U.S. to close..

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by UFO

So the Vaccine (Pfizer) was so well tested that they didn't even know that people with allergies should not take it, but hey 10 months is more than enough to test these things - Yeah Right.


Let the games begin

Given it’s a handful of people , it’s likely a few outliers that a trial would have not picked. Standard stuff for medicines.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by UFO

So the Vaccine (Pfizer) was so well tested that they didn't even know that people with allergies should not take it, but hey 10 months is more than enough to test these things - Yeah Right.

The patient information leaflet [1] provided with the Pfizer/BioNTech “BNT162b2" vaccine notes that the vaccine should not be given to someone who is “allergic to the active substance or any of the other ingredients of this medicine” [2], which include potassium chloride, sodium chloride, sucrose and cholesterol.
“Signs of an allergic reaction may include itchy skin rash, shortness of breath and swelling of the face or tongue,” says the leaflet.
The occurrence of any allergic reaction, was one of the factors monitored in the phase 3 clinical trial of this Pfizer/BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine. In this, they reported a very small number of allergic reactions, in both the vaccine and placebo groups (0.63% and 0.51%), a small, but significant difference.
In addition, the leaflet makes it clear that, as with any new medicine available in the UK, “this product will be closely monitored to allow quick identification of new safety information”. It encourages anyone who has received the vaccine to report any side effects using the MHRA’s yellow card [3] procedure.

1. ➥ https://assets.publishing.service.go...19_vaccine.pdf

2. Every medication, I've ever seen, carries this generic caution. ➥ https://www.forbes.com/2011/02/23/du...h=32806bbe54fc

3. ➥ https://yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by UFO

So the Vaccine (Pfizer) was so well tested that they didn't even know that people with allergies should not take it, but hey 10 months is more than enough to test these things - Yeah Right.
Let the games begin

Uh huh. Assuming you're not intending to get vaccinated, when are you selling your boat? The proceeds will buy a lot of e-books, Netflix and food delivery, while the rest of us are out and about.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Uh huh. Assuming you're not intending to get vaccinated, when are you selling your boat? The proceeds will buy a lot of e-books, Netflix and food delivery, while the rest of us are out and about.

LE, why do you force me to post this stuff?:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/chd-re...accine/5731793
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/w...ER-9-25-20.pdf

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

LE, why do you force me to post this stuff?:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/chd-re...accine/5731793
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/w...ER-9-25-20.pdf

Don't blame your compulsions on my 'force'.

Crudely simplistic hypothetical yes/no question: if you have a 1 in 100 chance of catching and dying from virus X, there's a vaccine for X with 90% protection (and nearer 99% chance that X won't kill you if you're vaccinated)... but the vaccine has a 1 in 1000 chance of a serious (but recoverable) adverse reaction, and a 1 in 50,000 chance of killing you... do you get the vaccine? yes or no.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Don't blame your compulsions on my 'force'.

It's the other way around. You have compulsions to disparage peoples right to be skeptical of an inoculation sold by a convicted felon. Here is their rap sheets:
https://www.corp-research.org/pfizer
https://violationtracker.goodjobsfir.../parent/pfizer

[Singularity]

..

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

LE, why do you force me to post this stuff?:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/chd-re...accine/5731793
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/w...ER-9-25-20.pdf

So doc,

A mom brings in her child asking for your recommendation. She read on the internet that PEG floating in the Covid vaccine might cause some nebulous problem.

She also read that a percentage of kids who get Covid develop a multisystem inflammatory syndrome, thrombocytic angiopathy, and diffuse complement activation, leading to systemic inflammation of a more serious/erosive kind (a somewhat less nebulous problem), even if her child is asymptomatic with a Covid infection.

You've got about 12 minutes to rectify/align what she read on the internet vs what you understand about such things.

So what is ultimately your advice to the mother of the child? How do you explain the risks of the different options? What numbers do you use? If you use the wrong numbers, and if the mom acts according to those numbers, and the child suffers...then you're easily subject to professional reprimand and lawsuit if the mom lodges protest with that outcome.

So what is your advice based on all the science?

[Oohla]

Indeed, there are case reports in the medical literature of utricaria and anaphylaxis following injection and ingetion of PEG, but there are quite rare and the risk must be vanishingly small given the widespread use of PEG in ingestants and injectables. As for antibodies to PEG the clinical significance appears to be very low. These statements are based on a quick literature review of Pub Med and Google Scholar. Both useful sources of information that can be used to assess the reasonableness of positions taken by advocacy groups.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

It's the other way around. You have compulsions to disparage peoples right to be skeptical of an inoculation sold by a convicted felon. Here is their rap sheet:
https://www.corp-research.org/pfizer

I AM allergic to terrible thinking, or the lack of thinking. I'll admit that. It's incurable.

“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.”
― Harlan Ellison


(answer the question, please)

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Oohla

Indeed, there are case reports in the medical literature of utricaria and anaphylaxis following injection and ingetion of PEG, but there are quite rare and the risk must be vanishingly small given the widespread use of PEG in ingestants and injectables. As for antibodies to PEG the clinical significance appears to be very low. These statements are based on a quick literature review of Pub Med and Google Scholar. Both useful sources of information that can be used to assess the reasonableness of positions taken by advocacy groups.

Sounds like honest, straightforward and responsible advice that is likely to be persuasive. Certainly more so than disparagement that is.

[Thumbs Up]

They deliberately excluded allergy sufferers from the trial. They knew this would happen all along. They lied. They lie all the time. They have been fined billions of dollars for lying. They are liars. I'm not rolling up my sleeve for a pack of liars.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Singularity

..

So what is your advice based on all the science?

Pfizer (the corporate felon liars), hasn't published their coopted misleading science yet. My advice is that you are being mislead and lied to.

[Thumbs Up]

Originally Posted by Oohla

Indeed, there are case reports in the medical literature of utricaria and anaphylaxis following injection and ingetion of PEG, but there are quite rare and the risk must be vanishingly small given the widespread use of PEG in ingestants and injectables. As for antibodies to PEG the clinical significance appears to be very low. These statements are based on a quick literature review of Pub Med and Google Scholar. Both useful sources of information that can be used to assess the reasonableness of positions taken by advocacy groups.

8% of population have high levels of anti PEG antibodies. 8% is clinically significant.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6512330/

[Oohla]

Received wisdom.
Homework assignment: read, analyize and discuss:


Elsevier
Journal of Pharmacological and Toxicological Methods


Volume 102, March–April 2020, 106678
Review Article
Antibodies against polyethylene glycol in human blood: A literature review




Lu Hong a, 1, Zongkui Wang b, 1, Xin Wei c, Jianyou Shi d, Changqing Li b


https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vascn.2020.106678Get rights and content


Abstract


Polyethylene glycol (PEG) conjugation, i.e. PEGylation, is a successful strategy to improve the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of biopharmaceuticals. In the past few decades, PEGylation technology has developed tremendously, and >15 PEGylated therapeutics have been brought to market, with more in development. However, the widely accepted assumption that PEG would have no antigenicity or immunogenicity is increasingly challenged with popularization of PEGylation technique. Although PEGylation indeed reduces the immunogenicities of the modified molecules, and even appears to completely eliminate their immunogenicities, yet emerging clinical evidence of anti-PEG antibodies (including both pre-existing and PEGylated therapeutics-treatment induced anti-PEG antibodies) have been attracted more and more attention. Anti-PEG antibodies were detected in not only patients treated with PEGylated therapeutics but also PEGylated drugs treatment-naïve individuals with a prevalence from <1% to 72%. In patients, the existing anti-PEG antibodies may attenuate therapeutic efficacy of PEGylated drugs and increase adverse effects. Although there is no golden standard avenue, several types of methods, including passive hemagglutination, Western Blot, enzyme linked immunosorbent assay, flow cytometry, Meso Scale Discovery technology, Acoustic Membrane Microparticle assay, and surface plasmon resonace technique, were established and used to screen, confirm and quantitatively detect anti-PEG antibodies. Herein, we focused on reviewing the prevalence of anti-PEG antibodies in healthy and PEGylated therapeutics-treated patients, and highlighting the detection methods for pre-screening and quantitative detection of anti-PEG antibodies.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Thumbs Up

8% of population have high levels of anti PEG antibodies. 8% is clinically significant.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6512330/

... but do YOU know what this means? In other words, from what you know about PEG reactions, and the PEG used in the current COVID-19 vaccine candidates, what do you predict as the %-age of mild reactions, severe reactions, deaths from the proposed COVID-19 vaccines?

You still haven't answered a simple question, which I guess boils down to what you fear more - COVID-19, or an adverse vaccine reaction.