|
Post by ratioetfides on Mar 14, 2021 4:52:41 GMT
"There is merely commentary on a certain line of thinking and its generally necessary end." Considering mine is the position you have been peppering with questions, you need to be more specific about this "certain line of reasoning" lest you come across to others as accusing people falsely. The fact one holds a position held by others does not necessarily indicate a rebuttal or questioning of the same position constitutes some form of personal accusation. It should be noted internet forum posts, including posts using quotations of other posts, can be and are used to address a wider audience than the quoted poster. Additionally it would seem a poster making claims in a public forum would expect and welcome questions regarding the same claims. On occasion potentially singular reflexive pronouns (you) were used in this thread. A redoubled effort will be made to use non-reflexive pronouns such as ‘one.’ Perhaps this will be more comfortable for posters and readers. It should also be noted the comments were broadened from those positions held by one poster to a larger sentiment expressed by others, even though these others constitute a small minority. A critical reading of this thread will provide vindication of the allegations of false accusations.
|
|
|
Post by AgnusDei on Mar 14, 2021 11:26:28 GMT
^ Nicely put. Dominus vobiscum
|
|
joeg
Full Member
Posts: 135
|
Post by joeg on Mar 20, 2021 20:55:09 GMT
Medical ethics from a Catholic perspective involves risk/benefit considerations, well-informed consent, etc. Unfortunately there are some in our culture who think it is okay to do something intrinsically evil in order to try to do some "greater" good. I assume an example of that is when in the early months of the pandemic Dr. Fauci claimed that average folks should not wear mask. Later he admitted he was saying that only to preserve masks for health care workers. www.naturalnews.com/2020-06-26-fauci-pushing-masks-previously-unneeded-supply-shortages.htmlThe inventor of the PCR test explains how his test can be abused--misinterpreted to serve some purpose other than human health. He's also very critical of Fauci. His comments were made before the pandemic but seem prophetic. www.lifesitenews.com/news/inventor-of-covid-test-calls-fauci-a-liar-says-it-doesnt-tell-you-that-youre-sickThen you have what I consider conflicts of interest. I hear that Fauci's US NIH owns half of a key patent for the Moderna vaccine. So I just assume Fauci is a vaccine salesman. There is nothing wrong with salesmen but I won't be well-informed if I only listen to the salesman's pitch. childrenshealthdefense.org/news/new-docs-nih-owns-half-of-moderna-vaccine/So I know that in order to become well informed I have to get some of my medical information from sources that are not receiving significant revenue from Big Pharma and those heavily invested in Pharma (Bill Gates). Corporate media receives a huge amount of its ad revenue from Pharma so I have to look to non profit orgs, retired med school profs, associations of med school profs, etc. Finally these are still experimental vaccines. It is impossible to know well the long-term risks and benefits of the various vaccines until they are well studied. It will take quite some time for the CDC and others to investigate the hundreds of reported deaths and serious injuries in the VAERS database. Obviously some of those will be coincidental, others may be situations where the vaccine was a contributing factor. It must be very difficult to sort all of that out. childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/latest-data-cdc-vaersRisk assessment is rather individual. I have no high risk factors for a bad outcome with this virus. I am not elderly, diabetic, obese. I am confident my blood vitamin D level is not insufficient but more likely near the center of the normal range. I rarely get more than a mild cold. I have access to Ivermectin and the other items in the I-Mask+ protocol of the FLCCC group of emergency med doctors and med school professors with a combined 2000 published papers. Btw, the meta analysis data from the Ivermectin studies are quite encouraging. ivmmeta.com/ There is encouraging study data of vitamin D and COVID. www.grassrootshealth.net/blog/review-vitamin-d-immune-health/There is also the issue of the use of fetal cells from past abortions. I won't be getting the J & J vaccine. I will be following news about the Novavax vaccine. I could be tempted to get that one even though it is doubtful that I need any of them. Supposedly the ethical issue related to fetal cells from abortions is not an issue. It is not using the experimental new mRNA technology of Moderna and Pfizer. Dr M. Syed explains more about Novavax that is still in testing. He seems fond of it. A retired immunologist who years ago developed one of the vaccines used in Australia also seems to prefer Novavax over the more experimental technology used in Moderna and Pfizer. He also bemoans the sad ethical situation in the world today: “We live in a strange post-truth world devoid of honest free speech, integrity, compassion & science.”
|
|
|
Post by pianistclare on Mar 20, 2021 22:19:12 GMT
My pastor is about the most orthodox priest you'll ever find. He says you can receive the vaccine. So I did .
|
|
|
Post by glennonp on Mar 21, 2021 16:44:45 GMT
My pastor is about the most orthodox priest you'll ever find. He says you can receive the vaccine. So I did . Makes sense to me. The fact that both Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict received the vaccine - and have encouraged others to receive it - is also a good recommendation in my eyes.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Mar 21, 2021 20:53:28 GMT
My pastor is about the most orthodox priest you'll ever find. He says you can receive the vaccine. So I did . Taking the vaccine, or not taking it, is not a question of religion, nor of orthodoxy. It's a prudential judgment that everyone has to make for themselves.
I have a hard time understanding how and why many "conservative" religionists, as well as many people of conservative politics, are so resistant to the vaccines, mask-wearing, social distancing, staying out of lengthy crowded situations in enclosed spaces, and so on. Whether a vaccine is abortion-derived or not, that's another thing entirely. There is also the very legitimate question of whether a vaccine developed so quickly, and rushed so quickly to market, has consequences and effects we don't know about. (Remember thalidomide.) But aside from this, I just don't get the objections. (My comments along these lines were judged --- oh, that just slipped out, there's that terrible word again! --- to be a "grievance" on another forum, and I trust that won't be a problem here.)
The TLM congregation (diocesan) with which I have been associated up to now, sends out a newsletter which is scathingly condemnatory of the various safety measures as well as the vaccine. To tell the truth, it makes me feel a bit unwelcome (I will not be returning to Mass at least until I have had both vaccinations), but I just try to remember that this community skews very conservative by every measure --- religion, politics, family life, child-rearing, lifestyle, you name it --- and keep it in perspective that way. I may soon be in circumstances where I can assist at the TLM exclusively --- no attending the Novus Ordo on Sundays I can't get to the TLM (not a condemnation, just stating the facts of the situation) --- and I don't intend to let an arch-conservative mindset keep me away.
|
|
|
Post by katy777 on Mar 21, 2021 21:06:26 GMT
I'll be traveling and I read a famous person tested positive after 2 doses. So I've been pretty isolated wear latex gloves and mask. My hands are proof..I'm allergic to latex..lol.
So I wonder if a person tests positive after a vaccine.
I also get the flu after a flu shot.. different strain.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Mar 22, 2021 0:05:32 GMT
I'll be traveling and I read a famous person tested positive after 2 doses. So I've been pretty isolated wear latex gloves and mask. My hands are proof..I'm allergic to latex..lol. So I wonder if a person tests positive after a vaccine. I also get the flu after a flu shot.. different strain. There is no way for us to avoid all harm that could possibly befall us. I know there is the off, off chance that I could get the virus, either before I get vaccinated, or possibly even after. No vaccine is ever 100% effective. I know that while I am a big, robust, well-fed, active man, and could probably slough off the illness in a few days (or maybe not), my father is very frail --- mysterious degenerative illness, doctors can't figure it out, at this point, every day is a blessing --- and I could bring it home to him, which would probably kill him within days. Yet we must eat, there are necessary things to get from the store, certain errands have to be run, and so on. Beyond a certain point, it just has to be Divine Providence and the resolution that we will not just accept, but joyfully accept, anything Our Blessed Lord sends us, good or bad. When I go to tend to my father's temporal needs in the morning after he's slept (sometimes I just spend the night, it's easier), I just praise God, "he's with us one more day". Unless I have totally missed the entire Christian message the past 45 years, I think that's a lot of what God asks of us.
I'll just be honest, I find Catholicism to be a lot like Buddhism in that regard --- forget your own desires, even your own existence, to the extent that's possible, just accept whatever comes, and accept it with trust and joy, or if you can't manage that, then with detachment and unaffected-ness. (Easier said than done sometimes.)
|
|
|
Post by AgnusDei on Mar 22, 2021 10:19:34 GMT
I like the term, “peaceful resignation”. What happened has already happened. The only thing that can make a difference is how I decide to deal with it. Getting upset is wasted emotion that doesn’t fix the problem. Try to be positive, and just keep going. I believe everything happens for a reason, though I might not understand it now, I will eventually. Dominus vobiscum
|
|
|
Post by josh987654321 on Mar 22, 2021 13:52:59 GMT
How's that saying go again? "Give me the strength to endure what I cannot change, the courage to change what I can change and the wisdom to know the difference."?
God Bless
|
|
|
Post by pianistclare on Mar 22, 2021 15:42:46 GMT
My pastor is about the most orthodox priest you'll ever find. He says you can receive the vaccine. So I did . Taking the vaccine, or not taking it, is not a question of religion, nor of orthodoxy. It's a prudential judgment that everyone has to make for themselves.
I have a hard time understanding how and why many "conservative" religionists, as well as many people of conservative politics, are so resistant to the vaccines, mask-wearing, social distancing, staying out of lengthy crowded situations in enclosed spaces, and so on. Whether a vaccine is abortion-derived or not, that's another thing entirely. There is also the very legitimate question of whether a vaccine developed so quickly, and rushed so quickly to market, has consequences and effects we don't know about. (Remember thalidomide.) But aside from this, I just don't get the objections. (My comments along these lines were judged --- oh, that just slipped out, there's that terrible word again! --- to be a "grievance" on another forum, and I trust that won't be a problem here.)
The TLM congregation (diocesan) with which I have been associated up to now, sends out a newsletter which is scathingly condemnatory of the various safety measures as well as the vaccine. To tell the truth, it makes me feel a bit unwelcome (I will not be returning to Mass at least until I have had both vaccinations), but I just try to remember that this community skews very conservative by every measure --- religion, politics, family life, child-rearing, lifestyle, you name it --- and keep it in perspective that way. I may soon be in circumstances where I can assist at the TLM exclusively --- no attending the Novus Ordo on Sundays I can't get to the TLM (not a condemnation, just stating the facts of the situation) --- and I don't intend to let an arch-conservative mindset keep me away.
|
|
|
Post by homeschooldad on Mar 22, 2021 23:17:09 GMT
How's that saying go again? "Give me the strength to endure what I cannot change, the courage to change what I can change and the wisdom to know the difference."? God Bless The "serenity prayer" is fine, as long as one doesn't lapse into diffidence where "accept what I cannot change" comes into play.
|
|
joeg
Full Member
Posts: 135
|
Post by joeg on Mar 23, 2021 2:21:39 GMT
No. They rushed the vaccine. I am anticipating seeing the vaccines involved in law suits later on for various unforseen effects. "Pharmaceutical companies working on COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics are protected from liability for vaccine injuries under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act)." childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-vaccine-emergency-use-fda/www.phe.gov/Preparedness/legal/prepact/Pages/prepqa.aspxLiability protection for the vaccine manufacturers obviously doesn't make anyone more confident in the system. They make more $ when the vaccines are less safe. Where do people go when they've had an adverse reaction? I sure hope the Pharma Co is thinking more about the common good than quarterly profits. The "warp speed" isn't my biggest concern. My understanding is that they skipped some of the more typical animal studies--at least for most of the available vaccines. An alternative was to do concurrent animal studies but my understanding is that they did not do that. Due to the shorter life span of the animals they could have gotten data on the health of offspring of vaccinated animals, etc. Seems strange they they did not bother to do that since it would not have affected the timing.
|
|
|
Post by ratioetfides on Mar 23, 2021 18:58:53 GMT
Medical ethics from a Catholic perspective involves risk/benefit considerations, well-informed consent, etc. Unfortunately there are some in our culture who think it is okay to do something intrinsically evil in order to try to do some "greater" good. I assume an example of that is when in the early months of the pandemic Dr. Fauci claimed that average folks should not wear mask. Later he admitted he was saying that only to preserve masks for health care workers. www.naturalnews.com/2020-06-26-fauci-pushing-masks-previously-unneeded-supply-shortages.htmlThe inventor of the PCR test explains how his test can be abused--misinterpreted to serve some purpose other than human health. He's also very critical of Fauci. His comments were made before the pandemic but seem prophetic. www.lifesitenews.com/news/inventor-of-covid-test-calls-fauci-a-liar-says-it-doesnt-tell-you-that-youre-sickThen you have what I consider conflicts of interest. I hear that Fauci's US NIH owns half of a key patent for the Moderna vaccine. So I just assume Fauci is a vaccine salesman. There is nothing wrong with salesmen but I won't be well-informed if I only listen to the salesman's pitch. childrenshealthdefense.org/news/new-docs-nih-owns-half-of-moderna-vaccine/So I know that in order to become well informed I have to get some of my medical information from sources that are not receiving significant revenue from Big Pharma and those heavily invested in Pharma (Bill Gates). Corporate media receives a huge amount of its ad revenue from Pharma so I have to look to non profit orgs, retired med school profs, associations of med school profs, etc. Finally these are still experimental vaccines. It is impossible to know well the long-term risks and benefits of the various vaccines until they are well studied. It will take quite some time for the CDC and others to investigate the hundreds of reported deaths and serious injuries in the VAERS database. Obviously some of those will be coincidental, others may be situations where the vaccine was a contributing factor. It must be very difficult to sort all of that out. childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/latest-data-cdc-vaersRisk assessment is rather individual. I have no high risk factors for a bad outcome with this virus. I am not elderly, diabetic, obese. I am confident my blood vitamin D level is not insufficient but more likely near the center of the normal range. I rarely get more than a mild cold. I have access to Ivermectin and the other items in the I-Mask+ protocol of the FLCCC group of emergency med doctors and med school professors with a combined 2000 published papers. Btw, the meta analysis data from the Ivermectin studies are quite encouraging. ivmmeta.com/ There is encouraging study data of vitamin D and COVID. www.grassrootshealth.net/blog/review-vitamin-d-immune-health/There is also the issue of the use of fetal cells from past abortions. I won't be getting the J & J vaccine. I will be following news about the Novavax vaccine. I could be tempted to get that one even though it is doubtful that I need any of them. Supposedly the ethical issue related to fetal cells from abortions is not an issue. It is not using the experimental new mRNA technology of Moderna and Pfizer. Dr M. Syed explains more about Novavax that is still in testing. He seems fond of it. A retired immunologist who years ago developed one of the vaccines used in Australia also seems to prefer Novavax over the more experimental technology used in Moderna and Pfizer. He also bemoans the sad ethical situation in the world today: “We live in a strange post-truth world devoid of honest free speech, integrity, compassion & science.” This appears to be another gish-galloping ride down conspiracy row which has come to be expected by readers of such forums. The piece from LifeSiteNews as well as the poster make no mention of the death of Kary Mullis prior to the pandemic or the context in which Mullis disagreed with Fauci. Mullis did so in the context of using PCR testing to look for the presence of HIV in those suffering from AIDS. Mullis was deeply committed to HIV/AIDS denier viewpoint. In this view HIV is not the causative agent of AIDS. Mullis’ disagreement with Fauci does not address the use of PCR testing as a surveillance tool. The objection, valid or not, was to its use in proving causality. The post references The Children’s Defense Network and The Defender: well known for employing this type of shotgun approach to argumentation. The single article contains references to a large number of somewhat legitimate looking sources. Discerning readers would see these sources largely do not back up the claims of the article, rather only treat somewhat tangential issues and make far weaker assertions than the article. Fauci’s US NIH? Fauci is the director of the NIAID. Neither the NIH nor NIAID regulate vaccines in the US. Vaccine development, approval, regulation, and surveillance is conducted by the FDA. Additional post approval surveillance is conducted by the CDC Ownerships of patents by the NIH allow for the licensing of patent protected medical interventions at greatly reduced prices from commercially held patents. Individual scientists listed as additional patent holders are indeed legible for bonuses funded by royalties of such licensing. Discerning readers will note Fauci’a name is not listed among such persons. Once again the assertion is made vaccination only concerns the individual accepting or declining vaccination. No concern is given to the non-vaccinated person’s ability to spread contagions to the vaccinated or those unable to be vaccinated.
|
|
joeg
Full Member
Posts: 135
|
Post by joeg on Mar 24, 2021 5:29:18 GMT
Quote Ratioetfides: "Ownerships of patents by the NIH allow for the licensing of patent protected medical interventions at greatly reduced prices from commercially held patents. Individual scientists listed as additional patent holders are indeed legible for bonuses funded by royalties of such licensing. Discerning readers will note Fauci’a name is not listed among such persons." I hear that the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) owns half of a key patent for the Moderna vaccine. childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/new-york-times-explains-lack-covid-treatments/ childrenshealthdefense.org/news/new-docs-nih-owns-half-of-moderna-vaccine/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC545012/Dr Fauci runs one of the divisions of the NIH, the NAID. The connection between the NIH and the Moderna vaccine is concerning for a few reasons. From the CHD link above: "NIH’s stake in the jab may explain why Anthony Fauci moved Moderna’s vaccine to the front of the line and to let Moderna skip animal trials despite the experimental technology and the inherent dangers of Coronavirus vaccines. Every prior coronavirus vaccine has proven problematic and can be lethal to animals due to COVID’s unique penchant for “pathogenic priming.” Death occurs only after a vaccinated animal encounters the wild virus." Do I understand correctly that they did not even do animal trials concurrent with the human trials? I wonder why. The shorter life span of animals provides an opportunity to study the health of offspring of vaccinated animals, etc, yet would not have affected the timetable of the human trials. A second issue is the NIH's recommendations about treatments, especially treatments for outpatients. The NIH has been accused by one med school professor of "therapeutic nihilism," the suppression of available treatments that have evidence of efficacy. covexit.com/excellence-in-early-outpatient-treatment-v-therapeutic-nihilism/A Yale prof thinks the suppression of outpatient treatments may be costing tens of thousands of lives. covexit.com/fox-news-laura-ingrahams-stunning-interview-with-yale-professor-harvey-risch/A retired pathologist explains the possible motive for the NIH's suppression of available treatments. The FDA's Emergency Use Authorization regulations prohibit EUA when there is already an effective treatment. If a treatment combo such as the I-Mask+ protocol by the FLCCC group of med school profs was shown to be very effective, Fauci and friends may not have gotten their EUA for the experimental vaccine technology. Or maybe they only would have gotten permission to sell their vaccine to high risk and older folks. www.peakprosperity.com/private-profits-vs-public-health/covid19criticalcare.com/Finally Fauci is all over mainstream media and treated almost as a medical god, even though there is this conflict of interest. He's essentially a vaccine salesman posing as an unbiased public servant. For those interested in coronavirus related patents this document is written by a guy whose company monitors for possible violations in international biowarfare related agreements. He is apparently also not fond of Fauci and friends such as UNC's coronavirus researcher, R. Baric. f.hubspotusercontent10.net/hubfs/8079569/The%20FauciCOVID-19%20Dossier.pdfFor those who prefer a video summary of some of Baric's coronavirus "gain of function" research (AKA bioweapons research) along with the Wuhan lab in China check out this several minute overview by a retired pathologist. Note you'll hear the term "zinc ionophore." The controversial medication hydroxychloroquine is the best known zinc ionophore. They move zinc into cells where zinc inhibits an enzyme needed by the virus to replicate. There is study data about this going back at least ten years. youtu.be/1plkwhi5KUE?t=1767For those who get some of their medical news from sources that don't get funding from Big Pharma there is much about the pandemic that doesn't smell right. The fact that so little of this is heard on corporate media and at times is even censored just adds to the suspicions. Just one more example. We all want safe and effective vaccines to be available; however we hear about the vaccines ad nauseam. It is as if they are pretending that the vaccines are our only hope against this virus. But we all know that most people who had a positive COVID19 test result got sent home without medication and recovered. Obviously for most people our God-given immune system was sufficient to fight the virus. Why is there so little discussion about support for that God-given immune system? There is now a pile of information about vitamin D and respiratory infections such as C19. Some of it is presented here for average folks. www.grassrootshealth.net/blog/review-vitamin-d-immune-health/They've known that many people are deficient in vitamin D in the Winter, especially the elderly and darker skinned people. Studies reported that those deficient in vitamin D were more likely to test positive and tended to have worse outcomes. A couple studies using vitamin D as a medication in hospitals reported faster recovery times or reduced ICU admission or a reduction in deaths. Catholics are obliged to care for one's gift of life every day, not just during a pandemic. Allowing oneself to become deficient in a substance required for adequate health is not virtuous, especially during a pandemic. So why have we heard so little about correcting vitamin D deficiency? Some people talk about vaccine mandates? Is anyone talking about a mandate to eliminate vitamin D deficiency? The Dems talk endlessly about racism and health care. Clearly they are two important issues. However are they and their friends in the media stressing the importance of being tested for vitamin D deficiency during a pandemic? The lack of balance between coverage of the experimental vaccines and correcting well known vitamin D deficiency seems strange.
|
|