Posts by Linda Harris59

Benjamin Brooks2 said:Let me let you in on a little secret, just to see if you're a bot or a human, and to see if you'll keep blowing your horn after this.

The virus itself recognizes a very specific target to latch onto, which in this case is the ACE2 receptors.

That's an explanation for people like you, 😁

But check this out: those ACE2 receptors also have various mutations. Look at the link.

Investigation of the genetic variation in ACE2 on the structural recognition by the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2)

https://translational-medicine.biome...86-7/figures/2

So what now? Just keep being stubborn... or actually realize what's happening.😉

What on earth does that have to do with my explanation regarding mutations?

If you honestly think there is a connection, then please, enlighten me.

Michelle Bennett5 said:So, here’s my take: mutations in vaccinated people are way more dangerous. In the unvaccinated, they just survive every single mutation the virus throws at them. So, if any truly nasty ones actually manage to break through, they’ll just get buried under a massive pile of harmless ones anyway. Makes sense, right? Or am I just talking to myself here?
So, here's the thing. Among the vaccinated, you're only going to see those super-mutations—the kind that can actually be carried by the vaccine itself. And genetically speaking? They’re a total bullseye.
So, here’s the logic people love to throw around: the more people you vaccinate, the higher the chance you're basically rolling the dice for some massive supermutation to pop up. Makes sense on paper, right? Or does it? I don't know. It's one of those "common sense" arguments that sounds deep until you actually sit with it for a second. Just a thought.

That is completely wrong. If you look at the data, the most dangerous mutations actually emerge from countries with very low vaccination rates. For instance, the Delta variant surfaced in India long before we even had a vaccine available.

It is true that a vaccine-resistant super-mutation could eventually become dominant in highly vaccinated nations like the USA. But the actual probability of a super-mutation developing within a vaccinated person is incredibly slim. Because there is a much smaller viral load and a shorter window of opportunity, antibodies strike the virus immediately, shutting down mass reproduction before it can mutate significantly.

Linda Lee4 said:States are rolling out new restrictions because hospitalization rates are spiking despite high vaccination numbers, yet you're sitting there hoping that a vaccine designed for the Alpha strain can somehow pull its weight against Delta, let alone this new variant? That is some top-tier optimism right there.🤣

Just keep hoping; I have zero doubts that my recently acquired natural immunity will handle this strain just fine, assuming it even manages to spread rapidly enough to matter...

I truly hope you're right.

The grim reality, however, is that this new variant emerged from regions with low vaccination rates, and it’s already proving to be capable of spreading among those who rely solely on natural immunity.

Carol Jackson2 said:But it still happens. Your previous post made it sound like you were claiming there's zero chance of mutation in vaccinated people.

Of course they occur—it’s just happening at a lower frequency.

Carol Jackson2 said:Claiming it doesn't mutate in vaccinated people is just plain wrong.

I never said that.

Let me be perfectly clear about what I actually wrote: the virus has a much higher potential for mutation and poses a greater threat to the community when it takes hold in an organism with a weakened immune system and no existing antibodies.

In vaccinated individuals, there is a significantly lower probability of mutation occurring. It's basic math—there is less virus present and it stays in the system for a much shorter window of time.

Carol Jackson2 said:Claiming healthy, unvaccinated people are literally the primary source of mutations is wrong. Vaccinated people transmit the virus too; they just spread it less, which reduces the overall chance for mutation. Mutation happens through transmission.

Vaccinated immunocompromised people struggle because their antibody levels drop off quickly.

That is fundamentally incorrect. A virus mutates during the replication process inside the host organism. Mutation happens because errors occur while the virus is copying itself.

Transmission is merely the selection process for existing mutations. The variant that happens to be more dangerous—the one that can infect a new host more easily—is the one that will become dominant.

Charles Howard74 said:About 24% of the population in South Africa has been vaccinated, and according to one source, "allegedly" they tracked down the mastermind behind it all. This guy actually had HIV, so his immune system was basically non-existent. Then he caught COVID, and man, that virus tore through him like a wrecking ball in a glass factory. He just took that whole chaotic hacking style and started applying it to everyone else.

In London, you get about 700 passengers arriving daily from Africa.

From a biological standpoint, that explanation actually holds water. When you have an organism with a severely compromised immune system, the virus is given all the time and space it needs to run wild, racking up a massive amount of mutations. That’s how you end up with variants that can bypass standard immune responses.

The lesson here is simple: a virus has much more opportunity to mutate and becomes far more dangerous to the public when it finds a host with a weakened immune system and zero antibodies.

Bottom line: immunocompromised and unvaccinated individuals essentially act as breeding grounds for dangerous new mutations.

vividfalcon31 said:The vaccine works... 🤦

We're looking at about 25% efficiency here.

Bluetooth doesn't work, there's no tracking chip or magnet involved, but hey, at least it protects you from COVID-19. 😁

Gerald Chavez7 said:It’s spreading pretty fast in Yosemite (according to preliminary reports, though we might see in a few days if it’s just a fluke) among a very experienced population. At least 70% of people in Yosemite have already dealt with previous variants, so we aren't exactly looking at an "immunologically naive" or "green" population here.

Now, this is certainly an interesting development. But the real question remains: has this actually been verified?

Are we really looking at a situation where 70% of the population has already built up natural immunity from prior infections, yet this new Variant is still managing to spread so aggressively?

The explanation regarding how this latest mutation evolved is actually quite fascinating. In immunocompromised patients, the virus was essentially given an open runway to mutate until it finally hit upon a variant capable of effectively bypassing the immune system.

Some people are operating under the delusion that they possess "good immunity." Sure, they might for now, but that changes the moment a mutation emerges that their system isn't prepared to recognize.

Ultimately, we are seeing exactly what I predicted would happen back when I made my call four months ago.

He went through the illness and then followed it up by getting two doses of Pfizer.

Ethan Campbell81 said:If you want me to counter your position with actual arguments, you first need to present some.
What you’re saying isn't an argument. It is nothing more than mindless parroting—just repeating tired clichés that were debunked and discredited a long time ago.
Go ahead and keep playing the critic. It doesn't matter anyway; most people just laugh at you behind your back. Every single topic seems to attract its own resident clown. 😉

This tendency toward sweeping generalizations and such a simplistic, black-and-white view of the world says more about your own "credibility" than anything else.
Read this a few dozen times. Maybe then you'll actually understand.

I think I've seen enough to know exactly who you are.

Ethan Campbell81 said:Sure, obviously.
I realized long ago that debating indoctrinated individuals is a complete waste of time.

That might be a wise way to look at it, but it doesn't change the fact that you still haven't provided a single valid response to the arguments I laid out.

Indoctrinated individuals almost always resort to ad hominem attacks when they're cornered. You just did exactly that a moment ago.

neontinker19 said:Keep your hands off my kids!! Get lost, Satan, in the name of Jesus Christ!

From here on out, I’m not letting my kids get vaccinated, whether it’s mandatory shots or this gene therapy nonsense for Covid-19.

There you have it, folks. A perfect example for anyone considering ignoring the guidance of medical professionals or actual science. This is exactly the kind of mindset you end up aligning yourself with.

Morgan Peterson6 said:And you're calling him an idiot? 🤣🤣🤣🤣

I didn't call him an idiot—that was your word choice. I'm calling him a coward.

Scott Hall5 said:Honestly, it feels like you're just being a total coward here...

It seems to me that your strategy is to avoid taking any personal risk at all, essentially waiting for everyone else to get vaccinated so they can provide you with a shield of herd immunity. That isn't bravery; it's opportunism. I made the conscious decision to get my shot despite knowing full well that the vaccine hadn't undergone exhaustive, long-term testing. I accepted the inherent risks—risks that you clearly lack the intestinal fortitude to face. You are a coward.

Morgan Peterson6 said:Here you go again

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/documen...rmation_hr.pdf

"Page no longer exists"

Nancy Williams58 said:You also conveniently left out the part where our healthcare system is totally slammed and hospitals are drowning under the pressure.

No, I didn't. But I did forget to mention that the virus mutates at lightning speed, that there isn't enough time to follow the standard vaccine registration protocols, and most importantly, that we are getting vaccinated because we know damn well that the risks of the shot are significantly lower than the risks of catching the virus itself.
.
.

Ethan Campbell81 said:Here is another one dealing with measles.🤦
I see how it is. You clearly lack the capacity for independent thought. Your entire worldview is shaped by the BBC, local news stations, and whatever trending nonsense is on the feed. Fine. Continue with your delusions. Have a nice day.

When you lack a single shred of actual evidence against vaccination, all you have left to do is attack the person making the argument.
.
.

Matthew Jackson2 said:When you look at the data, measles is significantly more dangerous for children than COVID-19, and frankly, the measles vaccine has been vetted through far more rigorous testing cycles.

Let’s get one thing straight: measles aren't the primary threat to kids—the danger lies with adults who failed to vaccinate when they were young. By choosing ignorance over science, parents are actively jeopardizing their own children's health and stripping them of their fundamental right to protection from preventable diseases.

Use some common sense here. The COVID virus mutates much too rapidly for standard, slow-moving regulatory procedures to keep pace effectively.
.
.

Ethan Campbell81 said:Don't worry, most people actually agree with you on this matter.😉

You aren't even worth a response... I hope you don't have children, for their sake.😢

The facts simply don't support your nonsense. Take San Francisco, for example—a few years back, there was a localized measles outbreak. This was a disease that had been virtually non-existent for decades, all because a handful of parents decided to exercise their "rights" by opting out of vaccinations. By doing so, they essentially gambled with their children's lives, ignoring the fact that measles can be incredibly dangerous once you reach adulthood.

That’s the reality of dealing with parents who genuinely believe they possess more wisdom than medical professionals and are willing to jeopardize their own children's health just to prove a point.
.
.