The "Bad Vaccine Theory" is Deep State Propaganda

posted 3 years ago by eagle123 3 years ago by eagle123 +37 / -6

According to theory the Deep State created COVID-19 in a Wuhan lab.

If they created a virus to control us, keep us in lockdowns, and destroy our economies, it is clear that they would NOT want a cure or a vaccine. They would prefer to keep us in lockdown for years on end and strip our freedoms and wealth.

Trump made a great effort to save us from the lockdowns with his promotion of HCQ and the creation of the vaccine.

Do you really think that Trump would create Operation Warp Speed to kill us all?
Do you really think that if "patriots are in control" that the vaccine would be a bad thing?

No. Clearly, the vaccine is a good thing, and was meant to save us from the Deep State's tyranny.

All of our beliefs come from someone else, and someone may have manipulated you into you thinking that vaccine = bad so maybe Trump = bad. Maybe the DS can't stop the vaccine, doesn't have as much control of the government and media anymore, and can only try to discredit it through alternative channels. What you believe may be unfounded DS propaganda.

Clearly, if Trump and the vaccine actually were good, the DS would try to convince you that it is bad. Don't believe random information. The DS is perfectly capable of spreading misinformation through alternative channels to trick you.

59 comments

59 comments share save hide report block hide replies

You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.

Comments (59)

sorted by:

▲ 2 ▼

– eagle123 [S] 2 points 3 years ago +3 / -1

What's your definition of "rushed" technology? According to the official story they have been studying DNA vaccines for at least 25 years. It was tested on animals in the 1990's and has prior human testing.

Studied for at least 25 years:

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03626-1

“A lot went into the mRNA platform that we have today,” says immunologist Akiko Iwasaki at the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut, who has worked on nucleic-acid vaccines — those based on lengths of DNA or RNA — for more than two decades. The basic research on DNA vaccines began at least 25 years ago, and RNA vaccines have benefited from 10–15 years of strong research, she says, some aimed at developing cancer vaccines. The approach has matured just at the right time; five years ago, the RNA technology would not have been ready.

Animal testing in the 1990's:

https://www.statnews.com/2020/11/10/the-story-of-mrna-how-a-once-dismissed-idea-became-a-leading-technology-in-the-covid-vaccine-race/

Before messenger RNA was a multibillion-dollar idea, it was a scientific backwater. And for the Hungarian-born scientist behind a key mRNA discovery, it was a career dead-end. Katalin Karikó spent the 1990s collecting rejections. Her work, attempting to harness the power of mRNA to fight disease, was too far-fetched for government grants, corporate funding, and even support from her own colleagues.....In 1990, researchers at the University of Wisconsin managed to make it work in mice. Karikó wanted to go further.

The first mRNA vaccine tested on humans was a Rabies vaccine in 2017:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28754494/

"Vaccines based on mRNA coding for antigens have been shown to be safe and immunogenic in preclinical models. We aimed to report results of the first-in-human proof-of-concept clinical trial in healthy adults of a prophylactic mRNA-based vaccine encoding rabies virus glycoprotein (CV7201)."

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 5 ▼

– Martha1776 5 points 3 years ago +5 / -0

Ok then why aren’t there any “vaccines” for every other Corinna virus out there, there are lots of them. The common cold. There has never been a successful mRNA “vaccine”. This isn’t even a vaccine, it is not a vaccine in the unaltered definition of what a vaccine has historically been. Unless this virus has been around for a long time, which we are told it wasn’t lab created and set loose on the world, then it was rushed for this particular virus in one year. If not, we are being lied to. We have been lied to and I don’t trust liars. Take it, but don’t try to convince me to do it because Trump said so, or Fauci said so or Dr Seuss said so. I don’t care who says it, my instinct is telling me no and I’m still alive so I’ll keep trusting myself. If I’m wrong I have no one to blame but myself. However, people trying every other which way to convince me to take it raises red flags. Why do you care if I don’t trust it, you do and if it works you will be fine. Cheers

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 3 ▼

– eagle123 [S] 3 points 3 years ago +3 / -0

The Army's COVID-19 vaccine is aimed at targeting the flu and common cold:

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/coronavirus/article245665350.html

Army COVID-19 vaccine may produce a side benefit: Cure for the common cold

The vaccine that Modjarrad and his team are working on would target not just COVID-19, but also other coronavirus-related illnesses, including several variants of the common cold.

It is also possible that the current Covid-19 vaccine can block against the common cold, and that Trump has cured us of it:

https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/could-the-covid-19-vaccine-prevent-the-common-cold/

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. (KNWA/KFTA) — Could the COVID-19 vaccine lessen your chances of getting the common cold?

It’s a theory brought up during recent Board of Health meetings in Fayetteville. Dr. Gary Berner is a member of the board and he said it is something to keep an eye on. “There is just a couple very, very small reports that there is some crossover of antibodies from the common cold version of the coronavirus to the pandemic causing version of the coronavirus,” he said. “I don’t think we can make any bold claims on that but I think it’s an interesting theory.”

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 4 ▼

– Martha1776 4 points 3 years ago +4 / -0

Go for it buddy! I’m good

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 3 ▼

– Slyver 3 points 3 years ago +3 / -0

There is a huge difference between testing the technologies you are listing above, and testing the vaccines in use today.

Anytime you make the slightest variation in treatment and then shoot it into someone's blood, you have to retest it because biology is complicated, and you never know.

In the case of the things you listed and this vaccine, the changes are not "slight variations." In fact they are HUGE variations, to the point that they aren't the same thing at all, except possibly a loose category association.

These vaccines did not go through proper testing, period.

Previous coronavirus vaccines, caused something called "pathogenic priming". This priming sets up an extreme immune reaction when an organism (human being or other mammal) encounters the virus. It is such a bad reaction that in all previous tests around 5% of the subjects died. This is why we have never had a cold vaccine. In all of our current rounds of vaccines, they didn't perform this test in animals. Instead they are performing it in humans.

The whole planet is this test.

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 2 ▼

– eagle123 [S] 2 points 3 years ago +2 / -0

Anytime you make the slightest variation in treatment and then shoot it into someone's blood, you have to retest it because biology is complicated, and you never know.

Is that why the seasonal flu vaccines have to go through a 10 year testing period before reaching the public?

permalink parent save report block reply

▲ 1 ▼

– Slyver 1 point 3 years ago +1 / -0

There are several differences between the seasonal flu vaccine and any of the medicines being discussed.

They are real vaccines. They inject part of the actual virus. if you take the same part of a new viral strain and inject that, the processes and other ingredients are all identical. If there is variation it is in the virus itself, and that is not the type of "variation" I was talking about at all.
I don't know much about how the influenza virus is processed for the vaccine, but looking at this, it seems the flu vaccines don't actually change except to use previously tested combinations of influenza viruses. I don't get that at all, and it sounds to me like a complete sham, but there it is, so your protest is moot.
In the case of the mRNA vaccine variants I was talking about, I meant variations in the mRNA, nanoparticles holding them, or the solution they are stored in. In the first case, if you inject one mRNA causing your cells to produce one protein, and then inject a different mRNA to produce a different protein, this becomes a completely different technology, even if it uses the same base delivery system and solution. Also, if you change any part of the delivery system or solution it is stored in, again, the difference in actual effect could be huge. By law, it requires a completely new testing program, most importantly including extensive animal testing (which was skipped in these trials).

permalink parent save report block reply