New Fever and Migraine Vaccine!

Make sure you are protected!

This is in regard to those who claim the covid (mRNA) jabs are real 'vaccines'!

Yes! Come and get your jab!

Every time you get a fever simply take our new Bayer fever and migraine vaccine!

It helps your body survive by fighting off your fever and preventing death.

Our Bayer aspirin vaccine inhibits an enzyme cyclooxygenase (COX) which is necessary to make prostaglandins—those natural chemicals in our body that produce pain, inflammation and fever.

So stop down to our jab center every time you have a fever and get our free vax it may save your life! Be afraid! Be very afraid!

Penn Develops mRNA Flu Vaccine

Penn Medicine
https://www.pennmedicine.org › news › november › p...

Nov 25, 2022 — PHILADELPHIA – An experimental mRNA-based vaccine against all 20 known subtypes of influenza virus provided broad protection from otherwise ...



Sorry anything that does not actually 'immunize' and prevent reoccurance functions no different in efficacy then the common aspirin which also provides a short term fix and also does not prevent future fevers and migraines.

Be sure to stop down to the jab shop 'every week' to remain protected and get your jabs today!

Explain why a temporary bandaid should be labeled a 'vaccine' which since its first definition creates a vaccine referred to a resulting long term immunity compared to todays definition of take two jabs and call me in the morning and if that dont work take two more? There are lots of drugs that stimulate a temporary immuno response that are not vaccines!


Pharmaceuticals Could Be Weakening Your Immune System

Alternative to Meds Center
https://www.alternativetomeds.com › blog › pharmace...

Jan 25, 2022 — Long-term medication use can lead to a dysregulated immune system. This may create either a weakened or an overstimulated immune response.

So the point is that anything that produces an increased or decreased immuno response is a vaccine?

Seriously?

Why should we accept that level of language lameness?

 

What about the COIVD vaccines that don't use the mRNA method? Are they "real" vaccines?

If you're taking something after infection to treat existing symptoms it obviously isn't vaccination so your sarcastic hyperbole falls at the first hurdle.

But that is exactly what the mRNA Flu Vaccine described in the article you linked is intended to do. It isn't a treatment taken to address current impact, it is a vaccine taken to reduce the scale and scope of potential future infections.

The key difference here, and a possible source of your confusion (or intentional misrepresentation) is that these are more broad spectrum vaccines than many established ones, being developed against the highly mutable viruses that it has always been difficult to create effective vaccination for. They don't target a single strain of a virus but a wider set of strains and variations (potentially including ones that don't even exist yet). One consequence of that is that they many not have the same level of efficacy as more focused vaccines - they do more, but not as well. That doesn't mean they're objectively bad though, it's just that the task they're created to achieve is more difficult, and it doesn't mean they can't be used to provide significant improvements to infection rates, severity of infection, serious illness and death rates. It certainly doesn't mean they're not vaccines.

That's true to an extent (though potentially just as true of "alterative medicine", assuming they actually do anything) but I don't see the relevance here.

Of course not, and I don't see where anyone has suggested that. A vaccine is something intentionally created to stimulate or enhance an immune response to particular pathogens in the event of the patient encountering them in the future.

We don't, that is why your choice of language in the field keeps getting challenged or corrected.

 

It's part of the human condition to buy what snakeoil salesmen sell. So sad.

 

I think you should consider:

"For the new study, Davis and his colleagues were armed with state-of-the-art technology, pioneered by Mallajosyula in Davis’ lab, that permitted them to precisely measure changes in levels of killer T cells directed specifically at cells infected by SARS-CoV-2. The researchers analyzed blood samples from three categories of study participants: people with no history of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection who were getting their first and second doses of the new mRNA vaccine, unvaccinated COVID-19 patients, and those getting the vaccine who’d previously been infected by the virus but who had now recovered — at least, apparently.

The researchers monitored the proliferation and activation of killer T cells specifically directed against SARS-CoV-2 in these individuals, drawing blood at several time points starting on the day of their first vaccine dose — or, in unvaccinated COVID-19 patients, on the first day they manifested symptoms.

Uninfected vaccine recipients experienced a greater than 60-fold rise in their levels of SARS-CoV-2-targeting killer T cells. By six weeks after their first dose, one in every five of their killer T cells was SARS-CoV-2-specific.

COVID-19 patients showed more lackluster results: Average levels of their total SARS-CoV-2-specific killer T cells were less than one-tenth those of infection-free vaccinees — despite the fact that the vaccine contains only one part of the virus (the so-called spike protein SARS-CoV-2 uses to latch onto cells) while infection by the actual virus can generate killer T cell responses to multiple components.

Recovered COVID-19 patients’ SARS-CoV-2-specific response to vaccination also lagged behind that of never-infected participants’ response. Three weeks after the second dose of the two-dose mRNA-vaccine regimen, killer T cells narrowly targeting SARS-CoV-2 were less than one-seventh as prevalent in previously infected vaccinees’ blood as they were in the blood of never-infected vaccinees at the same time point. These cells, moreover, seemed less warlike, by virtue of the signaling substances they secreted, in previously infected than in never-infected vaccine recipients.

Helper T cells were not strongly affected by prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. In contrast to killer T cells’ in-your-face behavior, these cells play a more managerial role. This includes encouraging antibody production by other immune cells called B cells.

Antibody production upon reinfection of former SARS-CoV-2 patients remains robust, Davis said.

“But antibodies mostly only block infection — they’re much less able to root out established infections,” he said. “Only killer T cells can do that. We think the infection-induced shortage of functional killer T cells may be one factor that’s helping give rise to long COVID, because these impaired killer T cell populations aren’t adequately eliminating all infected cells — and they’re becoming exhausted in trying to do so.”

Researchers from Emory University contributed to the work.

The study was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health (grants U19AI057229 and U01AI14049; the Howard Hughes Medical Institute; the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; the Stanford Institute for Immunity, Transplantation and Infection; the Sean N. Parker Center; and the Sunshine Foundation."​

https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2023/03/vaccine-covid-infection.html?trk=public_post_comment-text

Do you have a comment on their conclusions?

 

"The study was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health (grants U19AI057229 and U01AI14049; the Howard Hughes Medical Institute; the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation; the Stanford Institute for Immunity, Transplantation and Infection; the Sean N. Parker Center; and the Sunshine Foundation."

NIH, Bill and Melinda Gates (two corrupt genociders) and Sean Parker (a convicted drug addict) who was in charge/creating of a file sharing platform that was stealing millions if not billions of $$$ from musicians. Oh did I mention he also partnered up with the GREEDY scumbag, Peter Thiel at his venture capital thefitdom that made a name for itself by sucking the life's blood out of the working class stiffs in exchange for a controlling equity stake only to sell off the business assets bit-by-bit. And last but not least the Standford Institute in which our "CORRUPT" federal government megalomaniacs are the sponsors of approximately 78 percent of these "PROPAGANDA" & "BRAINWASHING" pseudo-science projects, like the one posted above.

 

Based on HJ and LM's posts our new definition of 'Vaccine' would have to include all immuno stimulants so who would have guessed we can grow our own vaccines in the back yard!

Immune System Effects of Echinacea, Ginseng,
and Astragalus: A Review Keith I. Block, MD, and
Mark N. Mead, MS

Traditional herbal medicine provides several remedies for
strengthening the body’s resistance to illness through effects
on immune system components.

This review article exam-
ines 3 popular herbal immune stimulants that are often of in-
terest to cancer patients. Echinacea, a native of North
America, is widely used to prevent, or provide early treat-
ment for, colds. Preclinical studies lend biological plausibil-
ity to the idea that echinacea works through immune
mechanisms. Numerous clinical trials have been carried out
on echinacea preparations: it appears that the extracts
shorten the duration and severity of colds and other upper
respiratory infections (URIs) when given as soon as symp-
toms become evident. However, trials of long-term use of
echinacea as a preventive have not shown positive results.
Ginseng has been studied in some depth as an antifatigue
agent, but studies of immune mechanisms have not pro-
ceeded so far. Preclinical evidence shows some immune-
stimulating activity. There have been several clinical trials in
a variety of different diseases. Astragalus is the least-studied
agent. There are some preclinical trials that show intriguing
immune activity. The herbs discussed appear to have satis-
factory safety profiles. Cancer patients may wish to use these
botanicals to inhibit tumor growth or to boost resistance to
infections. However, passive immunotherapy with herbs,
with no mechanism to expose tumor antigens, is unlikely to
be effective in inhibiting tumor growth. Although the margin
of safety for these herbs is large, more research is needed to
demonstrate the clear value of using herbs to improve resis-
tance to infections.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1534735403256419

I never guessed that I was growing vaccines in my back yard!