Despite talking point claims to the contrary, there is NO empirical evidence these fauxines result or have resulted in reduced adverse symptoms, hospitalizations, and/or death over those who have not taken them--despite the insistence of Fox News cretins and Donald Trump that they do. Quite the contrary. Most people in 2020 who contracted the disease, before the gush of these faulty inocula, had no or very mild symptoms; only a fraction were hospitalized. Fewer still died of it. Given that there is no longer a control group by which to compare the two groups, the Fauci-ites will continue to prattle. But they have no evidence to support their claims.
Beyond this, no one knowledgeable about these fauxines should be calling them vaccines. This should have stopped a year ago, since it was clear from the getgo they were not sterilizing treatmentsand therefore would not prevent infection or halt the spread of the disease. Even I knew by June 2020 that a drug therapeutic was not going to "cure" common colds, since respiratory viruses that cause them mutate so quickly and opportunistically. You, Steve, Alex, Robert and a cascade of others must stop calling the COVID fauxines what they are not, in the process becoming Orwellian linguistic pawns in the black/whiting of our medical literature.
You’re right. Quotes around “vaccines” help, but Dr. Yeadon’s “gene based ‘vaccines’” is better, being factually true. “Fauxines” is fun for those who know but puts other people’s backs up.
At the very least, those who hijack language and meaning for the most awful political purposes deserve getting their backs up. The damage these people have done to our health and to our polity is now incalculable. Besides, fauxines accurately, succinctly conveys what these utterly failed "therapeutics" really are.
Kay, I wrote a comment on Facebook with vaccines in quotes. Someone replied that me putting vaccines in quotes told him all he needed to know about me. :-)
The FDA only asked that they be able to "reduce symptoms" in "mild" cases. That, they can do--for a few months, anyway. And Dr. Robert Malone (invented the mRNA process used to make them) says they are vaccines AND gene therapy. They should be tested as BOTH, but have in actuality been tested for NEITHER.
Agreed. But in a recent interview, Malone maintained they were gene therapies—not vaccines. Before January 2021, the dictionary definition stipulated that a vaccine had to be immunizing. Afterward, however, to complement the fauxine rollouts, dictionaries allowed that mRNA therapies would qualify even if they failed to immunize. By September, the CDC, in time for legal challenges to the mandates, changed the definition for the medical literature so the non-immunizing drugs would qualify as vaccines, thus gaslighting the Supreme Court, allowing that body to think its many precedents permitting immunizing vaccine mandates would apply to the COVID fauxines.
In this, the CDC was successful. It’s now constitutional for businesses and institutions to extort their employees to ingest an ineffective, unsafe drug as a condition of employment as long as it’s justified by unproven claims of a medical emergency.
Never seen a vaccine that they claim reduces severity of symptoms, yet doesn’t prevent infection OR reduce the ‘viral load’ in airways.
I actually cannot conceive of the immunological mechanism whereby that could even happen.
Until I see trustworthy evidence of it, I’m going to classify that claim as a conspiracy theory.
Maybe because they needed to change the definition of "vaccine" to cover useless.
Despite talking point claims to the contrary, there is NO empirical evidence these fauxines result or have resulted in reduced adverse symptoms, hospitalizations, and/or death over those who have not taken them--despite the insistence of Fox News cretins and Donald Trump that they do. Quite the contrary. Most people in 2020 who contracted the disease, before the gush of these faulty inocula, had no or very mild symptoms; only a fraction were hospitalized. Fewer still died of it. Given that there is no longer a control group by which to compare the two groups, the Fauci-ites will continue to prattle. But they have no evidence to support their claims.
Beyond this, no one knowledgeable about these fauxines should be calling them vaccines. This should have stopped a year ago, since it was clear from the getgo they were not sterilizing treatmentsand therefore would not prevent infection or halt the spread of the disease. Even I knew by June 2020 that a drug therapeutic was not going to "cure" common colds, since respiratory viruses that cause them mutate so quickly and opportunistically. You, Steve, Alex, Robert and a cascade of others must stop calling the COVID fauxines what they are not, in the process becoming Orwellian linguistic pawns in the black/whiting of our medical literature.
I like "experimental gene therapy". Most people, even now, are unaware that these products are still in the midst of ongoing trials (supposedly).
You’re right. Quotes around “vaccines” help, but Dr. Yeadon’s “gene based ‘vaccines’” is better, being factually true. “Fauxines” is fun for those who know but puts other people’s backs up.
At the very least, those who hijack language and meaning for the most awful political purposes deserve getting their backs up. The damage these people have done to our health and to our polity is now incalculable. Besides, fauxines accurately, succinctly conveys what these utterly failed "therapeutics" really are.
Kay, I wrote a comment on Facebook with vaccines in quotes. Someone replied that me putting vaccines in quotes told him all he needed to know about me. :-)
Yes. Just because it’s factually true doesn’t mean people will believe it! But at least we’re showing that we’re not buying into the lies.
The FDA only asked that they be able to "reduce symptoms" in "mild" cases. That, they can do--for a few months, anyway. And Dr. Robert Malone (invented the mRNA process used to make them) says they are vaccines AND gene therapy. They should be tested as BOTH, but have in actuality been tested for NEITHER.
Isn't "therapy" supposed to help?
Supposedly but with definitions changing, maybe not in 2022?
Agreed. But in a recent interview, Malone maintained they were gene therapies—not vaccines. Before January 2021, the dictionary definition stipulated that a vaccine had to be immunizing. Afterward, however, to complement the fauxine rollouts, dictionaries allowed that mRNA therapies would qualify even if they failed to immunize. By September, the CDC, in time for legal challenges to the mandates, changed the definition for the medical literature so the non-immunizing drugs would qualify as vaccines, thus gaslighting the Supreme Court, allowing that body to think its many precedents permitting immunizing vaccine mandates would apply to the COVID fauxines.
In this, the CDC was successful. It’s now constitutional for businesses and institutions to extort their employees to ingest an ineffective, unsafe drug as a condition of employment as long as it’s justified by unproven claims of a medical emergency.
Words have consequences.
Superb observation and point! And another example of how fluid the definitions have been to suit the narrative. The 'evil' can be quite clever.
I tend to call them gene-based “vaccines” in writing.
I agree with you.
Gene based Therapies is more appropriate ..
Poison is possibly the best description.
Wasn't as appealing to the focus group.....