Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!

[Shasarak]

In reply to Ratman_tf's video, Chris Christie had a pretty good video answering questions of this sort.

Not sure what exactly you expect an Allergologist is going to add to the discussion regarding a viral epidemic.

I mean treating Hayfever I would back her opinion 100%.

[Ratman_tf]

In reply to Ratman_tf's video, Chris Christie had a pretty good video answering questions of this sort.

I watched a 30 minute infomercial so you don't have to.

They don't address any of Dr. Vanden Bossche's concerns. The closest they come is at 22:30 when Dr. Bailey comments that the sooner everyone gets vaccinated the less chance there is of mutation creating new strains. Dr. Vanden Bossche's claim is that the way we are rolling out the vaccines is creating exactly that kind of environment.

[jhkim]

Not sure what exactly you expect an Allergologist is going to add to the discussion regarding a viral epidemic.

I mean treating Hayfever I would back her opinion 100%.

She's speaking because she is President of the American Medical Association which has over 240 thousand members, and is speaking for the AMA. Representing an established organization of 240,000 doctors is fundamentally different than just being a single doctor with an opinion. With over 9 million doctors worldwide, there are individual doctors with a huge range of opinions. There are licensed doctors who support faith healing. There are licensed doctors who opposed vaccination programs in general. Simply having a degree in the field, even in a sub-field allows a huge range.

Regarding Geert Vanden Bossche...

Dr. Vanden Bossche does appear to have a Veterinary Doctor degree and a specialty in virology. From PubMed, I can see that he has 8 publications between 1988 and 1995, but nothing after 1995. (ref) Looking over his LinkedIn profile, he seems to have jumped around to a number of virus-related companies or foundations from 1995 to 2011. He did work for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation from 2008 to 2011 as a senior program officer. He is noted, for example, as having helped a researcher get a grant from the Foundation in 2010. (ref) After that, though, his main work is for companies called Univac and Vareco - which I can't find any references to other than his own credits.

In his 2021 talk, he credited himself as "Founder and CSO, Coimeva Llc", which isn't listed on his LinkedIn profile, but that does turn up this company profile.

Company Description: Coimeva is located in Huldenberg, FLEMISH BRABANT, Belgium and is part of the Education & Training Services Industry. Coimeva has 2 total employees across all of its locations and generates $37,000 in sales (USD).(Employees and Sales figures are modelled).
Key Principal: Geert Vanden Bossche
Industry: Education & Training Services
Education Sector
Schools and educational services, nec
Arts and crafts schools

Source: https://www.dnb.com/business-directory/company-profiles.coimeva.1c30a7c7a2e48d651cac3e61842ae2cf.html

In his letter (ref), he says that he was a keynote speaker at "Vaccine Summit Ohio" in 2021. From the site, he isn't listed in the advertised 14 speakers for that conference (ref). However, he among the 47 total speakers in the full program.

From this, it seems to me that he is recognized enough to speak at among 46 others at an Ohio conference, but he does not seem to be a leader in the field.

---

As for the substance of his claims, there are a number of rebuttals. The link below seemed the most scholarly. It's not my field, so I can't confirm most of it, but it is thoroughly referenced.

https://www.deplatformdisease.com/blog/addressing-geert-vanden-bossches-claims

[KingCheops]

---

Thanks.  This was fascinating.  Also thanks for watching the other video so I don't have to.

[Ratman_tf]

Not sure what exactly you expect an Allergologist is going to add to the discussion regarding a viral epidemic.

I mean treating Hayfever I would back her opinion 100%.

She's speaking because she is President of the American Medical Association which has over 240 thousand members, and is speaking for the AMA. Representing an established organization of 240,000 doctors is fundamentally different than just being a single doctor with an opinion. With over 9 million doctors worldwide, there are individual doctors with a huge range of opinions. There are licensed doctors who support faith healing. There are licensed doctors who opposed vaccination programs in general. Simply having a degree in the field, even in a sub-field allows a huge range.

Regarding Geert Vanden Bossche...

Dr. Vanden Bossche does appear to have a Veterinary Doctor degree and a specialty in virology. From PubMed, I can see that he has 8 publications between 1988 and 1995, but nothing after 1995. (ref) Looking over his LinkedIn profile, he seems to have jumped around to a number of virus-related companies or foundations from 1995 to 2011. He did work for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation from 2008 to 2011 as a senior program officer. He is noted, for example, as having helped a researcher get a grant from the Foundation in 2010. (ref) After that, though, his main work is for companies called Univac and Vareco - which I can't find any references to other than his own credits.

In his 2021 talk, he credited himself as "Founder and CSO, Coimeva Llc", which isn't listed on his LinkedIn profile, but that does turn up this company profile.

Company Description: Coimeva is located in Huldenberg, FLEMISH BRABANT, Belgium and is part of the Education & Training Services Industry. Coimeva has 2 total employees across all of its locations and generates $37,000 in sales (USD).(Employees and Sales figures are modelled).
Key Principal: Geert Vanden Bossche
Industry: Education & Training Services
Education Sector
Schools and educational services, nec
Arts and crafts schools

Source: https://www.dnb.com/business-directory/company-profiles.coimeva.1c30a7c7a2e48d651cac3e61842ae2cf.html

In his letter (ref), he says that he was a keynote speaker at "Vaccine Summit Ohio" in 2021. From the site, he isn't listed in the advertised 14 speakers for that conference (ref). However, he among the 47 total speakers in the full program.

From this, it seems to me that he is recognized enough to speak at among 46 others at an Ohio conference, but he does not seem to be a leader in the field.

---

As for the substance of his claims, there are a number of rebuttals. The link below seemed the most scholarly. It's not my field, so I can't confirm most of it, but it is thoroughly referenced.

https://www.deplatformdisease.com/blog/addressing-geert-vanden-bossches-claims

Correct me if I'm wrong, the article writer, Edward Nirenberg, has no published papers a PubMed and no presense on Linkedin.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Edward+Nirenberg
https://www.linkedin.com/search/results/people/?keywords=edward%20nirenberg&origin=CLUSTER_EXPANSION

Notably, in his article-

Ending COVID-19 will require vaccination- this is not a matter of debate or discussion.

I guess we should all stop asking questions about the vaccine and just accept it without debate or discussion.

[KingCheops]

I guess we should all stop asking questions about the vaccine and just accept it without debate or discussion.

Science!

[jhkim]

As for the substance of his claims, there are a number of rebuttals. The link below seemed the most scholarly. It's not my field, so I can't confirm most of it, but it is thoroughly referenced.

https://www.deplatformdisease.com/blog/addressing-geert-vanden-bossches-claims

Correct me if I'm wrong, the article writer, Edward Nirenberg, has no published papers a PubMed and no presense on Linkedin.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Edward+Nirenberg
https://www.linkedin.com/search/results/people/?keywords=edward%20nirenberg&origin=CLUSTER_EXPANSION

You're not wrong on that, but the author provides an extensive list of fully-sourced references to back up his explanation. He's not speaking on his own authority, but rather acting as an educator to point people to more authoritative sources. He apparently just graduated with his degree, and seems to be in paper-writing mode.

I haven't found a leading vaccine researcher who specifically takes the time to address Vanden Bossche's points individually. However, that's not because they agree with him, but simply because they are focused on addressing the general public rather than addressing individual opposing opinions like Bossche.

Would you be interested in my providing links to explanations from leading virologists and vaccine researchers on the general topic? Here are some that I looked over:

https://www.chcradio.com/episode/Angela-Rasmussen/564

https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2020/december/penn-mrna-biology-pioneers-receive-covid19-vaccine-enabled-by-their-foundational-research

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBWIzg6wBec&t=1s

I guess we should all stop asking questions about the vaccine and just accept it without debate or discussion.

I'm sorry that Nirnberg has a dismissive tone, but that doesn't mean he is wrong. Here on this forum, a lot of posters are less than humble in how they talk about opposing views.

Whether to believe a particular scientific point shouldn't be based on the speaker's politics or on the tone they use, but on the weight of the evidence behind them.

[Brad]

Oh I see...all you have to do is call your Marxist agenda "science" and anyone who questions it is just a science-denier. Newspeak is pretty neat!

[Pat]

I concur that Nirenberg doesn't seem to have any relevant credentials, and clearly has an agenda. Doesn't mean he's wrong in his critique, but it does mean we'd have to examine it closely. But I also agree that while Bossche does have some credentials, he's not particularly authoritative, his theory seems sketchy, and he appears to be the only one promoting it.

[Ratman_tf]

As for the substance of his claims, there are a number of rebuttals. The link below seemed the most scholarly. It's not my field, so I can't confirm most of it, but it is thoroughly referenced.

https://www.deplatformdisease.com/blog/addressing-geert-vanden-bossches-claims

Correct me if I'm wrong, the article writer, Edward Nirenberg, has no published papers a PubMed and no presense on Linkedin.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Edward+Nirenberg
https://www.linkedin.com/search/results/people/?keywords=edward%20nirenberg&origin=CLUSTER_EXPANSION

You're not wrong on that, but the author provides an extensive list of fully-sourced references to back up his explanation. He's not speaking on his own authority, but rather acting as an educator to point people to more authoritative sources. He apparently just graduated with his degree, and seems to be in paper-writing mode.

I haven't found a leading vaccine researcher who specifically takes the time to address Vanden Bossche's points individually. However, that's not because they agree with him, but simply because they are focused on addressing the general public rather than addressing individual opposing opinions like Bossche.

Would you be interested in my providing links to explanations from leading virologists and vaccine researchers on the general topic? Here are some that I looked over:

https://www.chcradio.com/episode/Angela-Rasmussen/564

https://www.pennmedicine.org/news/news-releases/2020/december/penn-mrna-biology-pioneers-receive-covid19-vaccine-enabled-by-their-foundational-research

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBWIzg6wBec&t=1s

I guess we should all stop asking questions about the vaccine and just accept it without debate or discussion.

I'm sorry that Nirnberg has a dismissive tone, but that doesn't mean he is wrong. Here on this forum, a lot of posters are less than humble in how they talk about opposing views.

I don't care how the posters here talk about opposing views. We're all a bunch of wankers dipping our toes into politics and current events on a message board focused on pretending to be an elf. I can take or leave an individual post as I see fit.

I do care that a rebuttal to a claim ends with a declaration supporting ignorance and blind obedience. That is a huge goddamn red flag.
He is most definitley wrong on that point.

Whether to believe a particular scientific point shouldn't be based on the speaker's politics or on the tone they use, but on the weight of the evidence behind them.

I agree. But you and I are both not experts on the subject, and yet we are faced with the decision to take an experimental vaccine that has only been created this past year. Information on the long term effects of these vaccines are impossible to determine. I resent the idea that we are not allowed to be critical of the subject, and any concern is dismissed by government and the mainstream media. That makes is exceedingly difficult to determine who to "trust" on the subject.

[Zelen]

If we suppose that the orthodox position is wrong, just because someone is dissenting from the orthodox position doesn't mean they are right.

I'm very skeptical of these vaccines, but I'm also skeptical of Vanden Bossche. In the past year, basically all of the extreme alarmist reactions have been wrong. The videos we saw of people collapsing in the street in China were staged, the models predicting millions of dead were off by orders of magnitude, even the numbers we do have need to be taken with a heavy dose of salt due to sketchy testing procedures and deaths-with attribution.

[Shasarak]

Not sure what exactly you expect an Allergologist is going to add to the discussion regarding a viral epidemic.

I mean treating Hayfever I would back her opinion 100%.

She's speaking because she is President of the American Medical Association which has over 240 thousand members, and is speaking for the AMA. Representing an established organization of 240,000 doctors is fundamentally different than just being a single doctor with an opinion. With over 9 million doctors worldwide, there are individual doctors with a huge range of opinions. There are licensed doctors who support faith healing. There are licensed doctors who opposed vaccination programs in general. Simply having a degree in the field, even in a sub-field allows a huge range.

Regarding Geert Vanden Bossche...

Dr. Vanden Bossche does appear to have a Veterinary Doctor degree and a specialty in virology. From PubMed, I can see that he has 8 publications between 1988 and 1995, but nothing after 1995. (ref) Looking over his LinkedIn profile, he seems to have jumped around to a number of virus-related companies or foundations from 1995 to 2011. He did work for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation from 2008 to 2011 as a senior program officer. He is noted, for example, as having helped a researcher get a grant from the Foundation in 2010. (ref) After that, though, his main work is for companies called Univac and Vareco - which I can't find any references to other than his own credits.

In his 2021 talk, he credited himself as "Founder and CSO, Coimeva Llc", which isn't listed on his LinkedIn profile, but that does turn up this company profile.

Company Description: Coimeva is located in Huldenberg, FLEMISH BRABANT, Belgium and is part of the Education & Training Services Industry. Coimeva has 2 total employees across all of its locations and generates $37,000 in sales (USD).(Employees and Sales figures are modelled).
Key Principal: Geert Vanden Bossche
Industry: Education & Training Services
Education Sector
Schools and educational services, nec
Arts and crafts schools

Source: https://www.dnb.com/business-directory/company-profiles.coimeva.1c30a7c7a2e48d651cac3e61842ae2cf.html

In his letter (ref), he says that he was a keynote speaker at "Vaccine Summit Ohio" in 2021. From the site, he isn't listed in the advertised 14 speakers for that conference (ref). However, he among the 47 total speakers in the full program.

From this, it seems to me that he is recognized enough to speak at among 46 others at an Ohio conference, but he does not seem to be a leader in the field.

---

As for the substance of his claims, there are a number of rebuttals. The link below seemed the most scholarly. It's not my field, so I can't confirm most of it, but it is thoroughly referenced.

https://www.deplatformdisease.com/blog/addressing-geert-vanden-bossches-claims

So then who to believe?  The part time Allergologist, full time Bureaucrat with training in Pediatrics or the trained Virologist with actual experience?

Its a conundrum alright.

[jhkim]

Whether to believe a particular scientific point shouldn't be based on the speaker's politics or on the tone they use, but on the weight of the evidence behind them.

I agree. But you and I are both not experts on the subject, and yet we are faced with the decision to take an experimental vaccine that has only been created this past year. Information on the long term effects of these vaccines are impossible to determine. I resent the idea that we are not allowed to be critical of the subject, and any concern is dismissed by government and the mainstream media. That makes is exceedingly difficult to determine who to "trust" on the subject.

Sadly, the dismissive tone has become standard for all politically-tinged discussion these days from both sides, and worse, covid-19 has become politically-tinged. I've fallen prey to it at times, though to be fair, I've also encountered it a lot.

For medical matters, my general rule is to follow my doctor's advice. In this matter, both my personal doctor and doctors in general are not just recommending the vaccine, but taking the vaccine for themselves. That's the biggest reason that has sold me on it.

I've followed plenty of Internet news about covid, which is natural given how vital it is for all our lives. But in most matters, I don't let my Internet research trump my doctor's advice. At most, I'll seek out a second opinion if I don't like my doctor at the time. Technically, both my parents are medical doctors, and I'll listen to them too, which I guess means I've sometimes gotten 3 or 4 opinions - but mostly that seems excessive and they mostly agree. In pre-covid times, I've seen too many people go down a rabbit-hole of following some Internet advice they found against what their doctor says, which usually turns out badly.

I concur that Nirenberg doesn't seem to have any relevant credentials, and clearly has an agenda. Doesn't mean he's wrong in his critique, but it does mean we'd have to examine it closely. But I also agree that while Bossche does have some credentials, he's not particularly authoritative, his theory seems sketchy, and he appears to be the only one promoting it.

Thanks, Pat. As you note, this isn't about Nirenberg, since the views he promotes are shared by many others. I thought he did do a good job of explaining in detail and giving detailed references, but he did have a dismissive tone. Below is another rebuttal of Bossche. It is written by Jonathan Jarry, who is a molecular biologist working as PR for McGill university. However, he consults with specialist Dr. Paul Offit for the facts, who is the co-inventor of the rotavirus vaccine and a highly qualified expert.

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/doomsday-prophecy-dr-geert-vanden-bossche

[Ratman_tf]

Whether to believe a particular scientific point shouldn't be based on the speaker's politics or on the tone they use, but on the weight of the evidence behind them.

I agree. But you and I are both not experts on the subject, and yet we are faced with the decision to take an experimental vaccine that has only been created this past year. Information on the long term effects of these vaccines are impossible to determine. I resent the idea that we are not allowed to be critical of the subject, and any concern is dismissed by government and the mainstream media. That makes is exceedingly difficult to determine who to "trust" on the subject.

Sadly, the dismissive tone has become standard for all politically-tinged discussion these days from both sides, and worse, covid-19 has become politically-tinged. I've fallen prey to it at times, though to be fair, I've also encountered it a lot.

For medical matters, my general rule is to follow my doctor's advice. In this matter, both my personal doctor and doctors in general are not just recommending the vaccine, but taking the vaccine for themselves. That's the biggest reason that has sold me on it.

I've followed plenty of Internet news about covid, which is natural given how vital it is for all our lives. But in most matters, I don't let my Internet research trump my doctor's advice. At most, I'll seek out a second opinion if I don't like my doctor at the time. Technically, both my parents are medical doctors, and I'll listen to them too, which I guess means I've sometimes gotten 3 or 4 opinions - but mostly that seems excessive and they mostly agree. In pre-covid times, I've seen too many people go down a rabbit-hole of following some Internet advice they found against what their doctor says, which usually turns out badly.

I'm not talking about taking some rando internet advice over your doctor's advice.

[Shasarak]

I'm not talking about taking some rando internet advice over your doctor's advice.

Yeah, I would trust my GP more then the head of the Ask Me Anything association.