Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26841582 - 07/23/20 09:22 PM (3 years, 8 months ago)



https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/daily-tests-per-thousand-people-smoothed-7-day?time=2020-04-15..&country=~ARG

Weird. Is China AFK?

Edit. Go ahead, click the link and add a country and see China not being available.

:whattefuck2:


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Edited by HamHead (07/23/20 09:25 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,725
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 minute, 28 seconds
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26841619 - 07/23/20 09:49 PM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Worldometer says China has run 90 million tests


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJokeshopbeard
Humble Student

Registered: 11/30/11
Posts: 26,088
Loc: Deep in the system Flag
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26842022 - 07/24/20 05:49 AM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

HamHead said:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8475639/Catching-colds-protect-Covid-19-scientists-say.html



Wait wait wait wait wait... did you just cite the daily fucking mail as a source? Jesus man, that's a new low for you.

The daily mail is the equivalent of those tabloids here that say shit on the front about bigfoot and aliens eating peoples babies.


--------------------
Let it be seen that you are nothing. And in knowing that you are nothing... there is nothing to lose, there is nothing to gain. What can happen to you? Something can happen to the body, but it will either heal or it won't. What's the big deal? Let life knock you to bits. Let life take you apart. Let life destroy you. It will only destroy what you are not.
--Jac O'keeffe

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: Jokeshopbeard]
    #26842027 - 07/24/20 05:56 AM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Jokeshopbeard said:
Quote:

HamHead said:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8475639/Catching-colds-protect-Covid-19-scientists-say.html



Wait wait wait wait wait... did you just cite the daily fucking mail as a source? Jesus man, that's a new low for you.

The daily mail is the equivalent of those tabloids here that say shit on the front about bigfoot and aliens eating peoples babies.



:notyou:

At least I pull links.

Many times I see people running their mouths with no sources.

Also, why ignore the peer reviewed article posted just above it, saying something very similar?

How's your jimmie feeling today, jsb?

I mixed up a batch of coconut oil/tea tree oil for my hail/beard last night. You can borrow it if you like.

Edited by HamHead (07/24/20 06:00 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJokeshopbeard
Humble Student

Registered: 11/30/11
Posts: 26,088
Loc: Deep in the system Flag
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26842033 - 07/24/20 06:00 AM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Citing and basing ones opinions on bullshit is better than having an opinion not based on and cited in bullshit??

Did I miss the common sense 101 class?


--------------------
Let it be seen that you are nothing. And in knowing that you are nothing... there is nothing to lose, there is nothing to gain. What can happen to you? Something can happen to the body, but it will either heal or it won't. What's the big deal? Let life knock you to bits. Let life take you apart. Let life destroy you. It will only destroy what you are not.
--Jac O'keeffe

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: Jokeshopbeard]
    #26842035 - 07/24/20 06:03 AM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Jokeshopbeard said:
Citing and basing ones opinions on bullshit is better than having an opinion not based on and cited in bullshit??

Did I miss the common sense 101 class?




I will cite more for you, from different sources later today. I have to go to work and don't have time to be copying and pasting right now.

Science is out there.

Why don't you go do your own research, like I'm doing?

Or are you just here to rustle your jimmie?

Edit. I suppose peer reviewed doesn't mean anything?


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Edited by HamHead (07/24/20 06:04 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJokeshopbeard
Humble Student

Registered: 11/30/11
Posts: 26,088
Loc: Deep in the system Flag
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead] * 1
    #26842066 - 07/24/20 06:37 AM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

HamHead said:
I will cite more for you, from different sources later today.



Please don't.

And also no; science, research, and peer reveiwed bollocks means very little to me.

Such things belong in the realm of intellect, not of reason, wisdom, and common sense. To know human nature, through and through, is all that matters to me; and this is learned by experience, not reading.


--------------------
Let it be seen that you are nothing. And in knowing that you are nothing... there is nothing to lose, there is nothing to gain. What can happen to you? Something can happen to the body, but it will either heal or it won't. What's the big deal? Let life knock you to bits. Let life take you apart. Let life destroy you. It will only destroy what you are not.
--Jac O'keeffe

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: Jokeshopbeard]
    #26842457 - 07/24/20 10:57 AM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Quote:

Jokeshopbeard said:
And also no; science, research, and peer reveiwed bollocks means very little to me.

Such things belong in the realm of intellect, not of reason, wisdom, and common sense.




:pleasetellmemore:


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleJokeshopbeard
Humble Student

Registered: 11/30/11
Posts: 26,088
Loc: Deep in the system Flag
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26842475 - 07/24/20 11:10 AM (3 years, 8 months ago)

Loving your sig. I feel like a celebrity!!

LOL. I just read feevs rating of you. That bit about YouTube comments is pure gold.


--------------------
Let it be seen that you are nothing. And in knowing that you are nothing... there is nothing to lose, there is nothing to gain. What can happen to you? Something can happen to the body, but it will either heal or it won't. What's the big deal? Let life knock you to bits. Let life take you apart. Let life destroy you. It will only destroy what you are not.
--Jac O'keeffe

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: Jokeshopbeard]
    #26845583 - 07/26/20 06:52 AM (3 years, 7 months ago)



Very interesting stuff here. If you dare.

Quote:

Jokeshopbeard said:
Loving your sig. I feel like a celebrity!!




Also, considering how celebrities are being viewed these days, it seems fitting you feel like one.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Edited by HamHead (07/26/20 06:54 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26857105 - 08/01/20 11:21 AM (3 years, 7 months ago)



Interesting stuff.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26861346 - 08/03/20 05:59 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2020/07/30/you-must-not-do-your-own-research-when-it-comes-to-science/

"EDITORS' PICK|220,711 views|Jul 30, 2020,02:02am EDT
You Must Not ‘Do Your Own Research’ When It Comes To Science
Ethan SiegelSenior Contributor
Starts With A BangContributor Group
Science
The Universe is out there, waiting for you to discover it. But don't research universe, you won't understand science.

“Research both sides and make up your own mind.” It’s simple, straightforward, common sense advice. And when it comes to issues like vaccinations, climate change, and the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, it can be dangerous, destructive, and even deadly. The techniques that most of us use to navigate most of our decisions in life — gathering information, evaluating it based on what we know, and choosing a course of action — can lead to spectacular failures when it comes to a scientific matter.

The reason is simple: most of us, even those of us who are scientists ourselves, lack the relevant scientific expertise needed to adequately evaluate that research on our own (you're stupid). In our own fields, we are aware of the full suite of data, of how those puzzle pieces fit together, and what the frontiers of our knowledge is. When laypersons (you) espouse opinions on those matters, it’s immediately clear to us where the gaps in their understanding are and where they’ve misled themselves in their reasoning. When they take up the arguments of a contrarian scientist, we recognize what they’re overlooking, misinterpreting, or omitting. Unless we start valuing the actual expertise that legitimate experts have spent lifetimes developing, “doing our own research” could lead to immeasurable, unnecessary suffering.

Let’s start with a simple, low-stakes example: fluoridated drinking water. On the one hand, fluoride is a simple ion that shows up in various concentrations, including naturally through calcium fluoride, in bodies of water all across the world. When humans ingest too little of it, particularly at a young age, it leads to weakened tooth enamel and greater rates of cavities; when humans ingest too much of it, it leads to tooth discoloration and various severities of dental fluorosis. In extreme cases, significantly too much or too little fluoride can also lead to other problems, such as osteoporosis (with too little) or skeletal fluorosis (with too much).

In most places in the United States and Canada, our drinking water is fluoridated at a specific level that’s safe and effective for humans of all ages. In places like Colorado Springs, CO, significant amounts of fluoride are removed from the water, bringing the levels down to acceptable values; in other places, like New York City, NY, fluoride is added to bring the levels up to acceptable values. Controlling the fluoride levels of water is a safe and effective public health intervention, reducing dental caries in children by 40% where it is implemented versus places where it isn’t implemented.

And yet, there are major cities in the world, like Portland, OR or Calgary, Alberta, where the public or city council, respectively, has voted (in the case of Portland, repeatedly) to not add fluoride to their drinking water. As expected, the typical cavity rates in children — when controlled for socioeconomic demographics — are about 40% higher than in places where the water is fluoridated, hitting those of lower economic demographics the hardest. The idea that “our water is natural” and “adding fluoride isn’t” has proven more powerful in swaying public opinion in these locations than the science supporting fluoride’s safety and effectiveness. To the voting public, a fear of chemicals and an affinity for what feels natural was more compelling than the dental health of poor children, despite near-universal support from dental health professionals.

There’s an old saying that I’ve grown quite fond of recently: you can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. When most of us “research” an issue, what we are actually doing is:

formulating an initial opinion the first time we hear about something,
evaluating everything we encounter after that through that lens of our gut instinct,
finding reasons to think positively about the portions of the narrative that support or justify our initial opinion,
and finding reasons to discount or otherwise dismiss the portions that detract from it.

Except, for almost all of us, we can’t. Even those of us with excellent critical thinking skills and lots of experience trying to dig up the truth behind a variety of claims are lacking one important asset: the scientific expertise necessary to understand any finds or claims in the context of the full state of knowledge of your field. It’s part of why scientific consensus is so remarkably valuable: it only exists when the overwhelming majority of qualified professionals all hold the same consistent professional opinion. It truly is one of the most important and valuable types of expertise that humanity has ever developed.

experts.

When it comes to fluoridated drinking water, the consequences may only be mild: cosmetic, barely visible markings on your teeth in the case of over-fluoridation or a slight weakening of your tooth enamel in the case of under-fluoridation. But in the cases of a number of public policy measures — vaccinations, climate change, or the science of the novel coronavirus and the disease it causes in humans, COVID-19 — the stakes are much higher. The consequences of getting it wrong can lead to permanent consequences and may even be a life-or-death matter for many.

When left to their own devices, a substantial fraction of people will choose not to fully vaccinate themselves or their children. In some schools, up to 60% of children can be unvaccinated against preventable diseases such as measles, leading to a resurgence of diseases that should be eradicated. Many parents have a greater fear of adverse consequences from vaccines, despite the fact that — other than skin irritation at the injection sites — medical complications are extraordinarily rare (occurring in far less than 0.01% of patients) and occur no more frequently than random chance would indicate.

The science overwhelmingly indicates that vaccines are one of the safest public health interventions ever undertaken by humanity. But if you “do your own research,” you can find a small percentage of online activists, and even a few medical professionals, who rail against the overwhelming science, pushing discredited claims, fear, and often unproven cures or supplements as well. This fraud-driven controversy created an enormous public health disaster that’s still ongoing today.

Similarly, in the field of climate science, it’s overwhelmingly well-understood that:

the Earth is warming,
and local climate patterns are changing,
caused by changes in the concentration of gases in our atmosphere,
driven by human-caused emission of greenhouse gases from fossil fuels,
and that this is having a number of adverse consequences: causing changes in food supplies, water availability, and land use all across the world.
This has been scientifically known and accepted by the consensus of active climate scientists for more than 30 years, and yet a sustained misinformation campaign — as well as a few contrarian scientists — has sown sufficient doubt that anyone who is determined to “do their own research” can find boatloads of websites and documents confirming whatever conspiratorial line of thought they prefer. It doesn’t change the scientific truth, but it has led to unprecedented inaction in the face of a problem with long-term, negative, planet-wide consequences.

Right now, as we enter the month of August during the year 2020, it’s a critical time for the United States and the world. We’re in the midst of a global pandemic, as the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and the disease it causes in humans, COVID-19, has claimed the lives of more than two-thirds of a million people. In the United States alone, more than 150,000 have died, with each new day adding an average of over 1,000 new deaths at present.

Although there’s still much to learn about the science of this, from how it spreads to who is most likely to spread it to what the best treatments are to the true infection rate and so on, there’s a lot that the scientific experts have achieved a consensus about. In particular:

the disease is airborne and easily spread from person-to-person contact,
it’s more easily spread in indoor settings,
older people are more likely to get critically ill and die from it,
staying home except for essential errands,
and the interventions of wearing masks when you go out, not touching your mask once its on, and remaining physically distant (2 meters/6 feet minimum) from others not in your household are all effective.

But even those basic messages — for which there’s virtually no scientific doubt surrounding them — have sparked enormous amounts of controversy. Despite the safety and efficacy of masks, many are refusing to wear them, leading to spikes in new infections. Despite the importance of avoiding close contact with others not a part of your household, many people continue to visit friends and relatives, accelerating the spread of the disease. Despite the fact that over 150,000 Americans have already died from it, many continue to claim “it’s just like the flu,” even though the last time 150,000 or more Americans died from the flu was 1918: the year of the infamous Spanish flu.

If you “do your own research,” you can no doubt find innumerable websites, social media accounts, and even a handful of medical professionals who are sharing opinions that confirm whatever your preconceived notions about COVID-19 are. However, do not fool yourself: you are not doing research. You are seeking information to confirm your own biases and discredit any contrary opinions. Each time you do this, you exemplify the problem of anti-science bias that Dr. Fauci warned about in June:

“If you go by the evidence and by the data, you’re speaking the truth and it’s amazing sometimes, the denial there is. It’s the same thing that gets people who are anti-vaxxers – who don’t want people to get vaccinated, even though the data clearly indicate the safety of vaccines. That’s really a problem.”

course to follow that novel path instead.

But that requires a kind of transformation within yourself. It means that you need to be humble, and admit that you, yourself, lack the necessary expertise to evaluate the science before you. It means that you need to be brave enough to turn to the consensus of scientific experts and ask, legitimately, what we know at the present stage. And it means you need to be open-minded enough to understand that your preconceptions are quite likely to be wrong in some, many, or possibly even all ways. If we listen to the science, we can attempt to take the best path possible forward through the greatest challenges facing modern society. We can choose to ignore it, but if we do, the consequences will only increase in severity."

You get it, right?

Fluoride.

https://www.webmd.com/baby/news/20190819/could-fluoride-be-bad-for-baby-during-pregnancy

"Fluoride crosses the placenta, and lab studies have shown that the mineral accumulates in brain regions involved in memory and learning, researchers said in background notes. Fluoride also has been shown to alter proteins and neurotransmitters in the central nervous system.

Pregnant women should consider reducing their exposure to fluoride, Till said. That might include avoiding public water sources that are fluoridated, since those account for 70% of fluoride exposure in adults.

"There's absolutely no benefit of fluoride to a fetus or a baby without teeth," Till said. "You're not doing any harm to your baby by reducing your fluoride intake. You can reduce it and your baby will be fine.""

And vaccines.

https://www.stopmandatoryvaccination.com/vaccine-dangers/

"Some of the viruses contaminating vaccines have a known effect, as in the case of the simian virus SV-40 that causes cancer (see Cross-Species Contamination below). Other effects are unknown. In 1975 Gena Bari Kolata wrote an article in the journal Science in which scientists at the FDA admit that all live virus vaccines are “grossly contaminated with phages,” even though it was against FDA regulations at that time. Rather than recall the vaccines, the FDA changed the rules so that a recall wouldn’t cause undue concern for parents. In 1987 the FDA decided this about vaccines: “seed virus used in manufacture shall be demonstrated to be free of extraneous microbial agents except for unavoidable bacteriophage.”[ii] Bovine (cow) serum is a frequently used vaccine growth medium and the most frequently contaminated animal serums with bacteriophage.

Vaccines have many other agents as well as the viruses and contaminants that can cause significant injury (see the full list below) to a child or adult. These injuries include brain swelling and permanent brain injury, seizures and convulsions, blood disorders, and even death. Since 1988 over 3.8 billion dollars in compensation has been paid by the federal government to vaccine victims. And yes, they have paid for autism. Studies have definitively shown that vaccines can result in autism, a disease that has increased from 1 in 10,000 in 1990, to 1 in 150 in 2000, to the current rate of 1 in 68 children. According to the CDC, the most recent numbers breakdown to 1 in 42 boys and 1 in 189 girls diagnosed with autism.

While other environmental assaults are also associated with autism, the increased vaccination schedule can be the trigger or a significant contributing factor especially in children who are predisposed because of other conditions. These other conditions are often unknown and not symptomatic until the vaccine injury triggers a cascade of problems.

In the 1960s only a handful of childhood vaccines were given. The current CDC recommended vaccine schedule for children now has over 30 vaccines by the time a child turns 6 and an additional potential for up to 30 more by the time they reach 18. Could this increase be linked to our declining health? For example, currently:

One in six children in the US has a learning disability
Over 50% suffer from some type of chronic illness.
Cancer is the leading cause of death in our children
Autism rates have soared from 1 in 10,000 in 1990 to 1 in 68 today
Since genetic mutations change slowly over generations, we must look to environmental causes for these changes. While other environmental toxins certainly are at play in these statistics, disregarding the potential role to the amounts of toxin injected into children through vaccines is not only bad public policy, it is bad science. By disregarding the role of vaccines in our statistics for infant mortality and chronic diseases, we could be doing more harm than good in mandating, or even advising, them.

Vaccines: Adverse Effects List
Various vaccines are linked to the following serious adverse reactions:

Anaphylactic shock
Aseptic meningitis, meningitis
Bell’s palsy, facial palsy, isolated cranial nerve palsy
Blood disorders such as thrombocytopenic purpura (a disease that destroys platelets need for clotting)
Brachial neuritis
Cerebrovascular accident (stroke)
Chronic rheumatoid arthritis
Convulsions, seizures, febrile seizure
Death
Encephalopathy and encephalitis (brain swelling)
Hearing loss
Guillain-Barré syndrome
Immune system disorders
Lymphatic system disorders
Multiple sclerosis
Myocarditis
Nervous system disorders
Neurological syndromes including autism
Paralysis and myelitis including transverse myelitis
Peripheral neuropathy
Pneumonia and lower respiratory infections
Skin and tissue disorders including eczema
Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)
Tinnitus (ringing in the ears)
Vaccine-strain versions of chicken pox, measles, mumps, polio, influenza, meningitis, yellow fever, and pertussis
Vasculitis (inflammation of blood vessels)
You can find more adverse reactions reported on the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) database.

Inadequate Testing of Vaccines
The problems associated with vaccines should lead manufacturers to conduct stringent testing. However, quite the opposite is true. In vaccine testing there is:

No cumulative safety testing done prior to licensing
No placebo standard safety testing done
No carcinogenic or mutagenic capacity testing done (even though vaccines contain animal DNA and carcinogens)
No route of exposure research to determine effective safe limits of ingredients
Safety or toxicity of vaccines is studied for short term rather than long-term. Many studies are limited to just a few weeks. When a vaccine is tested, it is given to healthy people and they are only given that one injection (not multiple injections at once, like a baby). The current CDC recommended schedule with a number of vaccines injected on a given day has never been tested. In essence, the current schedule is an experiment.



Chronic health conditions in children began growing rapidly at the same time that new vaccines were introduced 1985-1991, now impacting 1 in 2 adolescents.  Autism, ADHD, food allergies, bowel diseases, and other conditions began growing exponentially in the late 1980s.

The Hib vaccine was introduced in 1985, and replaced by the Hib conjugate vaccine in 1988, to avoid a death rate of 1 per 106,000 persons.  The Hepatitis B vaccine was introduced for newborns in 1991 to avoid the risk of transmission from the mother which can occur in 1 in 480 births.  HepB is a blood-borne illness not transmitted by casual contact, so an infant is not at risk unless the mother is HepB-positive. Learn more by reading the report created by Foundation for Pediatric Health.

Vaccine Ingredients, How They’re Made and How They Work
A clearer understanding of how vaccines are made and what they do raises even more questions about the risk/benefit ratio.

Vaccines work by stimulating and exciting an immune response. The efficacy of a vaccine is measured by the production of antibodies. This stimulation of antibody production is achieved (or not) when either a live or killed virus or other vaccine agent is injected into a child or adult. The theory is that this antibody response will then be replicated to protect the vaccinated individual from future exposures.

For live virus vaccines, a virus is grown on mediums that include aborted fetal tissue and tissues from monkeys, cows, chickens, dogs, mice, and other animals. Growing the live viruses on animal cells is supposed to make them less virulent to humans yet still strong enough to induce an immune response. This virus is then manufactured with a variety of additives and preservatives to make the serum injected as a vaccine.

Non-live virus vaccines include bacterial toxins, “killed” whole virus, and proteins (among other things) and require the use of “adjuvants” to stimulate an immune response. These adjuvant-stimulated responses create the antibodies that are the measures of success of the vaccine. However the antibodies are not necessarily effective measures of true immunity from either live or non-live vaccines.

Additionally, the concept of Original Antigenic Sin calls into question whether the immune response from a vaccine (live virus or otherwise) could ever provide adequate protection.

The most commonly used vaccine adjuvant is aluminum, a heavy metal that is a known neurotoxin associated with brain dysfunctions, including dementia and Alzheimer’s disease. Aluminum can last up to eight years in the brain resulting in cumulative neurological damage from additional exposures.

Cross-species Contamination
One very troubling danger that results from the way vaccines are produced is cross-species viral contamination. For example, the SV 40 virus, a simian virus, was transferred from monkeys to humans by growing the polio virus on monkey kidneys; the SV 40 virus causes human cancers (Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1997). The virus was injected into hundreds of millions of healthy people worldwide who received early versions of polio vaccines from 1955 -1963.

According to an article published and available from The National Center for Biotechnology Information in a 2007 review of numerous studies about SV40 in humans, researches said the following: “SV40 footprints in humans have been found associated at high prevalence with specific tumor types such as brain and bone tumors, mesotheliomas and lymphomas and with kidney diseases…” Once infected, people with SV40 can pass the virus on to their children.

Science Fraud and the Media
Getting credible independent scientific evidence for vaccines is not always easy. As was the case with the tobacco industry, pharmaceutical companies pay either directly or indirectly for much of the science that is published. The revolving door of officials in government moving into highly paid positions in the pharmaceutical industry or lobbying also is problematic. The government seems to have a vested interest in not publishing information that would show vaccines in a poor light.

For example, in a statement released in August 2014 on his lawyer’s website, CDC scientist William Thompson, PhD, admits to falsifying data that showed a statistical connection between the MMR vaccine and autism spectrum disorders in African American boys who are given the vaccine before the age of three. Dr. Thompson published a paper in the journal Pediatrics claiming there was no connection. Ten years later, he admitted his fraud after conversations he had with another scientist were recorded without his knowledge. Part of that release reads:

My name is William Thompson.  I am a Senior Scientist with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, where I have worked since 1998. I regret that my coauthors and I omitted statistically significant information in our 2004 article published in the journal Pediatrics. The omitted data suggested that African American males who received the MMR vaccine before age 36 months were at increased risk for autism. Decisions were made regarding which findings to report after the data were collected, and I believe that the final study protocol was not followed.

When foreign DNA is injected into humans, the body’s immune response is to attack that foreign DNA. When that foreign animal DNA attaches to the human cells, the immune response includes attacking its own cells. Animal DNA or foreign fetal cell DNA in vaccines can also be taken up by an individual and recombined into their DNA. Also, according to Helen Ratajczak, a former senior scientist at a pharmaceutical firm, there is a link to brain damage and human DNA in vaccines."

Yeah, yeah, TLDR. You are not smart enough to do research.

morrowwasted, do you write for forbes?


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,725
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 minute, 28 seconds
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead] * 1
    #26861362 - 08/03/20 06:08 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

Some people are. You are not.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleThe Blind Ass
Bodhi
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 08/16/16
Posts: 27,357
Loc: The Primordial Mind
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead] * 1
    #26861365 - 08/03/20 06:12 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

I believe that covid19 has been blown way out of proportion, mostly by the mass media & social media  - but, recently thankfully it’s been toned down.  A lot of people are infected a lot will and have died - but by keeping things in perspective - we see it’s not even close to the end of the world.  Like another flu & pneumonia, albeit worse than the flu.  People at risk need to pay special attention to how they live and those who can effect them need to also take care.  Everyone can potentially be respectful of those they interact with, without needing it to be enforced - but it is - bc people aren’t being respectful of others.  And that opens the doors to abuses.

Social distancing is good.  Masks are good.  Good hygiene is good. Everything has a time and place.

Not to say there are not real abuses and shady business and moves going on under the guise of those against covid and those who could care less about it.  Gov & non-gov factions & players.  There are.  It’s a massive opportunity for a bunch of shit to happen.

These are strange times.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,725
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 minute, 28 seconds
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: The Blind Ass]
    #26861382 - 08/03/20 06:27 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

Nobody said it was the end of the world. That’s you blowing it out of proportion.


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleThe Blind Ass
Bodhi
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 08/16/16
Posts: 27,357
Loc: The Primordial Mind
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: koods] * 1
    #26861411 - 08/03/20 06:44 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

Not being literal.


--------------------
Give me Liberty caps -or- give me Death caps

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: koods]
    #26861426 - 08/03/20 06:54 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

koods said:
Nobody said it was the end of the world. That’s you blowing it out of proportion.




https://www.mercurynews.com/coronavirus-bill-gates-predicted-pandemic-in-2015

"“If anything kills over 10 million people in the next few decades, it’s most likely to be a highly infectious virus rather than a war,” Gates said. “Not missiles, but microbes.”"

https://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Speeches/2017/05/Bill-Gates-Munich-Security-Conference

"Bill Gates
Munich Security Conference
Munich, Germany
February 17, 2017
AS PREPARED


Thank you, David [Miliband]. It's great to be here today.

When I decided 20 years ago to make global health the focus of my philanthropic work, I didn't imagine that I'd be speaking at a conference on international security policy. But I'm here today because I believe our worlds are more tightly linked than most people realize.

Here's one example. I spend a lot of my time on the effort to eradicate polio. We've made incredible progress. Of the 125 countries where polio was endemic, 122 countries have eliminated the disease. Only Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Nigeria have never been polio-free. And that's no coincidence.

War zones and other fragile state settings are the most difficult places to eliminate epidemics. They're also some of the most likely places for them to begin—as we've seen with Ebola in Sierra Leone and Liberia, and with cholera in the Congo Basin and the Horn of Africa. So, to fight global pandemics, we must fight poverty, too.

It's also true that the next epidemic could originate on the computer screen of a terrorist intent on using genetic engineering to create a synthetic version of the smallpox virus . . . or a super contagious and deadly strain of the flu.

The point is, we ignore the link between health security and international security at our peril.

Whether it occurs by a quirk of nature or at the hand of a terrorist, epidemiologists say a fast-moving airborne pathogen could kill more than 30 million people in less than a year. And they say there is a reasonable probability the world will experience such an outbreak in the next 10-15 years.

It's hard to get your mind around a catastrophe of that scale, but it happened not that long ago. In 1918, a particularly virulent and deadly strain of flu killed between 50 million and 100 million people.

You might be wondering how likely these doomsday scenarios really are. The fact that a deadly global pandemic has not occurred in recent history shouldn't be mistaken for evidence that a deadly pandemic will not occur in the future.

And even if the next pandemic isn't on the scale of the 1918 flu, we would be wise to consider the social and economic turmoil that might ensue if something like Ebola made its way into a lot of major urban centers. We were lucky that the last Ebola outbreak was contained before it did.

The good news is that with advances in biotechnology, new vaccines and drugs can help prevent epidemics from spreading out of control. And, most of the things we need to do to protect against a naturally occurring pandemic are the same things we must prepare for an intentional biological attack.

First and most importantly, we have to build an arsenal of new weapons—vaccines, drugs, and diagnostics.

Vaccines can be especially important in containing epidemics. But today, it typically takes up to 10 years to develop and license a new vaccine. To significantly curb deaths from a fast-moving airborne pathogen, we would have to get that down considerably—to 90 days or less.

We took an important step last month with the launch of a new public-private partnership called the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. The hope is that CEPI will enable the world to produce safe, effective vaccines as quickly as new threats emerge.

The really big breakthrough potential is in emerging technology platforms that leverage recent advances in genomics to dramatically reduce the time needed to develop vaccines.

This is important because we can't predict whether the next deadly disease will be one we already know, or something we've never seen before.

Without getting too technical, these new platform technologies essentially create a delivery vehicle for synthetic genetic material that instructs your cells to make a vaccine inside your own body. And the great thing is that once you've built a vaccine platform for one pathogen, you can use it again for other pathogens. You only need to substitute a few genes.

That flexibility and reusability would cut the vaccine development and approval timeline significantly. And we can apply this new vaccine technology to other hard-to-treat diseases like HIV, malaria, and tuberculosis.

The $550 million that launched CEPI is just a down payment. We will need considerably more support from governments to fund the R&D necessary to realize the promise of this new technology.

Of course, the preventive capacity of a vaccine won't help if a pathogen has already spread out of control. Because epidemics can quickly take root in the places least equipped to fight them, we also need to improve surveillance.

That starts with strengthening basic public health systems in the most vulnerable countries. This has a double benefit.

It improves our ability to prevent, detect, and respond to epidemics. And it enables us to break the cycle of poverty and disease that is at the root of so much instability in the world.

We also have to ensure that every country is conducting routine surveillance to gather and verify disease outbreak intelligence.

And we must ensure that countries share information in a timely way, and that there are adequate laboratory resources to identify and monitor suspect pathogens. We can build on the lab network that's in place now for polio, as well as a new network of field sites and labs that will help us better understand the causes of child mortality in poor countries.

The third thing we need to do is prepare for epidemics the way the military prepares for war. This includes germ games and other preparedness exercises so we can better understand how diseases will spread, how people will respond in a panic, and how to deal with things like overloaded highways and communications systems.

We also need trained medical personnel ready to contain an epidemic quickly, and better coordination with the military to help with logistics and to secure areas.

The Ebola epidemic might have been much worse if the U.S. and UK governments had not used military resources to help build health centers, manage logistics, and fly people in and out of affected countries.

It is encouraging that global alliances like the G7 and the G20 are beginning to focus on pandemic preparedness, and that leaders like Chancellor Merkel and Prime Minister Solberg are championing health security.

By the end of this year, 67 countries are expected to have completed independent assessments of their epidemic readiness. But there isn't enough money to help the poorest countries with epidemic preparation.

The irony is that the cost of ensuring adequate pandemic preparedness worldwide is estimated at $3.4 billion a year—yet the projected annual loss from a pandemic could run as high as $570 billion.

Pandemics are everyone's problem—and as leaders, we cannot ignore it.

Imagine if I told you that somewhere in this world, there's a weapon that exists—or that could emerge—capable of killing tens of thousands, or millions, of people, bringing economies to a standstill, and throwing nations into chaos.

You would say that we need to do everything possible to gather intelligence and develop effective countermeasures to reduce the threat.

That is the situation we face today with biological threats. We may not know if that weapon is man-made or a product of nature. But one thing we can be almost certain of. A highly lethal global pandemic will occur in our lifetimes.

When I was a kid, there was really only one existential threat the world faced. The threat of a nuclear war.

By the late 1990s, most reasonable people had come to accept that climate changed represented another major threat to humankind.

I view the threat of deadly pandemics right up there with nuclear war and climate change. Getting ready for a global pandemic is every bit as important as nuclear deterrence and avoiding a climate catastrophe.

Innovation, cooperation, and careful planning can dramatically mitigate the risks presented by each of these threats.

Indeed, the fact that fewer people die in conflicts now than at any time in human history is the direct result of choices made together by the international community—including through efforts like the Munich Security Conference.

The global good will evidenced at the historic Paris Climate talks a year ago give us a chance to prevent the worst effects of climate change.

The opportunity now is to extend that cooperation to pandemic preparedness. We've gotten a good start on innovation with the launch of CEPI. Reflecting on the lessons learned with Ebola, there is a shared consensus about the things we need to invest in.

I'm optimistic that a decade from now, we can be much better prepared for a lethal epidemic—if we're willing to put a fraction of what we spend on defense budgets and new weapons systems into epidemic readiness.

When the next pandemic strikes, it could be another catastrophe in the annals of the human race. Or it could be something else altogether. An extraordinary triumph of human will. A moment when we prove yet again that, together, we are capable of taking on the world's biggest challenges to create a safer, healthier, more stable world.

Ultimately, the choice is ours.

Thank you."

Oh, Bill. Germ simulations?

Nah, not the end of THE world, but a world as we once knew it is dead and gone.

:cheers:


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Onlinekoods
Ribbit
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,725
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 1 minute, 28 seconds
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26861429 - 08/03/20 06:57 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

Tl;dr

Where’s the part about the end of the world


--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: HamHead]
    #26861450 - 08/03/20 07:10 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

https://wealthygorilla.com/bill-gates-net-worth/

"SEARCH
Wealthy Gorilla
Wealthy Gorilla
NET WORTHBill Gates Net WorthBy Dan Western Bill Gates' Net Worth
SHARETWEET
What is Bill Gates’ net worth?

Net Worth: $111.1 Billion
Age: 64
Born: October 28, 1955
Country of Origin: United States of America
Source of Wealth: Founder of Microsoft
Last Updated: 2020
Bill Gates is the founder of Microsoft, and is the second richest man in the world. Gates co-founded Microsoft with Paul Allen in 1975, and it’s since then become the largest PC software company in the world."

"The irony is that the cost of ensuring adequate pandemic preparedness worldwide is estimated at $3.4 billion a year"

Billy, Billy, you have got over $110 billion dollars.

Let's math.

Bloop, bop boop beep pop bop.

Thanks calculator.

32.35294117 years.

At 64 years old, Bill, you could give away your fortunes to ironically be better prepared for a pandemic worldwide until you're 96 years old!

But wait, there's INFLATION!!!

INCOMING!!!

That's why we invest, to turn $10,000,000,000 into $200,000,000,000. All those 0s. Digital.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineHamHead
Hard Ass Motherfucker
Male


Registered: 03/17/15
Posts: 6,107
Loc: Galactic sector ZZ9 Plura...
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Well, guess I'll sit on the sidelines [Re: koods]
    #26861456 - 08/03/20 07:12 PM (3 years, 7 months ago)

Quote:

koods said:
Tl;dr

Where’s the part about the end of the world




Couldn't even look at the bottom of my post.

"Nah, not the end of THE world, but a world as we once knew it is dead and gone.

:cheers:"

It's in your head, koods.


--------------------
The Italian researchers’ findings, published by the INT’s scientific magazine Tumori Journal, show 11.6% of 959 healthy volunteers enrolled in a lung cancer screening trial between September 2019 and March 2020 had developed coronavirus antibodies well before February.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27V0KF

This online first version has been peer-reviewed, accepted and edited,  but not formatted and finalized with corrections from authors and proofreaders

https://www.icandecide.org/

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5  [ show all ]

Shop: Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale   Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   MagicBag.co All-In-One Bags That Don't Suck


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* posibility of a bird flu pandemic rising out of the aftermath of the se asia tidal wave ZippoZM 794 2 12/29/04 04:26 PM
by ZippoZ
* . dr_gonz 948 9 11/29/04 08:20 PM
by Young_but_cool
* global pandemic, 100s of millions may die
( 1 2 all )
Moonshoe 3,527 35 02/07/21 07:54 AM
by psi
* Pandemic thekwazz 529 7 09/06/08 08:14 PM
by thekwazz
* Sitting on top of the World
( 1 2 all )
Ripple 4,170 34 01/30/03 08:58 AM
by triptones
* Scared to death!!
( 1 2 3 4 ... 31 32 )
Zepplin 92,937 622 08/25/22 01:20 PM
by pineboy13
* Addicted to your computer Anonymous 2,575 19 06/09/13 03:20 PM
by Eggtimer
* Post deleted by Anno
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Anonymous 6,870 61 01/21/03 06:38 AM
by KackleDude

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Entire Staff
1,546 topic views. 5 members, 48 guests and 77 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.027 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 13 queries.