Comments by "gerhard7" (@gerhard7323) on "Kim Iversen: Does mRNA Change Your DNA? Breaking Down AP and Reuters Fact Check" video.

@Sceince01 May I ask if you have a vested personal interest in this technology?
2
@Sceince01 What's a 'kara'?
2
@Sceince01 When was the first mRNA vaccine approved and what was it for seeing as the technology had been around for decades?
2
@Sceince01 Why did the CDC feel the need to change the definition of the word vaccine recently do you think?
2
@Sceince01 Er, the bits where you didn't answer those questions? Copy and paste if it's easier, because I can't see answers to them.
2
@Sceince01 You used the word here....
2
@Sceince01 And how did he mislead when it came to pregnant women and DNA? What did he say?
2
@Sceince01 But these shots don't offer any protection longer than 6 months, so presumably I need to keep taking them?
2
@Sceince01 I'm just asking what lie he told. The video I saw, the most recent one, didn't seem that unreasonable to me. The advice has changed from pregnant women no longer being seen as in the at risk group to being in the same group as anyone else. The AZ jab, like the Johnson one, has had lots of question marks officially raised over its safety both in the US and elsewhere. Why shouldn't he feel able to say that?
2
@Sceince01 Ok, perhaps I missed it. A bit like your answer to my question about whether you intend to take these boosters, theoretically, in perpetuity. How long does sterilising immunity last once you've had these vaccines?
2
@Sceince01 Call me old fashioned Fayyaz, but the word 'vaccine' kinda was mostly used to meant to mean that. Only recently has that been changed. I will certainly watch some of his videos when I've got the opportunity and get back to you. In terms of your regular uptake of these non-sterlising jabs though, do you intend to plough on with each successive iteration or might there come a point when you say, 'naah'?
2
You can only accept the name 'vaccine' for this treatment if you accept the fact that the CDC changed the long held and understood definition if what a vaccine actually is at the beginning of this year. The fact is is that no 'vaccine' for ANY coronavirus actually existed prior to the changing of that long held, long understood definition.
2
@Sceince01 You have tried Fayyaz and I appreciate the exchange, but your championed Dr Offit has a pretty dubious record from what I have read. Like I said, I'm happy to listen to anyone and take your point about the Iverson report being bad journalism but if nothing else it also goes to show that there is plenty of bad science too. Do you plan on taking these boosters in perpetuity as each variant comes along?
2
@Sceince01 I have not edited any of my posts either, just for the record.
2
@Sceince01 I'm happy to state that Fayyaz and I'm happy to admit that I have not succumbed and nor will I. Were I over 70 and/or possessed of any of the known comorbidities associated with covid then yes I likely would have succumbed on an 'on balance' basis. Do I believe that under 50s, nevermind children, should be effectively coerced into this essentially novel, untested intervention then the answer is a resounding no. These jabs present a far greater risk to young people's health on balance than covid ever would and we're talking about in the short term because even you, dear Fayyaz, have no idea whatsoever about their long term implications.
2
Similarly, presumably you keep referring to it as 'a vaccine' based on the CDC's recent changing of the long held, long understood meaning of the word? No 'vaccine' that I've ever understood to be one until covid requires repeated boosters, apparently ad infinitum, or got to evade the long accepted protocols for what constituted the safe use of a vaccine. All the money in the world never bought one second of time and though there are lots of claims that the covid 'vaccine' was simply greenlighted and all the usual roadblocks apparently removed one cannot account for the passage of time and how these 'vaccines' behave in the body over time.
1
@Sceince01 Of course no vaccine is 100% effective. I never claimed any were. What a daft statement. The fact is is that they have to cross an established threshold of efficacy and safety and, ideally, provide lasting immunity. This is the reason why they are used against viruses and diseases that barely mutate, unlike coronavirus. Where does 'a vaccine' like mRNA, nevermind the attenuated ones, fit into all this?
1
@Sceince01 Presumably the vast amount being the 'unvaccinated'? And what do say to all those health professionals who happen to disagree with you. Many of them doing much the same thing as you?
1
@Sceince01 It's important that you answer these questions Fayyaz if you wish to be seen as someone debunking conspiracies. I accept that there are a lot of truths, half truths and lies out there coming from both sides and if you wish to be seen as an upholder of the truth you should feel more than happy to answer my good faith, truth based questions....
1
@Sceince01 In the UK, where I'm from, there was a very famous case where our health secretary at the time was confronted on a ward by an anaesthetist regarding the government mandate on ALL NHS healthcare workers being required to have the jab, note the word 'jab' there, by a certain date or risk losing their jobs. This extremely brave man did this in front of television cameras and in doing so pretty much single-handedly, managed to reverse a decision which could have led to hundreds of thousands of highly trained medical professionals being forced out of their jobs resulting in horrific job shortages in a vital area and inevitable ensuing deaths. What monies do you think he was making there might you say for his troubles? What might his hidden agenda be? This incident is freely available to watch on YouTube should you wish? As I said, there are clearly those out there on both sides who wish to make hay from this, but there are also those who kinda like dealing with actual facts. Me being one of them.
1
@Sceince01 To be fair, John Campbell was an unqualified advocate for 'the vaccines' at the beginning and has since flagged up peer reviewed studies in places like Thailand, Israel and Germany, albeit relatively small, that have shown unprecedented levels of cardiac issues, particularly amongst post vaccinated young men. The biggest question that I've seen him pose is why aren't these studies being conducted on a larger scale in countries like the US, the UK and elsewhere. The fact that this approach has been successfully monetised on YT doesn't somehow make him wrong or a bad actor. Are you saying that he shouldn't be talking about these things?
1
@Sceince01 Try and avoid the patronising technique if you can would be my advice. Saying that something is simple to people and they don't understand it in the same breath when they simply don't trust or believe what you're saying is never a good sell. Anything, however complicated, can be explained simply by anyone who TRULY understands it.
1
So, again, what is a 'kara', why did the CDC change its definition of what a vaccine is very recently and were all the people whom you treated, as you say often unpaid, for severe covid 'unvaccinated'?
1
@Sceince01 I'm fine with that and can work round that, but I still don't see what you mean by Kara.
1
@Sceince01 I'm looking at the number of deaths during the perinatal period from covid in the UK and I'm not really seeing anything on the official government ONS website. Were I a pregnant woman, particularly one repeatedly told to be careful about what I put into my body during that time, I would in no way entertain the introduction of a basically untested 'vaccine' using what is, essentially, a novel technology. What's so odd or reckless about that?
1
@Sceince01 I would certainly accept that in this report the study quoted wasn't sufficiently robust enough to draw any significant conclusions from, but if you read the included transcript starting around 2.18m onwards this point is made without going into the same depth of technical data you refer to.
1
@Sceince01 Kim Iverson's. The transcript is above.
1
@Sceince01 The results are indeed inconclusive, but the researchers from Lund University also expressed surprise that these studies have not been made much earlier for such a new vaccine and also that they fully expected far greater, deeper studies should be undertaken in the future. I accept that the study undertaken was not in anyway conclusive, nor could it have been and that Ms Iverson should have been much clearer about the methodology being used, but I also would like to think that any scientist in this field worth their salt should be demanding far more and bigger studies into what has bizarrely proven to be a studiously ignored area to date given how many millions of people have been subject to this intervention.
1
I have tried to reply but my reply seems to have been removed or just disappeared. The same thing happened yesterday to a comment I replied with. It was merely a continuation of our discussion and not in anyway rude, just so you know. It looks like the YouTube gods have spoken unfortunately.
1
@Sceince01 Came up with a strange code instead of your name then 'whoosh' it was gone. Can't see your reply either.
1
@Sceince01 Mentioned excess deaths and some anecdotal examples of four people I know. Looks like the algorithm didn't like it.
1
@Sceince01 In the UK the average age of a covid death remains at 83 and much is being made of the rise in excess deaths in the last three weeks or so, particularly in the younger age groups. It is being variously attributed to the hot weather, the long term effects of covid itself, people delaying getting treatment because of lockdowns and the deleterious affects of the lockdowns themselves on our health services due to covid measures and prolonged staff absences.
1
@Sceince01 Just for the record I've had covid twice (not exactly recommended) and had a drawn out, less than pleasant experience with a flu jab in the past, but your plan is to have these jabs regularly going forward regardless with each mutation?
1
@Sceince01 And as to my earlier question lost in our lengthy, but enjoyable exchange, can you confirm that by far the majority of patients you've been treating for serious covid issues are the unvaccinated and that known underlying health issues like obesity, diabetes or heart disease haven't been particularly prevalent in your experience, merely the fact that they have refused the jab?
1
@Sceince01 How many children is that in 10k that ended up in ICU?
1
@Sceince01 And you will keep taking these boosters each and every time they appear I assume?
1
@Sceince01 Just watched his release from 12 days ago citing the change in advice in UK for pregnant women. He chooses to quote exclusively and directly from all the official sources offering the only advice that he would be uncomfortable vaccinating pregnant women with the non-mrna AZ vaccine. He finishes by saying that he is under a warning from YouTube on the opinions he is expressing. Is this the piece you're referring to or is there another?
1
@Sceince01 Looked at some of the stuff from Dr Offit and he looks like he's been accused for many years of the same thing as Dr Campbell, except arguably far, far worse and certainly far, far more lucrative. In the financial world this is called talking up your book. He's made his money talking up vaccines and has earned the monicker Dr pr(Offit). It also looks like he's less keen on these new bivalent offerings. Are you planning on taking these interventions in perpetuity regardless or might there come a time where you might draw the line?
1
mRNA isn't a novel technology. It has been around since at least the early 90s and had been repeatedly trialled in various fields of medicine over the following decades including cancer and heart treatments. It also repeatedly failed to deliver results, being considered either ineffective at low doses and potentially toxic at higher ones. The alleged game changer came with covid and the lipid delivery system that supposedly allowed it to deliver its 'message', the 'm' in mRNA, more effectively.
1
Not sure where my reply to you went unless the diabolical YT goblins have been at work or you've substantially edited your original post.
1
@Sceince01 I've read his history with vaccines, his affiliations, how he made his money and the controversy that follows him from a long way back. Not exactly whiter than white and markedly more successful for his efforts than Dr Campbell humble attempts I suspect. The UK death figures for the under 50s according to official ONS figures simply don't warrant a jab and having one is by no means a risk free enterprise. Frankly it's utter madness if you're young unless you're in a particularly vulnerable extremely small group. There's literally no argument to be had there. This is probably one of the reasons why Denmark has stopped/banned the use of these vaccines in the under 50s now except in unusual circumstances. Although it has been more than a little mealy mouthed about its reasons. Which brings me back to my question to you. Presumably you will be taking these mRNA jabs with each mutation and subsequent iteration?
1
@Sceince01 Duly noted that you're STILL not answering my question. Your hero Dr Offit doesn't seem keen rather interestingly on the new bivalent 'vaccine' so perhaps you ought to contact him and tell him not to trust in his dumb luck? I believe I first had covid in December 2019 before China announced it officially to the world and long before any jabs came along. I worked throughout all the UK lockdowns and had face to face interactions, due to the nature of my business, with around 60,000 people that year. Feeling pretty confident I'd had it, though I felt lousy for three weeks, it basically held no fear for me after that. You call it 'dumb luck'. Throughout I have kept a pretty close eye on the UK death figures and their breakdowns by age, gender, comorbidities along with the numerous FOIs of our ONS...some of which it answered and some of which it didn't. Taking those statistics regularly and fully into account at no point throughout did I think I was in any great danger from covid. I was also a keen follower of events in Sweden and how they were dealing with covid and looked at how the world dealt with previous flu outbreaks in the early 1950s and late 1960s. What I am painfully aware of currently is the fact that a lot of this narrative is unraveling which is why I mentioned Denmark's recent stance nevermind the current broad rise in excess deaths across the globe and why the Scottish government is currently taking a keen interest in that anomaly occurring there.
1