[Tell It Right]

IMHO from a research technicality perspective, there was enough data for Emergency Use Authorization ... but only in how we used to define EUA before the china virus.

In other words, EUA has a role in use cases where someone is about to die from some illness and their only hope is a drug or treatment that's maybe halfway through the research stage (i.e. a new cancer treatment). The problem is that the political class ran with the jab EUA as though the research was enough to give to people not in dire straits (they said it was "approved" over and over with saying it was approved for emergency use only). And of course, nothing comes close to justifying the political class trying every way to force the masses to take the jab.

If they had just limited the implementation of the jabs for the few people in dire straits to be allowed to get them, (what the EUA designation is intended for), then the research done to get to that point would have been fine.

[Political Junkie Too]

In other words, EUA has a role in use cases where someone is about to die from some illness and their only hope is a drug or treatment that's maybe halfway through the research stage...

In other words, "right to try" and "informed consent."

Unfortunately, neither of those was offered by the Biden administration. People were mandated to take it, and nobody was allowed to withhold consent without severe punishment and the threat of social ostracization.

-PJ