Is JerryRig Right?

[JerryRig]

So freedom of expression is fine until you decide it’s not?

You’ll recall I was banned for less. There is a double standard being applied and it needs to be addressed.

I’m not aware of you being banned and if you were it wasn’t me complaining. I don’t agree with most of what you post but you should be able to say it. It seems the mods don’t agree though. I’m still going to call out any bullshit you post.

Aviatard,
How do YOU determine what is bullshit? Are you omniscient? If you have to look this word up, then you are not. Don’t be so arrogant to think you understand what is going not happening behind the scenes, because you do not. Are you perfect? If you are, then I apologize, I should have listened to you.

The mods clearly need to do some soul searching as well.

[Aviatard]

You’ll recall I was banned for less. There is a double standard being applied and it needs to be addressed.

I’m not aware of you being banned and if you were it wasn’t me complaining. I don’t agree with most of what you post but you should be able to say it. It seems the mods don’t agree though. I’m still going to call out any bullshit you post.

Aviatard,
How do YOU determine what is bullshit? Are you omniscient? If you have to look this word up, then you are not. Don’t be so arrogant to think you understand what is going not happening behind the scenes, because you do not. Are you perfect? If you are, then I apologize, I should have listened to you.

The mods clearly need to do some soul searching as well.

Since you claim to know what’s going on behind the scenes you must be all knowing. I think we’ve spotted your problem.

[rookiepilot]

In that case I’d think you’d be absolutely gagging for some vaccine induced myocarditis.

I ask again.

Why is it acceptable to wish harm upon another poster who you disagree with?

I’ll wait.

[Aviatard]

In that case I’d think you’d be absolutely gagging for some vaccine induced myocarditis.

I ask again.

Why is it acceptable to wish harm upon another poster who you disagree with?

I’ll wait.

Despite your fanciful thinking, and lack of reading comprehension skills, this statement wishes harm on nobody.

[rookiepilot]

In that case I’d think you’d be absolutely gagging for some vaccine induced myocarditis.

I ask again.

Why is it acceptable to wish harm upon another poster who you disagree with?

I’ll wait.

Despite your fanciful thinking, and lack of reading comprehension skills, this statement wishes harm on nobody.

Enough.

I have zero problem calling out your bullsh— Aviatard, just like you claim to call out others.

Think a long holiday for you is in order. Wishing a potentially fatal occurrence on another poster crosses the line here.

How about it Mod’s? Where is the line?

[Aviatard]

I ask again.

Why is it acceptable to wish harm upon another poster who you disagree with?

I’ll wait.

Despite your fanciful thinking, and lack of reading comprehension skills, this statement wishes harm on nobody.

Enough.

I have zero problem calling out your bullsh— Aviatard, just like you claim to call out others.

Think a long holiday for you is in order. Wishing a potentially fatal occurrence on another poster crosses the line here.

How about it Mod’s? Where is the line?

You’re being deliberately obtuse. “I would think you’d be gagging” does not mean “I hope you get”, or “I wish you’d get”.
Here, let me help you out:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictio ... -for-to-do

Your rage farming efforts are getting weaker and more childish daily. Don’t you have some oil price predictions to get wrong? I’d think you’d be gagging to get one right for a change.

[JerryRig]

I ask again.

Why is it acceptable to wish harm upon another poster who you disagree with?

I’ll wait.

Despite your fanciful thinking, and lack of reading comprehension skills, this statement wishes harm on nobody.

Enough.

I have zero problem calling out your bullsh— Aviatard, just like you claim to call out others.

Think a long holiday for you is in order. Wishing a potentially fatal occurrence on another poster crosses the line here.

How about it Mod’s? Where is the line?

Perhaps the mods have come down with a vax reaction that no one seems to be experiencing. Aviatards nano-particles have clearly crossed the blood-brain barrier. Don't expect reason or logic to prevail, only transitioning.

[khedrei]

Despite your fanciful thinking, and lack of reading comprehension skills, this statement wishes harm on nobody.

Enough.

I have zero problem calling out your bullsh— Aviatard, just like you claim to call out others.

Think a long holiday for you is in order. Wishing a potentially fatal occurrence on another poster crosses the line here.

How about it Mod’s? Where is the line?

Perhaps the mods have come down with a vax reaction that no one seems to be experiencing. Aviatards nano-particles have clearly crossed the blood-brain barrier. Don't expect reason or logic to prevail, only transitioning.

Its called mass formation psychosis. It seems to affect the very intelligent more than the average Joe.

[Reinhard]

lots of seething and coping vaxxies in this ITT thread

lol

lmao even

she's right you know

[North Shore]

^ One wonders if that includes mumps, measles, rubella, diptheria, and polio vaccines?

[CpnCrunch]

I guess I'm a seething vaxxer and sciencer. I love science and things it has enabled us to do, like, you know...fly planes, and live to a a ripe old age without dying from preventable diseases. I find this forum very amusing.

[JerryRig]

^ One wonders if that includes mumps, measles, rubella, diptheria, and polio vaccines?

Those are actual vaccines. The mRNA gene therapy witches brew is not. A vaccine is defined as an attenuated, or dead viral sample that when introduced to the immune system, produces an immune response giving the patient protection from further illness and prevents spread.

The Covid 19 mRNA gene therapy does neither of those things, but instead suppressed the immune system and programs the cells to produce spike protein unregulated. The CEO of Moderna calls it the software of life. It was a covert operation that produced a bio weapon. This is on the public record, but main stream media won’t cover thus because they were complicit.

Hey North Shore, I’m still waiting for an apology for locking me out for two weeks for tell the truth.

JR

[CpnCrunch]

"A vaccine is defined as..." No it's not, and 1 second of google will fix that error in your brain, but believe whatever you want.

[JerryRig]

"A vaccine is defined as..." No it's not, and 1 second of google will fix that error in your brain, but believe whatever you want.

The fallacy in this statement is the noun/verb “google”. They are a part of the deception as an instrument of war.

Try Duck-duck-go

[7ECA]

If, for whatever reason, you use duck duck go as Jerry seems to infer will show the truth as to the definition of a vaccine...

A preparation of a weakened or killed pathogen, such as a bacterium or virus, or of a portion of the pathogen's structure that upon administration to an individual stimulates antibody production or cellular immunity against the pathogen but is incapable of causing severe infection.

From there, you have results from Merriam-Webster, Brittanica, Dictionary Cambridge, WHO, CDC, etc.

Gosh, seems like pretty mainstream results to me. Actually, it's the same results you get with Google.

[Reinhard]

Hey

So basically I'm just not gonna take it (the vaccine!!)

UGH I know....... I know... I'm sorry!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's just that I'm not taking it is all

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[JerryRig]

If, for whatever reason, you use duck duck go as Jerry seems to infer will show the truth as to the definition of a vaccine...

A preparation of a weakened or killed pathogen, such as a bacterium or virus, or of a portion of the pathogen's structure that upon administration to an individual stimulates antibody production or cellular immunity against the pathogen but is incapable of causing severe infection.

From there, you have results from Merriam-Webster, Brittanica, Dictionary Cambridge, WHO, CDC, etc.

Gosh, seems like pretty mainstream results to me. Actually, it's the same results you get with Google.

Your quote is correct. But the c19 mRNA is not that. If you searched how mRNA works you will discover this. It’s never been used on humans before and it failed the animal tests. It is neither safe nor effective. In addition to that, many may have been administered saline placebo as this is a human trial phase.

[dontcallmeshirley]

Your quote is correct. But the c19 mRNA is not that. If you searched how mRNA works you will discover this. It’s never been used on humans before and it failed the animal tests. It is neither safe nor effective. In addition to that, many may have been administered saline placebo as this is a human trial phase.

You have made a claim without any sources or evidence.

I counter your argument with the following quotes and links to reputable sources.

The vaccine is safe and effective for all individuals aged 6 months and above.

World Health Organization

The mRNA-1273 vaccine showed 94.1% efficacy at preventing Covid-19 illness, including severe disease. Aside from transient local and systemic reactions, no safety concerns were identified.

New England Journal of Medicine

A two-dose regimen of BNT162b2 conferred 95% protection against Covid-19 in persons 16 years of age or older. Safety over a median of 2 months was similar to that of other viral vaccines.

National Library of Medicine

Clinical trials showed that beginning 2 weeks after the second dose, the Moderna Spikevax® COVID vaccine was:

• 94.1% effective in protecting trial participants aged 18 and above against COVID-19
• 100% effective in trial participants 12 to 17 years old
• as effective in trial participants 6 to 11 years old as in young adults (18 to 25 years old)

Health Canada

Yes. The two mRNA vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna, authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), are very safe and very good at preventing serious or fatal cases of COVID-19. The risk of serious side effects associated with these vaccines is very small.

Johns Hopkins Medicine

[Aviatard]

If, for whatever reason, you use duck duck go as Jerry seems to infer will show the truth as to the definition of a vaccine...

A preparation of a weakened or killed pathogen, such as a bacterium or virus, or of a portion of the pathogen's structure that upon administration to an individual stimulates antibody production or cellular immunity against the pathogen but is incapable of causing severe infection.

From there, you have results from Merriam-Webster, Brittanica, Dictionary Cambridge, WHO, CDC, etc.

Gosh, seems like pretty mainstream results to me. Actually, it's the same results you get with Google.

It’s never been used on humans before

More of your bullshit. A 1 second Duck Duck Go search, since you don't believe google, turns up this:

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectious ... id19/89998

Never Been Done Before?

That's not completely true. While an mRNA vaccine has never been on the market anywhere in the world, mRNA vaccines have been tested in humans before, for at least four infectious diseases: rabies, influenza, cytomegalovirus, and Zika.

In 2017, German biotech CureVac published results in The Lancet for a phase I trial of its mRNA rabies vaccine, and in January of this year the company issued results via press release from a phase I trial of its low-dose rabies mRNA vaccine.

Last year, Moderna and German researchers published the phase I results of two mRNA vaccines against influenza. In January, Moderna announced results of its phase I study of an mRNA vaccine against cytomegalovirus, and just this past April as the pandemic raged, the company reported interim data from its mRNA vaccine against Zika.


That's just the first of your claims I felt bored enough to look into. Nothing you post has any credibility.

[rookiepilot]

If, for whatever reason, you use duck duck go as Jerry seems to infer will show the truth as to the definition of a vaccine...



From there, you have results from Merriam-Webster, Brittanica, Dictionary Cambridge, WHO, CDC, etc.

Gosh, seems like pretty mainstream results to me. Actually, it's the same results you get with Google.

It’s never been used on humans before

More of your bullshit. A 1 second Duck Duck Go search, since you don't believe google, turns up this:

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectious ... id19/89998

Never Been Done Before?

That's not completely true. While an mRNA vaccine has never been on the market anywhere in the world, mRNA vaccines have been tested in humans before, for at least four infectious diseases: rabies, influenza, cytomegalovirus, and Zika.

In 2017, German biotech CureVac published results in The Lancet for a phase I trial of its mRNA rabies vaccine, and in January of this year the company issued results via press release from a phase I trial of its low-dose rabies mRNA vaccine.

Last year, Moderna and German researchers published the phase I results of two mRNA vaccines against influenza. In January, Moderna announced results of its phase I study of an mRNA vaccine against cytomegalovirus, and just this past April as the pandemic raged, the company reported interim data from its mRNA vaccine against Zika.


That's just the first of your claims I felt bored enough to look into. Nothing you post has any credibility.

On that note.....

You know what a Phase 1 trial means, don't you?

Didn't think so.

I do.

Phase 1 is about a billion years from the endpoint of a thorough drug testing regime. Or even the midpoint.

Do Carry on.

[Aviatard]

On that note.....

You know what a Phase 1 trial means, don't you?

Didn't think so.

I do.

Phase 1 is about a billion years from the endpoint of a thorough drug testing regime. Or even the midpoint.

Do Carry on.

I do know that. The statement made by JerryRig was that mRNA vaccines have never been tested on humans. I answered that question. Yes, they have been tested on humans. The article I posted was written in December of 2020, and much more testing of mRNA vaccines has been conducted since then.

It's cool how you make nonsense assumptions about people, ask rhetorical questions and answer them yourself, though. Do carry on.

[rookiepilot]

On that note.....

You know what a Phase 1 trial means, don't you?

Didn't think so.

I do.

Phase 1 is about a billion years from the endpoint of a thorough drug testing regime. Or even the midpoint.

Do Carry on.

I do know that. The statement made by JerryRig was that mRNA vaccines have never been tested on humans. I answered that question. Yes, they have been tested on humans. The article I posted was written in December of 2020, and much more testing of mRNA vaccines has been conducted since then.

It's cool how you make nonsense assumptions about people, ask rhetorical questions and answer them yourself, though. Do carry on.

I don’t dispute the testing that has gone on from 2020 until today. I am only talking about pre covid.

I struggle to put “phase one trial” and “rigorously tested on humans” in the same coherent sentence.

Therefore, I assumed you did not understand what a phase 1 trial is, and why there are normally far more extensive phase 2 and then, another order of magnitude— more extensive phase 3 trials that follow, all before a new drug is put up for approval by the FDA.

Referring to a small phase 1 trial by a no name drug company as “fully tested on humans” is a joke. There are tons of those that go on all the time. Most fail and never make it to phase 3.

Are we done?

Stop digging.

[Aviatard]

On that note.....

You know what a Phase 1 trial means, don't you?

Didn't think so.

I do.

Phase 1 is about a billion years from the endpoint of a thorough drug testing regime. Or even the midpoint.

Do Carry on.

I do know that. The statement made by JerryRig was that mRNA vaccines have never been tested on humans. I answered that question. Yes, they have been tested on humans. The article I posted was written in December of 2020, and much more testing of mRNA vaccines has been conducted since then.

It's cool how you make nonsense assumptions about people, ask rhetorical questions and answer them yourself, though. Do carry on.

I don’t dispute the testing that has gone on from 2020 until today. I am only talking about pre covid.

I struggle to put “phase one trial” and “rigorously tested on humans” in the same coherent sentence.

Therefore, I assumed you did not understand what a phase 1 trial is, and why there are normally far more extensive phase 2 and then, another order of magnitude— more extensive phase 3 trials that follow, all before a new drug is put up for approval by the FDA.

Referring to a small phase 1 trial by a no name drug company as “fully tested on humans” is a joke. There are tons of those that go on all the time. Most fail and never make it to phase 3.

Are we done?

Stop digging.

Honestly I think you have a reading disability. JerryRig did not say fully tested on humans. Neither did I. You have to read all the words and not make up your own.

[rookiepilot]

I do know that. The statement made by JerryRig was that mRNA vaccines have never been tested on humans. I answered that question. Yes, they have been tested on humans. The article I posted was written in December of 2020, and much more testing of mRNA vaccines has been conducted since then.

It's cool how you make nonsense assumptions about people, ask rhetorical questions and answer them yourself, though. Do carry on.

I don’t dispute the testing that has gone on from 2020 until today. I am only talking about pre covid.

I struggle to put “phase one trial” and “rigorously tested on humans” in the same coherent sentence.

Therefore, I assumed you did not understand what a phase 1 trial is, and why there are normally far more extensive phase 2 and then, another order of magnitude— more extensive phase 3 trials that follow, all before a new drug is put up for approval by the FDA.

Referring to a small phase 1 trial by a no name drug company as “fully tested on humans” is a joke. There are tons of those that go on all the time. Most fail and never make it to phase 3.

Are we done?

Stop digging.

Honestly I think you have a reading disability. JerryRig did not say fully tested on humans. Neither did I. You have to read all the words and not make up your own.

If not “fully tested” what is it? Experimental. That is what phase 1 trials are.

There’s then therefore absolutely no point in saying “tested” at all.

And first one with the personal insults — loses the argument.

[Aviatard]

I don’t dispute the testing that has gone on from 2020 until today. I am only talking about pre covid.

I struggle to put “phase one trial” and “rigorously tested on humans” in the same coherent sentence.

Therefore, I assumed you did not understand what a phase 1 trial is, and why there are normally far more extensive phase 2 and then, another order of magnitude— more extensive phase 3 trials that follow, all before a new drug is put up for approval by the FDA.

Referring to a small phase 1 trial by a no name drug company as “fully tested on humans” is a joke. There are tons of those that go on all the time. Most fail and never make it to phase 3.

Are we done?

Stop digging.

Honestly I think you have a reading disability. JerryRig did not say fully tested on humans. Neither did I. You have to read all the words and not make up your own.

If not “fully tested” what is it? Experimental. That is what phase 1 trials are.

There’s then therefore absolutely no point in saying “tested” at all.

And first one with the personal insults — loses the argument.

Fair point. I apologize. Now I’ll watch the Leafs first second round game in 19 years.