Would you take the covid vaccine if it contained cannabis?

Started by lauermar, January 14, 2022, 09:17:17 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Jayne

Quote from: Tennessean on January 17, 2022, 08:22:15 AM
So why are you offended a fraction of us won't be taking the abortion-tainted gene therapy, instead of getting happy there may be vaccines in the pipeline, which are gaining approval in Asia, Europe, Africa, and possibly America, and which are even more remotely tainted than the mRNA? You should be happy the alternatives to the garbage you took are getting green-lit. Grow some skin. I'm not changing my worldview or commiserating with you just because I used some JJ shampoo once.

I have to admit that I really don't know what point the OP was making, but I am pretty sure that nobody here is offended when people choose to avoid vaccines that have a remote connection to abortion.  It is good to avoid even remote material cooperation with evil when possible and it will be good to have alternatives available.

People are not saying they are offended or demanding sympathy when they point out that it is inconsistent to make a big deal about avoiding one instance of remote cooperation while being constantly involved in other instances of comparable remoteness.  When one evaluates positions in terms of reason, one looks for consistency.  Pointing out inconsistencies is a way to show that a position lacks reasonableness.
Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like unto Thine.

TerrorDæmonum

Quote from: Tennessean on January 17, 2022, 08:22:15 AM
So why are you offended a fraction of us won't be taking the abortion-tainted gene therapy,
Because when you word it like this, it is extremely offensive to Catholics.

What do you think people will think when you make such an accusation?

QuoteYou should be happy the alternatives to the garbage you took are getting green-lit. Grow some skin. I'm not changing my worldview or commiserating with you just because I used some JJ shampoo once.
How would you like it if a bunch of people went around condemning Apple, Google, VISA, Mastercard, Chinese companies, etc, and their products as materially supporting abortion? That is actually true. Are you materially supporting abortion? How can you defend yourself?

You cannot tell people to "grow some skin" after accusing them of using "abortion tainted" products that you are avoiding.

Jayne

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 17, 2022, 09:34:07 AM
Quote from: Tennessean on January 17, 2022, 08:22:15 AM
So why are you offended a fraction of us won't be taking the abortion-tainted gene therapy,
Because when you word it like this, it is extremely offensive to Catholics.

What do you think people will think when you make such an accusation?

When I saw a post consisting of "I'm not taking baby blood," my first reaction was that it was false to equate Covid vaccines with baby blood.  It was not so much that I was offended as I identified the poster as a person not interested in rational discussion. 

But now that you point it out, it does seem like a person who is trying to be offensive.  It does seem odd that a person would post that and then question why people are offended.
Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like unto Thine.

TerrorDæmonum

Quote from: Tennessean on January 17, 2022, 08:22:15 AM
So why are you offended a fraction of us won't be taking the abortion-tainted gene therapy, instead of getting happy there may be vaccines in the pipeline, which are gaining approval in Asia, Europe, Africa, and possibly America, and which are even more remotely tainted than the mRNA? You should be happy the alternatives to the garbage you took are getting green-lit.

I am generally happy to see new effective ethical treatments being developed, but you are excited about new vaccines that are untested after hundreds of millions of people already have been vaccinated safely.

The fact is that the while one may believe the emergency use authorization was unwise or too risky, we now have the largest sample size any new treatment could really hope to have.

So, if a new vaccine should get approval and become available, do you really think it is safe to assume it is safer or effective or going to be free? It might be. It might not be. We don't know the future. But the enthusiasm for it seems unwarranted, especially when it is with such denouncement of safe effective vaccines.

Prayerful

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 14, 2022, 10:04:09 PM
Quote from: lauermar on January 14, 2022, 09:17:17 PM
I'm willing to bet the majority of you would suddenly become pro-vax and support a mandate.

Hardly anyone here, I think, supports weed usage?

There's a social media cult of some bro trads, but traditional big families are not easily supported by a stoner's income. ;D
Padre Pio: Pray, hope, and don't worry. Worry is useless. God is merciful and will hear your prayer.

The Curt Jester

Quote from: Pæniteo on January 17, 2022, 10:22:43 AMI am generally happy to see new effective ethical treatments being developed, but you are excited about new vaccines that are untested after hundreds of millions of people already have been vaccinated safely.

Not enough time has gone by to determine that.   Give it another ten years or so.  Effects of vaccines (or medications for that matter) are not instant.  One year of testing is nothing.
The royal feast was done; the King
Sought some new sport to banish care,
And to his jester cried: "Sir Fool,
Kneel now, and make for us a prayer!"

The jester doffed his cap and bells,
And stood the mocking court before;
They could not see the bitter smile
Behind the painted grin he wore.

He bowed his head, and bent his knee
Upon the Monarch's silken stool;
His pleading voice arose: "O Lord,
Be merciful to me, a fool!"

TerrorDæmonum

Quote from: The Curt Jester on January 17, 2022, 12:39:16 PM
Quote from: Pæniteo on January 17, 2022, 10:22:43 AMI am generally happy to see new effective ethical treatments being developed, but you are excited about new vaccines that are untested after hundreds of millions of people already have been vaccinated safely.

Not enough time has gone by to determine that.   Give it another ten years or so.  Effects of vaccines (or medications for that matter) are not instant.  One year of testing is nothing.

That is true. I was referring to the more proximate concerns of the past when this discussion was first started.

The "vaccine disaster" scenario keeps getting pushed out.

Any new vaccine would start from scratch and being happy about new vaccines prematurely is perhaps unwise.

Miriam_M

THIS:

Quote from: The Curt Jester on January 17, 2022, 12:39:16 PM
Not enough time has gone by to determine that.   Give it another ten years or so.  Effects of vaccines (or medications for that matter) are not instant.  One year of testing is nothing.

ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez

this page left intentionally blank

lauermar

Quote from: Kaesekopf on January 14, 2022, 10:04:09 PM
Quote from: lauermar on January 14, 2022, 09:17:17 PM
I'm willing to bet the majority of you would suddenly become pro-vax and support a mandate.

Hardly anyone here, I think, supports weed usage?

YES THEY DO. Those that are willing to admit it say it is for "medicinal purposes" even though there are other drugs on the market that are more efficacious for the disease they have without getting high. Somebody already claimed that Pope Leo used cocaine without any reputable proof source proves my point. That looks like an apology for the use of systemic cocaine. There is no medical use for systemic cocaine. The class is used in surgical procedures and dentistry, where it's injected locally into tissue for anesthesia only.

If the Covid vaccine contained cocaine, THC or some component to get high, all the opposition against it would suddenly vanish.

I AM OPPOSED TO VACCINE MANDATES. How many times do I have to say it?

Thank you for your posts, Jayne and Paeniteo. Nice to see rational thought. The one who said she "wouldn't take baby's blood" needs to be reminded that umbilical cord blood is used to treat many illnesses.

"I am not a pessimist. I am not an optimist. I am a realist." Father Malachi Martin (1921-1999)

lauermar

Quote from: The Curt Jester on January 14, 2022, 11:25:38 PM
Quote from: lauermar on January 14, 2022, 09:17:17 PM
I'm willing to bet the majority of you would suddenly become pro-vax and support a mandate.

Don't go to the race track if you bet on odds like that.

I don't bet on races, but if I did, the responses to my OP indicate that I would win.
"I am not a pessimist. I am not an optimist. I am a realist." Father Malachi Martin (1921-1999)

The Curt Jester

Quote from: lauermar on January 18, 2022, 08:05:53 AM
Quote from: The Curt Jester on January 14, 2022, 11:25:38 PM
Quote from: lauermar on January 14, 2022, 09:17:17 PM
I'm willing to bet the majority of you would suddenly become pro-vax and support a mandate.

Don't go to the race track if you bet on odds like that.

I don't bet on races, but if I did, the responses to my OP indicate that I would win.

Based on the response, maybe three people would possibly be okay with cannabis in itself, but that doesn't have anything to do with the vaccine.  Even if it were three people, if you consider three to be a majority, you have an odd way of counting a majority.  Last I heard, majority means "more than half".
The royal feast was done; the King
Sought some new sport to banish care,
And to his jester cried: "Sir Fool,
Kneel now, and make for us a prayer!"

The jester doffed his cap and bells,
And stood the mocking court before;
They could not see the bitter smile
Behind the painted grin he wore.

He bowed his head, and bent his knee
Upon the Monarch's silken stool;
His pleading voice arose: "O Lord,
Be merciful to me, a fool!"

lauermar

Quote from: james03 on January 15, 2022, 12:24:35 PM
Work this out for us:

1. Current Vax:  gene therapy that enters your cell and causes a cell to create spike proteins, which are dangerous.

2.  A hypothetical hemp vax that inactivates spike proteins and doesn't enter your cells.  I'm assuming there are also no side effects like the current vax, like turning your arm magnetic or making the frogs gay.

You are talking about apples and oranges.

This is an example of irrationality that Jayne and others are talking about: gay frogs and magnetic arms. Qanon crap, and medical misinformation.

When live Covid virus enters your cell, your immune system develops antibodies if you survive. This is the same mechanism with the vaccine. The antibody titres gained after infection and vaccination decrease over time. The change is not permanent. One's immune system does NOT make spike proteins; rather, the immune system becomes better able to recognize and resist spike proteins as invaders. This is why it is dangerous for you to read unscientific garbage and make assumptions.
"I am not a pessimist. I am not an optimist. I am a realist." Father Malachi Martin (1921-1999)

Markus

Not a word about the millions already killed by this so-called vaccine...

lauermar

Quote from: The Curt Jester on January 18, 2022, 08:11:57 AM
Quote from: lauermar on January 18, 2022, 08:05:53 AM
Quote from: The Curt Jester on January 14, 2022, 11:25:38 PM
Quote from: lauermar on January 14, 2022, 09:17:17 PM
I'm willing to bet the majority of you would suddenly become pro-vax and support a mandate.

Don't go to the race track if you bet on odds like that.

I don't bet on races, but if I did, the responses to my OP indicate that I would win.

Based on the response, maybe three people would possibly be okay with cannabis in itself, but that doesn't have anything to do with the vaccine.  Even if it were three people, if you consider three to be a majority, you have an odd way of counting a majority.  Last I heard, majority means "more than half".

Keep watching the responses. There will be more than 3 people justifying the use of recreational drugs for medicinal purposes.
"I am not a pessimist. I am not an optimist. I am a realist." Father Malachi Martin (1921-1999)