What's new

We Are All Cattle Now

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 15, 2017
Messages
28,401
Reaction score
-82
Country
Canada
Location
Canada

BioNTech/Pfizer and the rest are basically livestock vaccines: They’re not very safe, they don’t work very well, and everyone has to get them.



There is nothing surprising about the failure of our vaccines. In fact it was totally predictable.

Coronavirus vaccines have been used in animals for years, with extremely unimpressive results. The problem is that coronaviruses infect the mucosal surfaces of the lungs, at what is basically the very edge of the reach of our immune systems. You could say that this their grand strategy. They work their way in from our least protected borders. Typically, nasal spray vaccines are preferred in animals to stimulate immunity in the mucosa. Unfortunately, even the sprays achieve immunity that „is often short-lived, requires frequent boosting, and may not prevent re-infection.“ This is after decades of vaccine development and the considerably reduced safety standards observed in veterinary medicine.

Our own SARS-2 vaccines, despite their fancy mRNA and virus vector technology, are entirely of a piece with veterinary standards. They have a poor side effect profile, they provide only temporary and partial protection against infection, and they are deployed on a vast scale with no regard for the evolutionary pressure they place on the virus or their broader consequences for infection dynamics. These are normal standards in the context of industrial livestock, where most animals are not raised to live very long in any event, and the risk of occasional accidents — inadvertently favouring or even causing lethal superstrains, or inflicting widespread vaccine injuries — can be weighed against the economic loss associated with mortality from infections.

Of all animal coronavirus vaccines, the most successful is that which prevents IBV, or infectious bronchitis virus, in chickens. IBV is mainly deadly to chicks, who are vaccinated almost immediately after hatching with a live, attenuated virus vaccine. These kinds of vaccines are preferred over deactivated virus vaccines in animals, because they elicit a better immune response. The reason is simple: The weakened vaccine virus actually infects you and your immune system remembers the event accordingly. Some SARS-2 attenuated virus vaccines are even in development for humans, but it is unlikely they will ever be used, because they are very dangerous. The attenuated virus, because it replicates in the cells of the vaccinated, can reacquire its prior virulence via mutations. This happened with early attenuated vaccines against poliovirus in humans. And there is an added danger, that the recently vaccinated might come into contact with the wild virus, and recombination events might then combine splice together the genomes of both, yielding unpredictable, potentially very lethal, mutant strains.

IBV vaccines protect the chickens from infection for only about nine weeks. That‘s long enough for the chickens destined to be eaten, but those raised for their eggs require constant boosters. They receive two or three attenuated virus vaccines at first, and then periodic deactivated virus boosters thereafter, to maintain their protection. Adenovirus vector vaccines have been tried in chickens, with efficacy similar to that induced by the attenuated virus vaccines. This is very likely an unstated reason that vaccine vector and mRNA messenger technology were used for our own SARS-2 jabs. It was known from experience with animals that deactivated virus vaccines would not work nearly as well, and that attenuated viruses were too dangerous.


There are other interesting tidbits in the literature on IBV vaccines too. For example: „The basis of immunity to IBV is not well understood. Serum antibody levels do not correlate with protection, although local antibody is believed to play a role.“ In other words, all those studies crying to the heavens about higher blood antibody levels after dose 3 are dancing upon a likely irrelevant metric. And then there’s this, from the same 2003 paper, on the feasibility of a SARS vaccine in light of the experience with IBV:

Application of a SARS vaccine is perhaps best limited to a minimal number of targeted individuals who can be monitored, as some vaccinated persons might, if infected by SARS coronavirus, become asymptomatic excretors of virus, thereby posing a risk to non-vaccinated people.
Emphasis mine.

At the extreme ends you are safe: Flu shots don’t really do anything, so they don’t matter one way or the other. And smallpox vaccines, because they are so effective at preventing infection, are an obvious benefit. But like the chickens, we are now in the world of a vaccine that only kind of works, and this is the most dangerous and unpredictable scenario of all.
 

BioNTech/Pfizer and the rest are basically livestock vaccines: They’re not very safe, they don’t work very well, and everyone has to get them.



There is nothing surprising about the failure of our vaccines. In fact it was totally predictable.

Coronavirus vaccines have been used in animals for years, with extremely unimpressive results. The problem is that coronaviruses infect the mucosal surfaces of the lungs, at what is basically the very edge of the reach of our immune systems. You could say that this their grand strategy. They work their way in from our least protected borders. Typically, nasal spray vaccines are preferred in animals to stimulate immunity in the mucosa. Unfortunately, even the sprays achieve immunity that „is often short-lived, requires frequent boosting, and may not prevent re-infection.“ This is after decades of vaccine development and the considerably reduced safety standards observed in veterinary medicine.

Our own SARS-2 vaccines, despite their fancy mRNA and virus vector technology, are entirely of a piece with veterinary standards. They have a poor side effect profile, they provide only temporary and partial protection against infection, and they are deployed on a vast scale with no regard for the evolutionary pressure they place on the virus or their broader consequences for infection dynamics. These are normal standards in the context of industrial livestock, where most animals are not raised to live very long in any event, and the risk of occasional accidents — inadvertently favouring or even causing lethal superstrains, or inflicting widespread vaccine injuries — can be weighed against the economic loss associated with mortality from infections.

Of all animal coronavirus vaccines, the most successful is that which prevents IBV, or infectious bronchitis virus, in chickens. IBV is mainly deadly to chicks, who are vaccinated almost immediately after hatching with a live, attenuated virus vaccine. These kinds of vaccines are preferred over deactivated virus vaccines in animals, because they elicit a better immune response. The reason is simple: The weakened vaccine virus actually infects you and your immune system remembers the event accordingly. Some SARS-2 attenuated virus vaccines are even in development for humans, but it is unlikely they will ever be used, because they are very dangerous. The attenuated virus, because it replicates in the cells of the vaccinated, can reacquire its prior virulence via mutations. This happened with early attenuated vaccines against poliovirus in humans. And there is an added danger, that the recently vaccinated might come into contact with the wild virus, and recombination events might then combine splice together the genomes of both, yielding unpredictable, potentially very lethal, mutant strains.

IBV vaccines protect the chickens from infection for only about nine weeks. That‘s long enough for the chickens destined to be eaten, but those raised for their eggs require constant boosters. They receive two or three attenuated virus vaccines at first, and then periodic deactivated virus boosters thereafter, to maintain their protection. Adenovirus vector vaccines have been tried in chickens, with efficacy similar to that induced by the attenuated virus vaccines. This is very likely an unstated reason that vaccine vector and mRNA messenger technology were used for our own SARS-2 jabs. It was known from experience with animals that deactivated virus vaccines would not work nearly as well, and that attenuated viruses were too dangerous.


There are other interesting tidbits in the literature on IBV vaccines too. For example: „The basis of immunity to IBV is not well understood. Serum antibody levels do not correlate with protection, although local antibody is believed to play a role.“ In other words, all those studies crying to the heavens about higher blood antibody levels after dose 3 are dancing upon a likely irrelevant metric. And then there’s this, from the same 2003 paper, on the feasibility of a SARS vaccine in light of the experience with IBV:


Emphasis mine.

At the extreme ends you are safe: Flu shots don’t really do anything, so they don’t matter one way or the other. And smallpox vaccines, because they are so effective at preventing infection, are an obvious benefit. But like the chickens, we are now in the world of a vaccine that only kind of works, and this is the most dangerous and unpredictable scenario of all.
This sounds like anti vaxer propaganda. stop causing the spread, man up and get the shot! It’s because of nut Cases we have needless death from covid in Canada

k
 
People who are still not taking the vaccine are on their own as far as consequences for them are concerned. Vaccines are effective but not everyone needs them. Healthy, young people who have survived Covid infection and carrying 'High Titer' antibodies don't need them. I have been carefully following the debate about 'Natural Immunity' and now more and more scientists are coming out in open giving credence to Natural Immunity.

Even NY Times today! But even this article is not bold enough to say that not to take the vaccine at all if already Covid survivor. The fact is that vaccines, while safe, DO carry certain risks--risks which should be avoided by people who don't even need the vaccine.


" But the immunity provided by an infection versus a vaccination differs in many ways. For example, a Covid-19 vaccine teaches the immune system to target a specific part of the virus, the spike protein, over a few hours or days. When people are infected with SARS-CoV-2, their immune system is exposed to the whole virus for several days or weeks. This provides the immune system with significant time to build a comprehensive defense if the infected person survives. These distinctions result in broader immunity for people who are infected versus people who are vaccinated.
"
 

BioNTech/Pfizer and the rest are basically livestock vaccines: They’re not very safe, they don’t work very well, and everyone has to get them.



There is nothing surprising about the failure of our vaccines. In fact it was totally predictable.

Coronavirus vaccines have been used in animals for years, with extremely unimpressive results. The problem is that coronaviruses infect the mucosal surfaces of the lungs, at what is basically the very edge of the reach of our immune systems. You could say that this their grand strategy. They work their way in from our least protected borders. Typically, nasal spray vaccines are preferred in animals to stimulate immunity in the mucosa. Unfortunately, even the sprays achieve immunity that „is often short-lived, requires frequent boosting, and may not prevent re-infection.“ This is after decades of vaccine development and the considerably reduced safety standards observed in veterinary medicine.

Our own SARS-2 vaccines, despite their fancy mRNA and virus vector technology, are entirely of a piece with veterinary standards. They have a poor side effect profile, they provide only temporary and partial protection against infection, and they are deployed on a vast scale with no regard for the evolutionary pressure they place on the virus or their broader consequences for infection dynamics. These are normal standards in the context of industrial livestock, where most animals are not raised to live very long in any event, and the risk of occasional accidents — inadvertently favouring or even causing lethal superstrains, or inflicting widespread vaccine injuries — can be weighed against the economic loss associated with mortality from infections.

Of all animal coronavirus vaccines, the most successful is that which prevents IBV, or infectious bronchitis virus, in chickens. IBV is mainly deadly to chicks, who are vaccinated almost immediately after hatching with a live, attenuated virus vaccine. These kinds of vaccines are preferred over deactivated virus vaccines in animals, because they elicit a better immune response. The reason is simple: The weakened vaccine virus actually infects you and your immune system remembers the event accordingly. Some SARS-2 attenuated virus vaccines are even in development for humans, but it is unlikely they will ever be used, because they are very dangerous. The attenuated virus, because it replicates in the cells of the vaccinated, can reacquire its prior virulence via mutations. This happened with early attenuated vaccines against poliovirus in humans. And there is an added danger, that the recently vaccinated might come into contact with the wild virus, and recombination events might then combine splice together the genomes of both, yielding unpredictable, potentially very lethal, mutant strains.

IBV vaccines protect the chickens from infection for only about nine weeks. That‘s long enough for the chickens destined to be eaten, but those raised for their eggs require constant boosters. They receive two or three attenuated virus vaccines at first, and then periodic deactivated virus boosters thereafter, to maintain their protection. Adenovirus vector vaccines have been tried in chickens, with efficacy similar to that induced by the attenuated virus vaccines. This is very likely an unstated reason that vaccine vector and mRNA messenger technology were used for our own SARS-2 jabs. It was known from experience with animals that deactivated virus vaccines would not work nearly as well, and that attenuated viruses were too dangerous.


There are other interesting tidbits in the literature on IBV vaccines too. For example: „The basis of immunity to IBV is not well understood. Serum antibody levels do not correlate with protection, although local antibody is believed to play a role.“ In other words, all those studies crying to the heavens about higher blood antibody levels after dose 3 are dancing upon a likely irrelevant metric. And then there’s this, from the same 2003 paper, on the feasibility of a SARS vaccine in light of the experience with IBV:


Emphasis mine.

At the extreme ends you are safe: Flu shots don’t really do anything, so they don’t matter one way or the other. And smallpox vaccines, because they are so effective at preventing infection, are an obvious benefit. But like the chickens, we are now in the world of a vaccine that only kind of works, and this is the most dangerous and unpredictable scenario of all.

Are you crazy HOW dared you try to criticize anything "Big Pharmas" unleash on you... how dare you...you should also follow the "path of least resistance" and follow the sheeple ... do not question anything...just take the jab...

BTW I am surprised on your diligence on finding the alternate view, I mean 90% plus narrative is strictly controlled....someone did ask me this question few months ago that...even 1% from healthy young populace died after taking the second jab (dose) isn't it is logical to question about the contents and side effects (at least) ...
 
That's a good point. Why do people who have acquired natural immunity need to vaccinate?

Can people test for natural immunity in blood?

Does vaccine damage natural immunity?

Is vaccination better than natural immunity?

There was a 34 year old woman in Australia perfectly healthy, took Astrazeneca and died from blood clotting. She had a very small chance of getting Corona and almost 100% chance of recovering from it, but she had almost 100% chance of dying from the vaccine because of her rare condition. Will the government compensate her family?
 
That's a good point. Why do people who have acquired natural immunity need to vaccinate?

Can people test for natural immunity in blood?

Does vaccine damage natural immunity?

Is vaccination better than natural immunity?

There was a 34 year old woman in Australia perfectly healthy, took Astrazeneca and died from blood clotting. She had a very small chance of getting Corona and almost 100% chance of recovering from it, but she had almost 100% chance of dying from the vaccine because of her rare condition. Will the government compensate her family?

Pharma lobby controls government.
 
All of these failed governments are indeed treating people like cattle. their strategy is to just throw sh*t on the wall and see what sticks, instead of doing adequate studies on volunteers to see what for example a 5th or 6th or more jabs will do to you in the short and long term they just decide to mandate it and experiment on the entire public along the way.

It's been more than a year now and all these governments have failed miserably.
Complete and real lockdowns are the only solution, however since no country other than China can do it, so what should be done for the other countries is to only vaccinate the vulnerable and let the virus spread to the young and healthy, by vaccinating every one including healthy people you are destroying the best defence vulnerable people have against the virus because the virus will become more resistant to the vaccine.
 
You can spread the virus and get infected with it whether you are vaccinated or unvaccinated.

yes the same is true fir the polio vaccine it’s only 98% effective. Like that vaccine no one has so far had severe Covid after taking the vaccine


k
 
Pharma lobby controls government.

They just alleviated you to a holier status in India then if article is to be taken literally.
Pharma lobby controls government.

also what about the phrase Sanksrit term for war and cattle have the same roots and how many cultures see cattle as currency.

why is there a chicken in there? as observer status or volunteer test object.
 
yes the same is true fir the polio vaccine it’s only 98% effective. Like that vaccine no one has so far had severe Covid after taking the vaccine


k
Israel says Pfizer Covid vaccine is just 39% effective as delta spreads, but still prevents severe illness

 
Israel says Pfizer Covid vaccine is just 39% effective as delta spreads, but still prevents severe illness

The goverment lies, all reliable western goverment say two shots are 96% effective in getting covid -19 and 100% effective in preventing death from Covid

k
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom