
My reasons for not getting the infamous Covid-19 vax were outlined in this 2021 post, Therefore I tell you, do not be anxious about your life.
I was relatively young (certainly nowhere near the at-risk demographic), healthy, flu-exposed, and doubtful that the C-19 vax would be any more effective than the normal flu vaccines that I’d rejected for thirty years. Also I knew that corona viruses were tough to combat due to their often not hitting the immune systems at all, re-producing fast in the nose and the lungs to spread to other humans and then fading fast – as well as mutating quickly, leaving vaccines to catch up. And by the time I wrote that in June, as the Labour government belatedly started to try and catch up on vaccinations, it was quite obvious that the vaccination wasn’t stopping people from catching the disease (the term “breakthrough infections” didn’t last long as the numbers of them rapidly rose) or spreading it to others, which is a big fail for a “vaccine”. At best you could say that it was a viral therapy that would probably stop you getting very sick, a key factor for old people most at risk.
What I didn’t say at the time was that I also suspected I’d already caught the bug, either in Italy in late 2019 or back in NZ in January 2020: in both cases it was the sniffles but also some mild joint pain which is the indicator of flu. In both cases I was fine after 24 hours and some Nurofen. So I figured I had immunity and that seems to be confirmed by my never having caught it since then, despite being around a lot of people when they had it, most of whom proudly told me they’d been “jabbed”.
I wasn’t afraid of the virus or the vaccine and in the case of the latter was actually quite fascinated by the mRNA technology since I’d been following for years the progress in using genetic engineering to tackle cancer.
As such I merely noted with interest the efforts to tie the vaccines to the rise in youthful myocarditis, screwy mortality figures for 18-29 year olds, life insurers reporting massive increases in late 2021 for the 18-64 mortality rates, a spike in miscarriages, and overall higher adverse reactions than one should expect from a vaccine. Such things had no bearing on my original decision.
And the one health hazard I purposely ignored were the efforts made to tie the vaccine to cancer. That seemed just a step too far to contemplate, even as people around me, including many vaccinated people, began to talk in astonishment about the numbers of folk they knew who were getting cancer. I admit that I was a bit concerned when a close mate died last year and for the first time I heard the term “turbo cancer” and another mate a bit younger than me and in perfect health got cancer this year. But I don’t take much notice of anecdata, only actuaries, anti-vaxxers have long been trying to tie all vaccines to various diseases, and none of the proposed explanations for the mechanism made any sense to me.
It was the one aspect of the C-19 vaccines that did seem to fairly fall into the category of conspiracy theory.
However, it would seem that TPTB and their MSM mates are finally willing to concede that something weird has been going on with cancer in the last three years and they have an explanation, courtesy of the Washington Post:
Unusual cancers emerged after the pandemic. Doctors ask if covid is to blame? It’s not a new idea that viruses can cause or accelerate cancer. But it will probably be years before answers emerge about covid and cancer.
Viruses certainly can cause cancer. I lost a high-school and varsity mate to liver cancer back in 1999 after he’d caught Hep B and D in Africa several years earlier. He survived that, although he lost a hell of a lot of weight, but knew his number might be up for cancer as a result, and so it was.
There’s just one problem with the theory and this article by David Strom gets stuck into it:
Coronaviruses don’t cause cancer. We know that, since people get them all the time. The common cold is often a coronavirus. It would be rather shocking to discover that, this ONE time, one suddenly does.
To be fair even the Washington Post acknowledges that, quoting two experts: John T. Schiller, a National Institutes of Health researcher and pioneer in the study of cancer-causing viruses, and David Tuveson, director of the Cancer Center at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory and former president of the American Association for Cancer Research:
- Said Schiller, “You can never say never, but that sort of … virus does not suggest being implicated in cancers.”
- Tuveson said there’s no evidence the coronavirus directly transforms cells to make them cancerous.
Yet despite quoting these experts and acknowledging a 100% medical history of no connection between coronaviruses and cancer, the WaPo article still spends the rest of its space arguing for that connection.
Moreover, despite trying to connect the rise in rare cancers to this one unique virus, they are absolutely determined to not connect them to the other unique medical event of the same period:
it’s also important to emphasize that the research and other recent papers focusing on covid and cancer involve acute infection or long covid; they do not suggest a link between the coronavirus vaccine and cancer — misinformation that some anti-vaccine groups have spread in recent months.
To paraphrase Salieri, it simply has to be the virus.
It has to be.
It better be.
Could it be the (not) extensively tested ‘vaccine’?
https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/10/2056
[Mod – I’ve added the above excerpt for those who don’t want click on an unknown website]
Well that’s the problem in a nutshell.
If you did prove that it’s the spike protein on the SARS–CoV–2 virus screwing with DNA repair by impeding other proteins, then you’d would be making the case the Washington Post so desperately wants to make.
You’d also have to then acknowledge that the same spike protein produced by the body after being triggered by the mRNA vaccines would cause the same damage.
But the problem then would be differentiating the two causes in a world of people who almost all have been either vaccinated or naturally infected. As far as I know there is no difference between the spike protein on the virus and the ones produced by the human body in response to the vaccine – the whole point was to make sure they were identical.
At best – and it might be good enough – you could then conclude that since the spike protein can cause cancer we shouldn’t create it in the body in greater numbers via the vaccine than what may have happened with an infection.
========
BTW, while that’s a good explanation it’s still not mechanistic enough for me (and proteins are all about mechanics). How does the spike protein “impede” the BRCA1 and 53BP1 proteins? The authors admit that the mechanism remains unclear. More studies and time will tell I suppose.
And of course it was ultimately retracted after a few months, which could be the usual politics surrounding Covid-19 (I wouldn’t deny that in the wake of the Fauci revelations), but could also be because the authors or others found a flaw in their study?
When you look into why the paper was retracted it would appear to be the SOP for Covid politics. The official reason was the paper was not peer reviewed and concerns were raised around procedure. Interesting the findings were not argued.
as far as mechanics the paper is a good answer. In layman’s terms: During mitosis dna strands snap. When there are foreign bodies present in the nucleus the normal repair process is impeded. The spike protein on its own is small enough to pass through into the nucleus to stop the repair process.
There is a lot of anecdotal evidence that the vaccinated are prone to all sorts of diseases due to their immunity system been compromised.
In NZ, it’s generally all covered up and all sorts of stats had their data reorganised to hide the problem.
In one example, people in hospital with myocarditis routinely get told they have pneumonia instead.