[chrisser]

Lemme see if I get this straight.

You’re accusing people of hypocrisy for accepting multiple:
- FDA-approved treatments that
- meet the accepted definition of “vaccine” that stood for the better part of a century
- underwent years, if not decades long full clinical trials

but then rejecting:
- “emergency use” treatments that
- have not yet been FDA approved and
- utilize novel technologies that
- have not passed conventional clinical trials
- have never before been able to pass animal trials (including this year) without killing the animals and that
- only meet the definition of “vaccine” if you use the definition created out of thin air this very year?

Oh, and the manufacturers are exempt from any liability.

That about right? That’s your position?

[Jane Long]

👍🏼

[greeneyes]

👍⚡😉 You made a lot of good points there.

[JayGalt]

👍🏼

[AppyPappy]

I think one vaccine is “approved”. The rest are only approved for emergency use.

I don’t see how they can require an “emergency use” vaccine. They can make you wear a mask