Would you date/marry someone who is covid vaccinated?

[JamesGatz]

I'm a bit torn in this topic:

On one hand - I believe one really cannot prevent exposure - I believe in shedding definitely, but even if shedding weren't a thing and the person you were having relations with was not vaxxed - you still have to take into account if they had relations with someone who was and in that case - you are screwed either way

I remember there was this one girl at my old job that got vaxxed and showed up to work and I definitely remember that same week I would experience some violent allergies being around her - instinctively I wanted to get away from her or smack her around a bit, but that experience definitely made me believe in shedding

On the other hand - I am actually concerned with what people I personally knew experienced - I saw 2 jabbed up kids have seizures in the middle of class - I've seen coworkers at my old job at the verge of tears talking about how they were breaking out in hives, shakily body movement when they were walking and seizures, and in general felt very weak. These are all normies by the way so none of them believed that this was some giant plot before they got vaxxed - I imagine this experience helped them see the light I hope. I am concerned that maybe even with shedding that I am still actually clean but that relations with a vaxxed women could mean the death of me. I do also think it clings to the gonads as Drareg mentioned and that sex means trouble.

 

[David90]

I'm wondering if/why someone who is not vaccinated (for covid) would or would not date someone else (having in mind from the outset the goal to marry, have a family, etc.) someone who is at present vaccinated? It's a fun question but also a serious question...

Hard Question. It depends. Thankfully i'm out of the dating field for quite some time.

Especially (like @-Luke- said) if she got vaccinated "because the government and the science said so'', this would be also a clear no for me.
Because there would be no base for a relationship. I would also like to have someone that is on the same page (or at least has a open mind) about this actual situation.

For Example:
I have a Female Friend (#1.) of mine, that got vaxxed (and boosted) because ''The Government said so and it is about saving Life's''. She is absolutly sure, that the vaxx protects to 100% and the vaccines and lockdowns are all useful tools for ''saving life's''. You can't even tell her otherwise. I tried once (with numerous proofs) but it didn't help.

I have also another Female Friend (#2) that got vaxxed (and boosted) that is the complete opposite of her. She says it herself, that the vax, doesn't protect to 100% and she is still can and will be ''infectious'' to other People. So at least, she is more grounded and/or has an open mind to this topic.

In that Example, i would choose #2.

 

[tankasnowgod]

"Evidence for Aerosol Transfer of SARS-CoV2-specific Humoral Immunity"
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.28.22274443v1.full.pdf"
"
Given these observations, we hypothesized that droplet/aerosolized antibody transfer might occur between individuals, much like droplet/aerosolized virus particles can be exchanged by the same route. To evaluate this hypothesis, we obtained nasal swabs from children living in households in which parents or family members had varying degrees of SARS-CoV2-specifc immunity, including those unvaccinated, vaccinated and COVID-19+. Initial comparison of nasal swabs acquired from children living in vaccinated households revealed readily detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG (Fig 1E), especially when compared to the complete deficit of SARSCoV-2-specific antibody detected in the few nasal swabs we obtained from children in nonvaccinated households. We then used the variation in parents’ levels of intranasal IgG as the basis of stratification across all children’s samples. Log transformation of the data from thirtyfour adult-child pairs established antibody cut-offs for high vs low parental intranasal antibody levels. Evaluation of samples in this fashion revealed that high intranasal IgG in vaccinated parents was significantly associated (p-value = 0.01) with a 0.38 increase in the log transformed intranasal IgG gMFIs within a child from the same household (Fig 1F). This significant positive relationship was observed using either parametric or non-parametric analysis, and adjustments for the correlation within household did not alter the conclusion. Though not statistically significant, a similar trend of elevated IgA was found in the same samples.
"

Yeah, I read it, it's about ANTIBODIES. Not the alleged spike protein. SARS-Cov-2 specific IgG is an antibody. You can confirm this with a quick Google search. Your bolded part 100% confirms my point.

 

[OccamzRazer]

For me health and God is everything and the vax is the opposite of both of those things. I would feel insecure being with someone who doesn’t think something is wrong with these vaccines, and I wouldn’t want to be with someone who would give up their freedom to keep their job. For me love isn’t everything.

Exactly.

I am surprised at the number of people who are considering answering 'yes' to such a question.

Everybody chooses their own path. But I think not taking a clear stance on such issues will only make one's life harder in the long run.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

Exactly.

I am surprised at the number of people who are considering answering 'yes' to such a question.

Everybody chooses their own path. But I think not taking a clear stance on such issues will only make one's life harder in the long run.

… and imagine the arguments about getting their kids vaxxed ?

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

… and imagine the arguments about getting their kids vaxxed ?

Here is an example posted, just this morning, of that exact scenario.

 

[OccamzRazer]

Here is an example posted, just this morning, that exact scenario.

Yeah I saw that. Very sad.

The possibility of love/romance/security/sex/whatever is NEVER worth going thru such things.

 

[FoodForeal]

Yeah, I read it, it's about ANTIBODIES. Not the alleged spike protein. SARS-Cov-2 specific IgG is an antibody. You can confirm this with a quick Google search. Your bolded part 100% confirms my point.

No, they tested for antibodies in the nose. The study speculates about what was transferred from vaccinated parent to unvaccinated child, but can not draw any concrete conclusions.

 

[tankasnowgod]

No, they tested for antibodies in the nose.

Right. They tested for Antibodies.

The study speculates about what was transferred from vaccinated parent to unvaccinated child, but can not draw any concrete conclusions.

Right again. Which contradicts your original quote of-

We now have proof that the vaccine is spreading disease. Vaccination contagion.

Nope, we just have more speculation, and a plausible mechanism.

 

[Peating4life]

Nope. Too much of an unknown health risk for offspring.

 

[FoodForeal]

Right. They tested for Antibodies.


Right again. Which contradicts your original quote of-



Nope, we just have more speculation, and a plausible mechanism.

Antibodies from the vaccine are at least part of the vaccine disease. They authors hypothesized that antibodies are transferred by aerosol. The study proves that vaccinated people are transferring antibodies to their unvaccinated children somehow, by exactly what mechanism or infectious particle is still to be discovered. As of now we don't know what exactly is being transferred and even whether it is aerosolized is in question but it seems that some infectious agent is aerosolized from anecdotal evidence of unvaccinated reactions to vaccinated shedding.

We know now that vaccine antibodies are somehow being conferred to unvaccinated children by unvaccinated parents in the same household. What will be revealed by testing for transfer outside the same family in public or at least in a different location, maybe the workplace? What if further testing reveals that more than just antibodies are being aerosolized and transmitted?

Anyone remember magnetic injection sites?

 

[tankasnowgod]

Antibodies from the vaccine are at least part of the vaccine disease.

What? Antibodies don't come from the vaccines (there is zero claim of that by anyone), but are made in response to a vaccine. As they seem to from both organic illnesses, traditional vaccines, and even poisonings. Again, how would this finding not apply to any other condition in which antibodies are made?

And traditionally, antibodies have been thought to be good thing. They demonstrate that your immune system is working to fight off a pathogen. Not that they are somehow causing a disease themselves.

The study proves that vaccinated people are transferring antibodies to their unvaccinated children somehow,

It does no such thing. It proves that antibodies can be detected in a mask, after use. I don't think most parents hold their children centimeters from their mouth and then breathe into them for hours at a time.

but it seems that some infectious agent is aerosolized from anecdotal evidence of unvaccinated reactions to vaccinated shedding.

Again, this would be a serious pivot from the "Spike Protein shedding" that was initially proposed, and it certainly doesn't prove that someone else's antibodies as causing other people harm, even if there is some mechanism for them to be inhaled by another individual.

 

[FoodForeal]

Antibodies don't come from the vaccines (there is zero claim of that by anyone), but are made in response to a vaccine.

The immune response to a vaccine comes from a vaccine. The immune response is the production of antibodies so the vaccine antibodies come from a vaccine. The vaccine essentially contains the body's response, so the antibodies come from the vaccines. This is cause and effect.

Again, how would this finding not apply to any other condition in which antibodies are made?

It's possible, but I haven't seen evidence of other antibodies not from vaccines being transferred.

And traditionally, antibodies have been thought to be good thing. They demonstrate that your immune system is working to fight off a pathogen. Not that they are somehow causing a disease themselves.

Traditional medicine is often viewed skeptically here. Vaccinated parents are emitting an infectious agent that produces an immune response in unvaccinated children living in the same household.

It does no such thing. It proves that antibodies can be detected in a mask, after use.

They tested masks of vaccinated individuals after use, yes, but they also tested the nose of unvaccinated children living in the same household as vaccinated parents for antibodies and found them. This is in stark contrast to the finding of a "complete deficit" of the coronavirus vaccine specific antibody in the nasal tests of unvaccinated children living in the same household as unvaccinated parents.

Again, this would be a serious pivot from the "Spike Protein shedding" that was initially proposed, and it certainly doesn't prove that someone else's antibodies as causing other people harm, even if there is some mechanism for them to be inhaled by another individual.

I don't care what people were saying about shedding in the past, I am presenting evidence of transfer of vaccine antibodies from vaccinated parents to unvaccinated children living in the same household. Yes it may not be evidence of harm but we now know that there is an infectious agent capable of being transferred from vaccinated parents to unvaccinated children living in the same household which then elicits an immune response. This could be capable of causing harm, especially if the antibodies are similar or homologous to antigens in the reproductive system.

 

[Don]

If I was looking for a baby making partner no way, other wise yes unless (like many have said on here) they truly believe in jabs and all the government pharma nonsense.

 

[FocusedOnHealth]

After all the countless articles posted on this forum on HOW DANGEROUS these gene altering shots are, and how people close to the jabbed people are getting, clots, heart problems, children dying etc., how ANYONE on this forum could even consider dating a vaxxed zombie is a lost cause. You cannot be helped. You will also probably take the death jabs in the microneedle patch version and think it is safer and probably all die too like all the other jabbed zombies will eventually.

So WHY are you even concerned about your health? You are no better than people who took the dna altering jabs in the first place.

You can’t fix stupid and ignorance is deadly bliss. Enjoy your demise.

 

[FoodForeal]

Antibodies from the vaccine are at least part of the vaccine disease. They authors hypothesized that antibodies are transferred by aerosol. The study proves that vaccinated people are transferring antibodies to their unvaccinated children somehow, by exactly what mechanism or infectious particle is still to be discovered. As of now we don't know what exactly is being transferred and even whether it is aerosolized is in question but it seems that some infectious agent is aerosolized from anecdotal evidence of unvaccinated reactions to vaccinated shedding.

We know now that vaccine antibodies are somehow being conferred to unvaccinated children by unvaccinated parents in the same household. What will be revealed by testing for transfer outside the same family in public or at least in a different location, maybe the workplace? What if further testing reveals that more than just antibodies are being aerosolized and transmitted?

Meant to say "by vaccinated parents in the same household" obviously.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Traditional medicine is often viewed skeptically here. Vaccinated parents are emitting an infectious agent that produces an immune response in unvaccinated children living in the same household.

There is zero evidence in the study that any sort of "infectious agent" is being emitted or transmitted, since they were only measuring antibodies.

They tested masks of vaccinated individuals after use, yes, but they also tested the nose of unvaccinated children living in the same household as vaccinated parents for antibodies and found them. This is in stark contrast to the finding of a "complete deficit" of the coronavirus vaccine specific antibody in the nasal tests of unvaccinated children living in the same household as unvaccinated parents.

There is no claim that there is a "coronavirus vaccine specific antibody." The antibodies they are testing for are thought to be specific to the alleged SARS-Cov-2 virus, and the vaccines allegedly produce the exact same antibody.

Legend holds that there is a "pandemic" around this alleged "virus," and supposedly, this "Novel Corona Virus" has been detected everywhere in the world. So, if children test positive for the Covid antibodies, it would seem just as likely that they could have picked up this "Novel Corona Virus" from somewhere else in the environment, like school, daycare, or a store.

Or, from someone else at the "vaccine center," where they took the samples from-

Nasal swabs were obtained by convenience sampling both parents and their children at the Colorado Tricountry vaccine center in Aurora, CO who were attending vaccine appointments, not limited to SARS-CoV2.

I don't care what people were saying about shedding in the past, I am presenting evidence of transfer of vaccine antibodies from vaccinated parents to unvaccinated children living in the same household.

Except there is no evidence of "transfer of antibodies." It's just as likely that parents and children are producing their own antibodies, possibly from the same stimulus in the environment (aka, the alleged "Novel Corona Virus"), or from different sources (vax for the parents, virus for the kids).

Yes it may not be evidence of harm but we now know that there is an infectious agent capable of being transferred from vaccinated parents to unvaccinated children living in the same household which then elicits an immune response.

Once again, antibodies themselves are not an infectious agent, and there is no evidence that antibodies were being transferred in the way you claim.

 

[FoodForeal]

There is zero evidence in the study that any sort of "infectious agent" is being emitted or transmitted, since they were only measuring antibodies.

There is no claim that there is a "coronavirus vaccine specific antibody." The antibodies they are testing for are thought to be specific to the alleged SARS-Cov-2 virus, and the vaccines allegedly produce the exact same antibody.

Legend holds that there is a "pandemic" around this alleged "virus," and supposedly, this "Novel Corona Virus" has been detected everywhere in the world. So, if children test positive for the Covid antibodies, it would seem just as likely that they could have picked up this "Novel Corona Virus" from somewhere else in the environment, like school, daycare, or a store.

Or, from someone else at the "vaccine center," where they took the samples from-

Except there is no evidence of "transfer of antibodies." It's just as likely that parents and children are producing their own antibodies, possibly from the same stimulus in the environment (aka, the alleged "Novel Corona Virus"), or from different sources (vax for the parents, virus for the kids).

Once again, antibodies themselves are not an infectious agent, and there is no evidence that antibodies were being transferred in the way you claim.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.28.22274443v1.full.pdf

Evidence for Aerosol Transfer of SARS-CoV2-specific Humoral Immunity. ​

"
Given these observations, we hypothesized that droplet/aerosolized antibody transfer might occur between individuals, much like droplet/aerosolized virus particles can be exchanged by the same route. To evaluate this hypothesis, we obtained nasal swabs from children living in households in which parents or family members had varying degrees of SARS-CoV2-specifc immunity, including those unvaccinated, vaccinated and COVID-19+. Initial comparison of nasal swabs acquired from children living in vaccinated households revealed readily detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG (Fig 1E), especially when compared to the complete deficit of SARSCoV-2-specific antibody detected in the few nasal swabs we obtained from children in nonvaccinated households. We then used the variation in parents’ levels of intranasal IgG as the basis of stratification across all children’s samples. Log transformation of the data from thirtyfour adult-child pairs established antibody cut-offs for high vs low parental intranasal antibody levels. Evaluation of samples in this fashion revealed that high intranasal IgG in vaccinated parents was significantly associated (p-value = 0.01) with a 0.38 increase in the log transformed intranasal IgG gMFIs within a child from the same household (Fig 1F). This significant positive relationship was observed using either parametric or non-parametric analysis, and adjustments for the correlation within household did not alter the conclusion. Though not statistically significant, a similar trend of elevated IgA was found in the same samples.

...

The log transformed IgA and IgG values from the children’s samples were modeled using linear regression with a single binary covariate corresponding to high or low antibody levels from their parent. Residual plots were used to check violations of linear regression assumptions and a Wilcoxon rank sum test was conducted if assumptions were violated. A linear mixed effects model was evaluated to assure that the correlation within household did not significantly contribute to the data or alter the conclusions drawn from the fixed effect linear regression model.
"

 

[tankasnowgod]

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.28.22274443v1.full.pdf

Evidence for Aerosol Transfer of SARS-CoV2-specific Humoral Immunity. ​

"
Given these observations, we hypothesized that droplet/aerosolized antibody transfer might occur between individuals, much like droplet/aerosolized virus particles can be exchanged by the same route. To evaluate this hypothesis, we obtained nasal swabs from children living in households in which parents or family members had varying degrees of SARS-CoV2-specifc immunity, including those unvaccinated, vaccinated and COVID-19+. Initial comparison of nasal swabs acquired from children living in vaccinated households revealed readily detectable SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG (Fig 1E), especially when compared to the complete deficit of SARSCoV-2-specific antibody detected in the few nasal swabs we obtained from children in nonvaccinated households. We then used the variation in parents’ levels of intranasal IgG as the basis of stratification across all children’s samples. Log transformation of the data from thirtyfour adult-child pairs established antibody cut-offs for high vs low parental intranasal antibody levels. Evaluation of samples in this fashion revealed that high intranasal IgG in vaccinated parents was significantly associated (p-value = 0.01) with a 0.38 increase in the log transformed intranasal IgG gMFIs within a child from the same household (Fig 1F). This significant positive relationship was observed using either parametric or non-parametric analysis, and adjustments for the correlation within household did not alter the conclusion. Though not statistically significant, a similar trend of elevated IgA was found in the same samples.

...

The log transformed IgA and IgG values from the children’s samples were modeled using linear regression with a single binary covariate corresponding to high or low antibody levels from their parent. Residual plots were used to check violations of linear regression assumptions and a Wilcoxon rank sum test was conducted if assumptions were violated. A linear mixed effects model was evaluated to assure that the correlation within household did not significantly contribute to the data or alter the conclusions drawn from the fixed effect linear regression model.
"

Yeah, you can bold and change the color of the text all you want. It doesn't change the fact that they were measuring antibodies to SARS-Cov-2, and the presence of antibodies to something that is claimed to be ubiquitous does not prove that the antibodies themselves were transmitted, nor an infectious agent. The more you keep reposting the study like this, the less I think you have read it.

By the way..... do you have any idea how many people were tested in the study? There are apparently 4 groups between vaxxed and unvaxxed, children, and adults. How large was this study? It would appear to be a minimum of four subjects, but I didn't see any numbers in the study. How many? 4? 10? 50? 200? Maybe you can bold that part and change the color to green?

EDIT- Wait! I finally found the number!

Log transformation of the data from thirtyfour adult-child pairs established antibody cut-offs for high vs low parental intranasal antibody levels.

34 pairs means 34 adults, and 34 children. So, a study of less than 70 people, all taken from one area.

On top of that.... do you know the measurements of the antibodies? Differences are often "statistically significant," but don't rise to any sort of meaningful clinical significance. The only part that seems to suggest some numbers actually comparing children in vaxxed vs unvaxxed families is Figure F-

There is no legend to decode this thing, but assuming "High IgG (and IgA) are the vaxxed households, and the low are the unvaxxed (again, guessing here, because it's not made clear), it would appear that there is quite a presence of antibodies in both types of children. So, while the average difference looks to be a concentration of about 10%, it would appear that some children in unvaxxed households have a higher antibody count (in whatever measurement) than some children in the vaxxed households.

How, again, is this good proof of shedding?

 

[FoodForeal]

EDIT- Wait! I finally found the number!

Yes 34 pairs.
and
"Data availability statement: All materials, data, and associated protocols will be available to readers upon request and without undue qualifications."

There is no legend to decode this thing, but assuming "High IgG (and IgA) are the vaxxed households, and the low are the unvaxxed (again, guessing here, because it's not made clear), it would appear that there is quite a presence of antibodies in both types of children. So, while the average difference looks to be a concentration of about 10%, it would appear that some children in unvaxxed households have a higher antibody count (in whatever measurement) than some children in the vaxxed households.

How, again, is this good proof of shedding?

"E. Histograms showing the mean fluorescent intensities for Wuhan-RBD-specific IgG eluted from nasal swabs from unvaccinated children living in households in which parents or family members were either vaccinated (top) or unvaccinated (bottom). F. Log transformation of the gMFI for Wuhan-RBD-specific IgG (left) or IgA (right) from thirty-four adult-child pairs using antibody cut-offs for hi vs low parental intranasal antibody levels."

The thing you posted shows log transformation of the antibody levels of unvaccinated children stratified against high and low parental intranasal IgG and IgA antibody cut-off groups. The figure contains both vaccinated and unvaccinated parent child pairs/households; it isn't specific so it doesn't need those labels. Figure F shows that high or low parental intranasal levels of antibodies are associated with higher or lower child intranasal antibody levels.

Figure E is also data from the nasal swabs... It labels the vaccinated and unvaccinated adult households/pairs.

"...complete deficit of SARSCoV-2-specific antibody detected in the few nasal swabs we obtained from children in nonvaccinated households"

Corona vaccine specific antibodies.