I never said he's afraid of all vaccines or an antivaxxer. You made that up. He does appear to be scared shitless of spike-based COVID vaccines. Just take a look at his tweetstorm on June 25. He wrote "For months I've asked - everyone I talk too if they're vaccinated & what their experience was. Nearly all had scary symptoms, some terrifying." Now that just sounds nutty. He goes on to say, about the vaccine spike-protein, which he says is produced by all current vaccines, "So if it's safe, that will have been a very lucky accident." He believes the spike-protein "not only crosses the blood-brain barrier, but tatters it, opening the central nervous system to toxins and pathogens." This he says induces severe headaches, brain fog, and potentially impaired cognition, clotting and vascular damage to the brain, and strokes. I'm not an immunologist, but applied to the population at large this sounds like bull shit.
He may be right or he may be wrong about gain of function research and Ivermectin, I don't know. But he sure sounds over the top on vaccine risk. I'll take the word of mainstream medicine and the CDC. Mainstream MEDICINE, not the mainstream media. There's a difference.
Originally Posted by Tiny
I'm making things up? No sir, it is you who is doing so by making wild claims about Weinstein's position on this particular vaccine in order to discredit him. To say that he's afraid of vaccines is a lie. He has concerns about a vaccine that that was rushed through truncated clinical trials and given legal protection in terms of liability. What could possibly go wrong?
Weinstein also recognized the alarmist tone of his first tweet in the thread in question and has made additional tweets since to clarify. BTW, Weinstein is not part of the media.
As far as his "tweet storm" goes, you post more here on a daily basis so there's another attempt to discredit him that falls flat.
Your quotation of his one tweet leaves a lot of context out that was included in his original post. Try this on for size:
"The key difference involves vaccine spike-protein being “locked open”. That was done to give immune cells access, not to render it safe. So if it's safe, that will have been a very lucky accident. And the logical presumption goes the other way. The precautionary principle applies." Not quite so over the top, eh?
As far as his claims about vaccine side effects related to the spike protein and the BBB, do you think he made that up? Had you looked a little closer at the "tweet storm" you might have seen these links.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33053430/
More on the spike protein here:
https://www.canadiancovidcareallianc...full_guide.pdf
see page 20
And if you want to argue the qualifications of folks commenting about the science, who are the people quoted in your fact check from Reuters? Sabina Vohra Miller? How is she qualified? Anna Durbin, a professor of International Health? Color me unimpressed. Is that the best you have? Crikey!
As for Ivermectin, Weinstein's position is based on him seeing field studies and clinical work that speaks to the efficacy and safety of the drug while there has been resistance to it based solely on it being associated with President Cheeto Dust. He thinks we should use all the arrows in our quiver to fight the disease. That sounds pretty reasonable to me. What say you?
To sum up it seems like you don't really know that much about Weinstein or what his message really is.
And as far as me changing the topic in this thread? Fuck that!
There's an old adage you are proving true, "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think."
