Last week, Brigada asked the question, “Should an org or partner be requiring the COVID vaccine?” There were a lot of comments! We loved hearing from everyone and want to keep the discussion going on this relevant topic. Brigada wants to know your thoughts on these COVID related questions:
- What is the biblical basis for getting or not getting the vaccine?
- What are some ways that your ministry or field of expertise has adapted/changed due to COVID?
- What is the future of missions as it relates to the impact of COVID?
You can post your answer to these questions in the comments below.
You can read last weeks article and comments here if you happened to miss it: https://brigada.org/2021/09/26_33265
The prior discussion contains many incredibly dangerous lies (e.g. “thousands of people have already died directly from the covid19 vaccine” — promotion of the use of ivermectin to mitigate the “damaging effects of the covid 19 vaccine” — “covid test swabs touch the brain” — “vaccine manufacturing companies either skipped all the required testing or chose not to publish the results of their testing” — etc.).
I recommend this thread (and the last) be heavily moderated or large cautionary warnings added to many of the comments that are sharing false and dangerous information.
Thank You! and Amen!
Thanks VCI. Some of comments in the last post took the direction of the “internet snowball,” repetition of statements made by some and repeated by someone, etc (with no actual proof from the start).
I tried to push back a bit on the other post (“I also push back on those who repeat the “thousands of people have died” idea without evidence.”), and I am happy to see you and Hugh join as well.
It seems that a moderator is needed to at least challenge those who make statements like “thousands have died ” or “test swabs touch the brain.”
When I made the post above yesterday, I backspaced over (deleted) a comment that our desire for a moderator risks to be decried as “censorship.” I took that phrase off, but it is exactly what happened in a later comment (below).
I believe that most of us would like some data for claims like “Thousands have already died from the vaccine…” and “test swabs touch the brain.” If these claims were backed up by verifiable data, that would be significant. If they are just social media, repeat, repeat, repeat, then our request for a moderator is important.
It only takes a few minutes to find many medical sites that say it is anatomically impossible for a swab to reach the brain.
Thank you for saying this! I was so appalled by the thread last week and the lack of moderation of any of the responses. Brigada should not be encouraging “open discussion” on things that have life or death, not to mention Gospel, consequences.
Celeste, you wrote, “Brigada should not be encouraging “open discussion” on things that have life or death, not to mention Gospel, consequences.” Why would an organization that helps so many people acquire information about a great variety of topics shut down open discussions simply because people are not in agreement or because the consequences could have a great impact on those influenced by it? Even when people disagree or make claims that others don’t like, I believe that “things that have life or death, not to mention Gospel consequences” should enjoy the trails, joys and challenges of open discussion as people work through their thoughts, understandings and opinions and share ideas, resources, and discoveries that can be challenged, tested, shared and discussed. Yes, it would be less trouble to shut down or not even invite discussion, but there is great value in discussion despite the claim that it appalls some. I applaud Brigada for inviting this discussion.
I believe that the guidelines of Romans `14 should apply here. Some feel free in their conscience to receive the vaccine. Others do not. We should respect the conscience of both groups of individuals by neither forcing them to receive the vaccine, or by forbidding them from doing so. Let each be fully convinced in their own mind.
So an organization should respect the varying convictions of all of its members on this matter, and not dictate their course of action.
Thank you Tom. Totally agree.
Allegations that the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines currently available in the United States (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna) are toxic because they contain graphene oxide on their lipid nanoparticles (which help transport the mRNA through the body) are baseless.
The claims stem from a July 28 talk show ( archive.ph/eTKvT ) where a woman in the video, introduced as Karen Kingston, points to documentation on a lipid particle maker’s website which allegedly shows that graphene oxide is present in their products.
Pfizer and Moderna told Reuters, however, that graphene oxide is not among their vaccines’ ingredients.
The video has since gained over 1.3 million views on Rumble and has been replicated on YouTube ( archive.ph/8f6vW ) , BitChute ( archive.ph/18Cfp , archive.ph/pfpLo ), Brighteon ( archive.ph/krx6O ) and social media ( archive.ph/Uew1Q , archive.ph/e3ZMC ).
WHAT IS GRAPHENE OXIDE?
Graphene oxide is a “single-atomic layered material” made through the oxidation of graphite ( here ). When chemically reduced ( bit.ly/3yAcXpn , here ), graphene oxide can create graphene which has been described as “the strongest, thinnest and most conductive material on earth” ( here ).
Medical experts at Meedan’s Health Desk explain here that this compound, which has been studied for multiple biomedical applications including biosensors and drug delivery, could be toxic to humans in certain amounts. But in the case of its use in potential vaccines, current research indicates these would contain such small quantities that it would not be toxic to human cells.
The medical experts said that “many more studies and trials are needed” to determine whether the compound would be completely safe and effective for biomedical applications.
The lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are essentially “delivery vehicles” that protect the mRNA when the vaccine is injected and transport it to the right place in the cells ( here ).
Polyethylene glycol (PEG) ( here )is a compound used in both COVID-19 mRNA vaccines to keep the lipid nanoparticles stable, medical experts at Meedan’s Health Desk explain here . (This is why the term PEG-LNPs may be used.)
Polyethylene glycol can be found listed as an ingredient among the lipids in the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine ( here , here ) and the Moderna vaccine ( here , here ).
“PEG has a long history of safe use in FDA-approved drug formulations,” Kathryn Whitehead, Associate Professor of Chemical Engineering and Biomedical Engineering at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) ( here ) told Reuters via email. See more ( here ).
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) does not recommend the mRNA vaccines for people with a PEG allergy.
The woman in the video points to information on the website of Sinopeg, a Chinese company, which is among various companies in the world ( here ) that produce lipid nanoparticles ( here ).
She shows an entry of Sinopeg’s website in the section “Industry news” ( archive.ph/ic1sg ). The information, however, is about a different PEG (a polyethylene glycol monomethyl ether, not the PEG-LNPs in the mRNA vaccines) that was “successfully grafted to the surface of graphene.”
Sinopeg referred to a study originally published by the journal Composites Science and Technology ( here ). The publication first received the study on Dec. 2019, predating the detection of COVID-19.
Contacted by Reuters, Sinopeg said that the company has “never provided any lipid nanoparticles that include graphene oxide” and that the grafted graphene mentioned in this study “is not related to COVID-19 vaccines.”
Source: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-graphene-lipidvaccines-idUSL1N2PI2XH
Hi. Martin Luther’s closest ministry associate, Philipp Melanchthon, penned the famous lines adopted by various denominations and wide parts of evangelical/protestant Christendom… “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials liberty; in all things, charity/love.” This vaccination topic/issue is one where, at times, people have very strong polar opposite, life-threatening points of view. Therefore, what one person considers essential may be the opposite of what another person considers essential. These two different people are going to feel that their particular view requires unanimous support and in some cases (in a couple of these previous posts) “moderation” (or in need of a moderator) which is really censorship in the name of their perceived ‘truth’, which may be erroneous. While Melanchthon’s truism is helpful in many situations and conundrums, it is not scripture or absolute truth. My lifelong (since I was 20) walk with Christ and pursuit of truth has been an essential in my life, but it was not welcomed with a unified response from my family of origin, although all have eventually come to Christ. Passionate truth is often paid for and accompanied by a lonely, suffering walk (with Christ). Who, reading this, if they saw their young three year old son or daughter walk out in the middle of a street with heavy traffic, would consider it non-essential to run out into the street and rescue this little one? No one, I’m sure. In similar manner, if one has deeply researched, prayed over, and sifted through all the good, bad, ugly, truth, lies, etc., and come to a reasoned and careful conviction that the vaccines are both hurtful and deadly, potentially in the short or long-term, would that person feel qualms about not mandating a ‘heroic’ street extracting effort? I have and I m experiencing this dilemma with one of my adult daughters, who has felt it necessary to take two jabs to keep her hospital job. After the second jab, she is feeling bad side effects. I strongly encouraged her to not take the jab(s) but she took them to keep her job. With love and concern, I said she could move back in with her Mom and Dad and look for work in our area that doesn’t require the jab. Although I felt it absolutely essential, to preserve her life and health, for her not to take the jab, I could only try to persuade her not to take it. Another modified truism that may be relevant regarding this issue is the following… “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him (th)ink.” Shalom! Selah! Blessings! Le Chaim (to life!)
https://vaccines.daystar.com/ 30+ videos; comprehensive regarding covid, “vaccines”/shots, etc. with plenty of help for people wherever they are on the spectrum (haven’t had covid; had covid; took ‘shot’; etcetera); very helpful
Many more helpful videos regarding covid 19 crisis at this link: https://covid.daystar.com/
Regardless of the issue at hand, the real question is, Is cohesion ever an ethical or even strategically sustainable option? We speak metaphorically of humans playing G-D. But the almighty does not coheres humans. Is violating another individuals conscious ever justifiable as a means to any ends ever. I think not.