I thought I'd inject a small amount of truth into this thread.
Trump is overwhelmingly pro vaccine. Just look at all of his
archived tweets, e.g. this one from last month: "Moderna vaccine overwhelmingly approved. Distribution to start immediately."
RNA is not DNA. In theory, the Pfizer vaccine triggers the production of some antibodies by the cell and then gradually decays. In practice, we simply do not know the long term effects. The clinical trial only lasted 6 months and it only tested for the ability of the vaccine to prevent low level COVID symptoms, not deaths, as COVID simply doesn't kill anyone healthy enough to qualify for a vaccine trial. Skepticism about new ways to edit one's genetic code does not in any way involve a rejection of Dalton's laws or other basic chemistry, because basic chemistry and physics cannot at this point accurately predict how a human body is going to respond. Which is why we have clinical trials.
Biden's stimulus bill contains 20 billion reasons to falsify vaccine research. Everyone wants to be in a business where the government forces everyone to consume your product. Also, falsifying science is actually quite straightforward when you have large amounts of money.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Richard Horton
Much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.
|
This guy is the
editor of the Lancet, one of the more prestigious publications. He has all of the alphabet degrees and thousands of citations on google scholar. Consider that all through 2020, labs used 40 rounds of PCR to determine COVID infections even though it was well known at the time that was too many. The WHO and others are now recommending reducing it. Presumably it's just a coincidence that their new recommendations coincide with Biden's inauguration. The obvious thing to do is stop and ask: OK, how many of those COVID cases and deaths were false positives? Of course we can't go back and test dead people! But shouldn't we immediately question the number of COVID deaths?
---
One thing that I am genuinely curious about is whether the corona virus actually exists. The relevant paper appears to be
this one from January 2020 which begins with the following quote:
Quote:
In all of these situations, virus isolates were available as the primary substrate for establishing and controlling assays and assay performance.
In the present case of 2019-nCoV, virus isolates or samples from infected patients have so far not become available to the international public health community. We report here on the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation, designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens.
|
In other words, they are going to develop a test for something that they don't have. I'm open to being convinced, but my background in AI classifiers is screaming that this is impossible.
Quote:
|
Upon release of the first 2019-nCoV sequence at virological.org, three assays were selected based on how well they matched to the 2019-nCoV genome
|
Without the virus isolates how did they get the 2019-nCoV genome? It's worth noting that the
CDC's PCR recommendations still claim that 'no quantified virus isolates are available' (page 42/43) as of last month, a full year later.
01-29-2021, 09:33 AM
Linear Mode
