I noticed here in Canada we are getting many doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine(and the media is already claiming they aren't as good as Pfizer or Moderna which tells me they are probably safer). I have done a lot of research on the mRNA vaccines and I really think there is something truly sinister going on with them.
But when it comes to this other ones such as AstraZeneca and Sputnik from Russia, I don't have much experience. Has anyone researched these?
I wouldn't go near any of these with a 10 foot pole but I have friends and family members who refuse to hear logic when it comes to the Covid vaccine, so I am thinking maybe at the very least I can push them in the direction of avoiding the Pfizer and Moderna.
You have expressed your feelings, and that's well and good. I express my feelings all the time too, but you have provided no evidence to support them (not that I expect you to, but stating a fact for context). I have yet to see credible evidence (and I have looked a LOT) that the coronavirus has not been isolated. In fact, I have found a fair bit of credible evidence that it has, some of which is listed above.
Your assessment on what you think has happened to the virus is not supported by the evidence. It also doesn't jive with my years of experience in a related field. I'm not a virologist but I am close enough to one to demand good evidence (that I will fully understand) of outrageous claims that run contrary to my years of experience.
For example, your assessment of its "changing because its too far from the original SARS" is just not how these things work. Nature doesn't care about the original SARS (whatever that even means). I make "not nature" DNA all the time. If I put that into E. coli, or a human cell line for example, it can be perfectly happy indefinitely, in many cases happier than the "natural" variant under harsher circumstances.
People who have not studied biology extensively think there is a difference between nature and lab. While that is not completely untrue, it is not true in the ways people think. The only real difference between the two is how likely one will get a desired result. Both produce good and bad results (sometimes the exact same result), but in a lab, a good result is more likely.
As for SARS specifically, there is evidence (which I would have to look up because I didn't save it) that it was being developed for a long time. I've seen evidence it was first developed somewhere other than Wuhan (a lab in Africa maybe?) and was then moved to the Wuhan lab for further development and because it was a better place to release it.