Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Israel has no COVID-19 deaths this week.

Wait, you mean we didn't need to destroy the economy?!?!?!????

More kids die of diarrhea every month at home than from C19. Nearly all Covid cases in kids are one of about 7 corona cold viruses.

Well, Taiwan, Greenland and Iceland didnt. S Dakota didnt.

Maybe the problem was that govt funded medical groups failed to investigate and promote NORMAL DESEASE RESPONSE TREATMENTS.

Dr. Peter McCullough tells ‘Tucker Carlson Today’ the world has gone 'off the rails' with treating COVID-19 | Fox News
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dr...one-off-the-rails-with-treating-covid-19

Let me make it simple:

1. If you got the shot, shut the phuqq up. You’re safe.

2. If you didn’t get the shot, shut the phuqq up. You’re safe.

None of you stupid phuqqs will be around long enough for any of it to matter. Fear motivated people to get it, fear keeps people from getting it.

Moral of the story: make a choice and shut the phuqq up.

These are the same phuqqtards that bitch about what they are free to do and don’t step on my rights blah, blah, blah.

Wear a mask, don’t wear a mask. Get a shot, don’t get a shot. Either way, what the other guy does, doesn’t affect YOU.

So......


Shut the phuqq up!

Folks might take you a little more seriously if you could spell disease correctly...doc.


LMFAO


mike r

Leave him be, he's hittin the bottle already.

Moderna's SEC filing

Some exerpts:

mRNA medicines are a novel approach, and negative perception of the efficacy, safety, or tolerability of any investigational medicines that we develop could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business, advance our investigational medicines, or obtain regulatory approvals.

As a potential new class of medicines, no mRNA medicines have been approved to date by the FDA or other regulators. Adverse events in clinical trials of our investigational medicines or in clinical trials of others developing similar products and the resulting publicity, as well as any other adverse events in the field of mRNA medicine, or other products that are perceived to be similar to mRNA medicines, such as those related to gene therapy or gene editing, could result in a decrease in the perceived benefit of one or more of our programs, increased regulatory scrutiny, decreased confidence by patients and clinical trial collaborators in our investigational medicines, and less demand for any product that we may develop. Our large pipeline of development candidates and investigational medicines could result in a greater quantity of reportable adverse events, including suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions, or SUSARs, other reportable negative clinical outcomes, manufacturing reportable events or material clinical events

😆🤣

And more:

While we aim to segregate risk using modalities, there may be foreseen and unforeseen risks across modalities in whole or in part. These include, but are not limited to, mRNA, chemical modifications, and LNPs and their components. In addition, if any one or more of our clinical programs encounter safety, tolerability, or efficacy problems, developmental delays, regulatory issues, or other problems, our platform approach and business could be significantly harmed. We may believe that a particular modality has been de-risked but later determine that new and different risks exist with respect to such modality.

In addition, the biology risk across the majority of our pipeline represents targets and pathways not clinically validated by one or more approved drugs. While we believe we have made progress in seeking to reduce biology risk in certain settings, such as for vaccine targets for which we and others have shown the utility of neutralizing antibodies, the risk that the targets or pathways that we have selected may not be effective will continue to apply across the majority of our current and future programs.
While we attempt to diversify our risks by developing one or more programs in each modality, there are risks that are unique to each modality and risks that are applicable across modalities. These risks may impair our ability to advance one or more of our programs in clinical development, obtain regulatory approval, or ultimately commercialize our programs, or cause us to experience significant delays in doing so, any of which may materially harm our business.

Certain features in our development candidates and investigational medicines, including those related to mRNA, chemical modifications, surface chemistries, LNPs, and their components, may result in foreseen and unforeseen risks that are active across some or all of our modalities. Any such portfolio spanning risks, whether known or unknown, if realized in any one of our programs would have a material and adverse effect on our other programs and on our business as a whole.

There are specific additional risks to certain of our modalities and our programs as a whole. For example, prophylactic vaccines typically require clinical testing in thousands to tens of thousands of healthy volunteers to define an approvable benefit-risk profile. The need to show a high degree of safety and tolerability when dosing healthy individuals could result in rare and even spurious safety findings, negatively impacting a program prior to or after commercial launch. While we believe that certain safety, tolerability, and levels of immunogenicity we have observed in the early-stage clinical trials in our prophylactic vaccine programs are sufficient to initiate additional trials, there can be no assurance that we will observe acceptable safety or efficacy profiles in later-stage trials required for approval of these programs. For neoantigen cancer vaccines, to date, no molecular (non-cell-based) therapeutic protein vaccine has been shown to be effective against cancer and there are many clinical and manufacturing challenges to personalized medicines, including cell-based therapies and vaccines. These risks include: a rapid production turn-around time that is measured in weeks in order to supply patients in our clinical trials before further progression and mutation of their tumors, the significant costs incurred in making individualized vaccines, and potential lack of immune responses potentially due to the biology of the tumor or immune status of the patient. These and other risks apply to our PCV and other neoepitope investigational medicine programs. Additionally, there may be challenges in delivering an adequate quantity of active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, required to drive efficacy due to the limitation in volume of API that can be delivered to a specific location, like a tumor or injured tissue. Our therapies for local injections often require specialized skills for conducting a clinical trial that could delay trials or slow or impair commercialization of an approved investigational medicine due to the poor adoption of injected local therapeutics or intratumoral therapies. In addition, the uncertain translatability of target selection from preclinical animal models, including mouse and non-human primate models, to successful clinical trial results may be impossible, particularly for immuno-oncology and systemic therapies, and cancer vaccines. In general, several biological steps are required for delivery of mRNA to translate into therapeutically active medicines. These processing steps may differ between individuals or tissues, and this could lead to variable levels of therapeutic protein, variable activity, immunogenicity, or variable distribution to tissues for a therapeutic effect. Gene therapies and mRNA-based medicines may activate one or more immune responses against any and all components of the drug product (e.g., the mRNA or the delivery vehicle, such as an LNP) as well as against the encoded protein, giving rise to potential immune reaction related adverse events. Eliciting an immune response against the encoded protein may impede our ability to achieve a pharmacologic effect upon repeat administration or a side effect. These risks apply to all of our programs, including our systemic secreted therapeutics and systemic intracellular therapeutics modalities.

And you can always tell an ass kisser when they jump in to take a cheap shot like Chester the Terrier.

He’s a Fugkin eye doctor

Nailed it. Perfectly !

LMAO

Black Fart be on that Covid retirement plan. Lol

Yeah, im notta freakin English teacher. Sheesh.

Lv, sometimes I'm pulling this stuff up on an I ph and copying it and posting with big fingers.

Do you really think Im going to proof read it for the few spell cops who have problems figuring it out like you?

What did you think of the info provided by the good Dr, or could you not get past having a big O over my blunder?

Says the liberal moron.

Libs like you and Idaho Poof spout CNN propaganda on the 'fire, like it was the cogito, but demand a "peer reviewed" study from a member that posts that the sun is comin up tomorrow.

That's why y'all remain perpetually stupid.

They’re just hatin’ on you, Doc

Oh they love the chance to Bob.

The quality of wine matters less to some than the color of its label.

I'm doubting he could have understood the message had he heard it, but he wanted us to know he was smart enough to spell disease

Crap, my finger just had it as fisease but this time spell check changed it to disease. Whew. Thank you Lord.

He'd have busted a nut.

DOC, maybe try for quality over quantity.



mike r