Well considering we are blessed here on this forum by a conga line of daily posts from the same propagandists quoting the same sources and insisting it to be true, perhaps the better way to look at it would be — waiting for the line up of People who make arguments that you can’t refute so will use the technique of supremacy of the first statement timewise instead of a data driven argument.
To wit: the hypothesis advanced states that some person talked to a rabidly antivaxxer who has been thrown off faculty of multiple medical schools for misrepresenting his credentials that is refuted by observational data from someone in the cohort being discussed who has a sufficient N to draw a conclusion.
Yeah. I’ll take the data.
Doctors actually treating people are wrong, but the government, big pharma, democrat politicians and the media, and most especially Faux-xi are correct in saying that the clot shot is safe and effective? That it was also rigorously tested? How do you rigorously test something that bypassed all animal trial phases and went straight into peoples’ bodies?
You also have heard that every single animal that was a test subject for an mRNA injection died, right? Constantly slobbing on the knob of democrats/media/big pharma and Faux-xi is not a good look, and constantly quoting them isn’t even a real source. Of course Faux-xi is going to say it’s safe and effective, he has a monetary interest in promoting it.