What does the "science" say?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (63)
sorted by:
Except at the end, what is talked about in that video is a short term effect. The ADE is a long term effect. They are completely different scopes of problems.
The video talks about the S protein "getting in the way" because they are sticking out. I have a big problem with that idea. First, they are way too small relative to the size of a capillary or blood cell, second, all cells have all sorts of proteins just like the S protein sticking out.
I think there may be something to the blood clots happening in the capillaries. In fact, I think its likely. Blood cells spend more time squeezing through a capillary than they do flowing through veins and arteries, so if there is going to be an interaction with blood cell/vasculature or blood cell/blood cell it is entirely probable it would happen in the capillaries, but whatever the reason is, I don't think that part of it was correct. It just doesn't make sense for the reasons I listed. That doesn't mean its not the reason, but to me, it makes no sense, so data would be needed to show it before I will consider it.
Having said that, I mostly agree with the other things he said. I also disagree with his assessment of "permanent damage," though that is an argument with the larger medical community that I have.
I also see why you said "dead in three years." Those reactions he was talking about are rare. I do think they have happened. It does seem a plausible long term effect, but the data suggests it will be a rarity, not a common reaction. Just like "long term covid" is very rare according to the data (they are likely related reactions).
As for the S protein being the disease, that is true for sure, though it is not the only problem with either SARS-CoV-2 or the vaccines it is probably the biggest one in both cases (though the autoimmune problems with the vaccine may be equal or even worse to S protein problems).