but you've not only taken one piece of research that has yet to be peer reviewed, but you've drawn parallels with the mRNA vaccines that the authors don't. 

the relevance is the REASON they said it's not possible, which you seem to have missed entirely.

The whole reason it was supposedly impossible was because it was believed humans lacked reverse transcriptase.  They don't.  we all have a highly efficient one, actually.

So if that's the reason it's not possible... then the logical conclusion is that it's a reality.

It's definitely happening, as there was evidence in 2020 that covid itself could write itself to the genome and everyone wondered why / demonized the research as "potentially dangerous"... polymerase theta is the answer.

Your characterization of this was also a little off.  They straight PROVED it can write RNA to DNA.

[Stonker]

7 hours ago, m3oody said:

the relevance is the REASON they said it's not possible, which you seem to have missed entirely.

The whole reason it was supposedly impossible was because it was believed humans lacked reverse transcriptase.  They don't.  we all have a highly efficient one, actually.

So if that's the reason it's not possible... then the logical conclusion is that it's a reality.

It's definitely happening, as there was evidence in 2020 that covid itself could write itself to the genome and everyone wondered why / demonized the research as "potentially dangerous"... polymerase theta is the answer.

Your characterization of this was also a little off.  They straight PROVED it can write RNA to DNA.

No, I haven't "missed" anything, I've simply gone along with what the WHO said, as did / do all the leading experts, without exception.

None agree with you.

If you know better, then maybe you should tell the WHO and all the leading experts, not me.

I'm sure they'll give your opinion all the attention it deserves.