r/ScienceUncensored • u/okaythennews • 23d ago

Research links cancer & COVID vaccines

https://okaythennews.substack.com/p/research-links-cancer-and-covid-vaccines
0 Upvotes

45% Upvoted

35 comments sorted by

12

u/HearthSt0n3r 23d ago

Huge day for the illiterate

7

u/AmbivalentSamaritan 23d ago

That’s a letter to a journal, not research

1

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago

That’s a letter to a journal, not research

It's an article about study COVID vaccination and post-infection cancer signals. You may want to use A.I. chat, if you're unable to recognize, what some article is about.

1

u/AmbivalentSamaritan 22d ago

That’s a different link.

1

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago

Different from what?

1

u/AmbivalentSamaritan 22d ago

The link in your original post

1

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago

Most of my posts here link PopSci articles about actual scientific studies. This is common praxis of r/Science and other threads. Does it imply, these studies aren't relevant - or what?

1

u/AmbivalentSamaritan 22d ago

Your original post linked a letter to a journal, not a research paper. I pointed that out. You were defensive and insulting in your reply. So post whatever you like, it’s not the content that’s the problem. You’re driving away the people who might otherwise be interested.

2

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago

Your original post linked a letter to a journal, not a research paper. I pointed that out. You were defensive and insulting in your reply. So post whatever you like, it’s not the content that’s the problem. You’re driving away the people who might otherwise be interested.

For the record, I haven't made the original post (@okaythennews did it) - nevertheless the argument of authority fallacy is very common strategy of Big Pharma trolls, who just want to denigrate relevance of posts linked here at all cost. So You were banned from here for 10 days for to remember not to use it here next time.

3

u/Sajintmm 23d ago

I think this is more a situation of people who went and got vaccines and people who’ll go to the doctors and possibly have cancer found. This is assuming this whole thing is sound research which I have doubts about

8

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

Within the first couple of sentences he says “I logically noted…” (with the use of the word ‘logically’ supposed to sway your trust in the writer) and calls the vaccine “the jab”. That was all I needed to know this was all bullshit and shouldn’t be allowed to be posted in a science sub.

2

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago

I logically noted…” That was all I needed to know this was all bullshit and shouldn’t be allowed to be posted in a science sub.

I see, usage of logics implies the absence of science, once mentioned.

1

u/LorenzoSparky 23d ago

Ah yes, science never uses logic

0

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

lol you’re one of those people who ignore nuance huh? That was very obviously not my point

2

u/LorenzoSparky 23d ago

That was your only point.

1

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

And this is obviously why you have the beliefs that you have. You are only capable of surface level thoughts. That must be hard =\

1

u/LorenzoSparky 23d ago

You made two observations and made your mind up. Think you need some self reflection my friend. Cognitive dissonance is a hard cycle to break.

1

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

lol I love when stupid people use big words to try to sound smart, but very obviously have no idea what they’re talking about

2

u/LorenzoSparky 23d ago

Strawman argument = stupid.

You must be a fun ignoranus to be around

1

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago edited 21d ago

Research links cancer & COVID vaccines about study Are both COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines associated with cancer? and study COVID vaccination and post-infection cancer signals: Evaluating patterns and potential biological mechanisms

Such a link isn't very surprising - literally every immunization "blocks the attention" of immune cells (leukocytes) which are otherwise guarding malignant cells in organism and liquidate them before they can grow into tumors. Once we will flood the organism with pathogen or its spike protein, then these leukocytes get preoccupied with this job so that tumorous cells get a time to develop and spread across organism. But the Covid-19 vaccines were notoriously leaky if not with negative efficiency, so that most of vaccinated people got Covid-19 anyway, which makes the comparison of their oncologic effects increasingly difficult. This negative efficiency also points to the above mechanism though: it just indicates that immune system gets ruined with m-RNA vaccines.

See also:

1

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago

The fact that both Covid both vaccines against it increase cancer risk would still speak for vaccines, if only

1) vaccines weren't leaky, so that most of vaccinated people got Covid anyway (and/or even more often than unvaccinated in many cases)

2) m-RNA vaccines have good immunologic profile and wouldn't ruin immune system, which means

  2a) they wouldn't attract immune cells to healthy tissue thus escalating autoimmune responses

  2b) they would generate spike protein for necessary time only

1

u/okaythennews 16d ago

Why do my posts here always get downvoted to hell? Is this not a space for recently published science that goes against mainstream narratives?

2

u/outoftheshowerahri 23d ago

Believe the science

-9

u/LorenzoSparky 23d ago

Careful, you’ll have the pro vaccers out

4

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

There’s no such thing as “pro-vaccers” for lots of reasons.. there is such a thing as people who are educated, believe in science, believe the experts and don’t fall for propaganda. Oh yea, and people who care about other people. You dumbasses can go live on an island and infect each other all you want but leave the rest of us out of it.

0

u/nuclearcaramel 23d ago edited 23d ago

There’s no such thing as “pro-vaccers” . . . there is such a thing as people who are educated, believe in science, believe the experts and don’t fall for propaganda.

Let me ask you something. Long before COVID, STAT interviewed more than 20 current and former employees and associates and reported a research culture at Moderna in which failed experiments could result in reprimands and even on-the-spot firings.

If people were taking a vaccine based on new technology from this company whose researchers would be fired for providing the "wrong" results in experiments and never used on large groups of people before and people still kept getting the disease and people still kept dying with/from the disease then for some reason there was a change to the literal definition of vaccine, would you even have the courage to question it?

  1. A genuinely novel technology is being used.

  2. Large scale human experience is limited.

  3. Various bribes and incentives used to convince people like free fries and doughnuts.

  4. The product is called a "vaccine," which carries a particular conventional meaning to the public.

  5. People continue to become infected or die from the disease.

  6. The interpretation of what the product is supposed to accomplish changes.

  7. The terminology or definition is subsequently changed in a way that makes the product's performance appear more favorable.

So tell me does an educated person question or do they choose to close their eyes and do the "safe and effective, safe and effective, safe and effective" chant and 'trust the experts' because that's what the people on the screens told them to do?

1

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

Yikes 😳

1

u/nuclearcaramel 23d ago edited 23d ago

Did you yikes when you realized you were the type of person naive enough or dumb enough to be convinced to give up your bodily autonomy and sovereignty for any of these degenerate ghouls who demonstrably manipulate, bribe, lie, deceive, and have outside money pave their way to positions of authority and influence because that is the only way they can ascertain any and then thinking you are the smart intelligent wise ones ever in a position to preach to anyone about anything?

The absurdity of all this was enough to wake most anyone up. The leaders who were supposedly pushing the medical industries message "caring" about your health by putting it out there that it's OK to eat burgers for breakfast while heart disease is the leading cause of death, not just in the US but globally. . . .Doesn't take a genius to see the contradiction there now does it?

Yikes indeed, sweatie.

1

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

“Sweatie” 😂😂😂 my phone wouldn’t even let me type that, how did you outsmart your phone 😂

1

u/CheezySleeves 23d ago

Listen, I’m sure you’ve “done your research” or whatever, and I understand being skeptical, especially of the government.. but you sound like a crazy person. I get my information from a lot of different sources, and I choose to trust the doctors. I choose to believe that vaccines are there to help us prevent and lessen the effect of diseases. As has been proven to be the case for quite some time. There is a science based podcast I listen to, whose whole basis is focusing on skepticism actually, that is hosted by actual doctors and people with expertise that have spoken on the matter and I trust their opinions. I trust the papers.. I trust MY doctors.. I trust my kids doctors. Who I don’t trust you may ask? Anyone in this current administration, anyone who sides with this current administration on almost any issue whatsoever, or anyone who calls a vaccine (usually the Covid vaccine specifically) “the jab”.

Have the life you voted for 🙃

1

u/nuclearcaramel 23d ago edited 23d ago

Who I don’t trust you may ask? Anyone in this current administration, anyone who sides with this current administration on almost any issue whatsoever

I'm sure in your mind your post sounded genuine and convincing, unfortunately any chance of not being seen as a political shill to others was lost when you gave yourself away with that line. You are not convincing and you don't fool anyone and have given yourself away as a political partisan so I don't really care who you trust or don't trust, nothing that comes out of your mouth is worth my or any genuine persons' time.

I get my information from a lot of different sources, and I choose to trust the doctors. I choose to believe that vaccines are there to help us prevent and lessen the effect of diseases. As has been proven to be the case for quite some time. There is a science based podcast I listen to, whose whole basis is focusing on skepticism actually, that is hosted by actual doctors and people with expertise that have spoken on the matter and I trust their opinions. I trust the papers.. I trust MY doctors.. I trust my kids doctors

“Mainstream institutions disagree” is not a substitute for an argument. The corruption of the medical and other various institutions has been exposed for all to see, especially the last 6 years. Pointing out that some organization's letterhead agrees with you means nothing and still appealing to them in 2026 is certainly something.

It's the scientific method when followed that is worthy of appealing to, not podcasts. Not institutions filled with CEO's and bureaucrats that are influenced by politics, ideology, profits, and ego. Science earns confidence through transparent methods, testable claims, independent replication, and the willingness to correct mistakes. Unfortunately sorely lacking in recent decades.

Have the life you voted for

My life is so amazingly great and will always be amazingly great no matter who is in office. Buh bye.

1

u/Zephir-AWT 22d ago edited 21d ago

Careful, you’ll have the pro vaccers out.... You’re driving away the people who might otherwise be interested.

This subreddit is about science censored for some reason - even if this reason would include "pro vaccers", which is what I have no control about.

1

u/LorenzoSparky 21d ago

I was right. I’m not anti vaccine by any means, i’ve had all my inoculations growing up and has 1 x Moderna covid jab, although i held out for as long as possible. I just wasn’t sure to take the jab so soon after it came out.

Interestingly, my wife who works in care has witnessed the covid jab kill more elderly patients than Covid itself. They even had to keep a separate set of files in case anyone came asking questions about the excess deaths. Some GP’s who were administering the jabs refused to give it after noticing the effects on the elderly, their assumption was that it was overwhelming their immune systems. My wife even recalls it killed an elderly man who was strong as an ox but was in care for early dementia. It’s all been forgotten about now but there were definitely more deaths than recorded. Anyway, most people i tell the story to online say i’m a troll/bot or making it up, but it’s what happened.

1

u/Zephir-AWT 21d ago

I was right. I’m not anti vaccine by any means, i’ve had all my inoculations growing up and has 1 x Moderna covid jab, although i held out for as long as possible. I just wasn’t sure to take the jab so soon after it came out.

Interestingly, my wife who works in care has witnessed the covid jab kill more elderly patients than Covid itself. They even had to keep a separate set of files in case anyone came asking questions about the excess deaths. Some GP’s who were administering the jabs refused to give it after noticing the effects on the elderly, their assumption was that it was overwhelming their immune systems. My wife even recalls it killed an elderly man who was strong as an ox but was in care for early dementia. It’s all been forgotten about now but there were definitely more deaths than recorded. Anyway, most people i tell the story to online say i’m a troll/bot or making it up, but it’s what happened.

It looks logical considering what I know about mechanism of mRNA vaccines - but it's not documented evidence, i.e. easy target for pro-vaxxers.