20 Comments
User's avatar
Dixie Belle's avatar

I’ve been in healthcare as a nurse throughout this debacle. I said from the beginning, with basic biology as my foundation, that I would not take any injection that changed mRNA because it would affect your DNA. Unfortunately, this simple information was not publicized until, I believe, Sweden did some research and published their findings that indeed your DNA was changed within hours of the injection. In addition to that, the numbers of unusual cancers, cancers found in final stages and untreatable, Parkinson’s diagnoses, heart issues exacerbated, etc. have not been reported as vaccine injury or caused by vaccine. It’s sad that so many, in fear, took these killing vaccines. And the killing continues as folks bodies continue to be compromised. I’ve come to ask, did they get the vaccine, whenever previously healthy individuals are suddenly dying.

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

Dixie: I'm in full agreement.

Expand full comment
Thomas R. Klaiber's avatar

Hi John,

I just tried commenting to the FDA in regards to the mRNA gene therapy wrongfully labelled as vaccines. I got a few sentences typed in and then all of a sudden everything I typed just disappeared. I guess someone or something did not like what I had to say. Apparently censorship is still alive and well!

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

Thomas: I suspect that the site was simply overloaded — no conpiracy hypothesis needed. I had no trouble when I sent in mine. Try again!

Expand full comment
Van Snyder's avatar

Trump 45 accepted the advice of Fauci and Birx, and paid for development and distribution of the first mRNA vaccines to make them available to people who wanted them. Biden made them mandatory and punished people who wouldn't accept them. Now we know Fauci lied.

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

VS: Trump is not a medical expert, and it was reasonable that he listened to people with the credentials of Fauci and Birx. To his credit Trump also added the voice of Dr. Scott Atlas to their top level meetings — but he was drowned out by the anti-science majority. It's interesting that when Trump got COVID, he ignored the advice of Fauci & Birx and took HCL — which worked as advertised.

Expand full comment
Carter Crain's avatar

Why is the name of the MD who wrote this not included?

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

Carter: I asked him for permission to quote him, but have not heard back yet. That said, he sent it to me and It is publicly posted on the FDA site.

Expand full comment
Carter Crain's avatar

How do I find it?

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

Carter: May I ask why?

Expand full comment
Carter Crain's avatar

Curiosity and to see if there similar comments or responses. I followed one of the links and saw that autopsies were not continued on those who died so there is an absence of important information.

Expand full comment
Mike Dearing's avatar

If Covid vaccinations were really lethal, I and millions of others would already be dead. How about instead giving a critique of the anti-vaxxers and the concommitant harm caused thereby?

To take another example: MMA vaccines had successfully has eradicated childhood diseases, but now they are resurging. But, hey, experts and scientists suck?!

Expand full comment
Iva's avatar

You don’t know how much your lifespan has been reduced by the damage to your genes. If you feel good today, that doesn’t mean you have not taken the damage. Time will tell for you.

While it is clear that many have been maimed and killed. You just don’t care about them. It suits you to stay in your bubble.

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

Mike: Just like smoking, no one is saying that these injections are lethal to everyone.

The indisputable facts about COVID-19 injections are: 1) they were experimental, and so different from prior vaccines that they should NOT have been called "vaccines" [acknowledging this reality, the CDC changed their official definition of a vaccine], 2) outside of the manufacturer, no one knew exactly what was in them, 3) prior to their release, zero long-term safety studies were done, 4) similarly, zero studies were done analyzing the effects on people with other serious health issues (e.g., Parkinson's) — which comprises over 50% of the American population, and 5) to further confuse the public, Relative Risk was presented, instead of Absolute Risk <https://criticallythinking.substack.com/p/absolute-vs-relative-risk>.

The public should have been told all this. If fully informed citizens subsequently chose to get injected, that's fine. However, under NO CIRCUMSTANCES should citizens be mandated to accept such an experimental and unscientifically proven treatment.

Expand full comment
Mike Dearing's avatar

Thanks for your consideration.

Nonetheless, I feel that these arguments are specious, in the context of the time of the pandemic, not least the idea that anybody was mandated to take the "vaccines" on offer. On the contrary, many people knew there had been no long-term trials and validation, but equally it's hard to maintain that the medication didn't help. Perhaps we should have stuck to chloroquine, as advocated by #45.

We live with risks all the time, but accentuating this one as though it's another Thalidomide seems a bit much.

Of course, it makes sense for scientists and the appropriate authorities to persist with research into the efficacy of these remarkable medications. We should wish them well.

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

Mike: Since you did not respond to my five (5) points, plus the underlying requirement that citizens should be fully informed, it sound like you prefer political science to Real Science.

Expand full comment
Mike Dearing's avatar

Ahem, political science? I notice that a certain Dr Ryan Cole is presenting identical arguments to yours, using exactly the same wording. Also, I see a number of others presenting as scientists waging was against mRNA shots.

Pardon me for suspecting that there is political motive before scientific endeavour being presented to a biddable audience.

Expand full comment
John Droz's avatar

Mike: I don't know Dr. Cole and have not communicated with him. Most independent scientists would come to the same five conclusions that I stated. If you dispute them then you have departed from Real Science and are advocating political science.

And according to your logic, the MRNa advocates have no financial or other motives, while the MRNa questioners, are flat earrthers. Really?

Expand full comment
Mike Dearing's avatar

John: my inbox is presently replete with claims from US sources about the evil of mRNA (jabs, shots, whatever) all playing to the same hymn sheet. It seems like a politically motivated campaign. If UK and EU health authorities were to agree, I would pay attention, because unlike the FDA they are not under attack for not kowtowing to right-wing tropes. In the meantime, I am unsurprised that Big Pharma profits, as they did with treatments for HIV, but that's not evidence of scientific malfeasance.

Expand full comment