You note that you bolded yourself that the FDA considered the clot shots a gene therapy.
Therefore, that's a reputable, official government source saying so; quoted by one of the clot-shot companies themselves.
Back in 2020.
Before you trolls came out of the woodwork attempting to discredit anyone standing against the clot shots -- because they hadn't been massively distributed, nor had many companies and the government attempted to force people to take them.
So all the rest of your attempted ad hominem is meaningless, and knowingly dishonest.
I wasn't cherry picking. It was an admission against interest by the company.
And they dig their own hole a little deeper in the next few sentences:
" In addition, because no product in which mRNA is the primary active ingredient has been approved, the regulatory pathway for approval is uncertain. The number and design of the clinical trials and preclinical studies required for the approval of these types of medicines have not been established, may be different from those required for gene therapy products, or may require safety testing like gene therapy products. Moreover, the length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and to submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one pharmaceutical product to the next, and may be difficult to predict."
Yeah, they cut the hell out of the testing time -- REAL vaccines allow around 10 years for adverse events to manifest themselves. And sent out a legion of flying monkeys to cover up the signals being sent through VAERS.
And (laughs in American) -- so what if the company says their jab is not a gene therapy? It involves adulterated mRNA to cajole the body into making a foreign protein: and at that, not a natural foreign protein, but one where the sequence of the spike has been changed to stabilize it, in the conformation it has before fusing with the target cell.
The only excuse they have, is that it's not a therapy at all. Retrospective results prove that it does not prevent severe infection, and contrary to grandiose claims, cannot prevent either transmission, OR infection with subsequent strains: in fact it seems to prime the body to make additional antibodies to the injection-created spike protein, rather than reacting to whatever natural strain is out there.
Not to mention, why did these ding-dongs concentrate on something which would spread spike protein throughout the body, when
a) the spike protein is the harmful part of the virus
b) the nucleocapsid proteins in the virus are conserved far better from one strain of the virus to another
For the profit? They don't exist to make a profit.
They exist to make a profit within the law, while making products which do more good than harm, for which there are no cheaper, less expensive alternatives.
Otherwise, you get with medicine what you did with the early Pintos, where the company KNEW IN ADVANCE of the design flaw which caused the car to be liable to leak fuel and catch fire when rear ended; and for which emails among the executives showed they knew, and they decided to go ahead and produce the car and try to buffalo victims in court, rather than pay the $11/car it would take to solve the problem.
Kind of like all the adverse effects from the jabs themselves. You know the ones that even in the abbreviated clinical trials, were so bad, that Pfizer tried to get the results of their trials sealed for 75 years.
For the lipid envelope, it had to be specially engineered to not mess up the artificial mRNA it was carrying, while remaining stable enough to be transported in the body, AND to effectuate entry of the mRNA into the cells.
The people who were busy wrenching their own arms out of their sockets from patting themselves on the back so hard for getting stable lipid nanoparticles, failed to think about (or maybe the jab manufacturers ordered everyone to be quiet about) the transport of the LNPs far from the site of the injection: including crossing the blood-brain barrier.
There was a whistleblower from Pfizer who published internal results about that, as I recall.
And you're lying through your foul teeth when you say "I put my trust in" (a long list of strawmen articles you posted.)
If you bother to pull your head out of your ass, you can find I was posting to articles from Nature, The Lancet, The British Medical Journal and NEJM.
And you give yourself away by trying to link this to Q; there are sites which have saved all the Q posts, and Q does NOT emphasize or concentrate on the jabs. Out of over 4500 posts, only three (3) even contain the word "vaccine."
And I love this quote of yours:
"Just because Fauci and Birx turned out to be untrustworthy in a number of respects does not mean the vaxx doomers are trustworthy."
The vax doomers didn't have the full force of government, nor daily coverage in the MSM trumpeting and echoing everything thing they said.
But Birx and Pfauci DID. And they knowingly pushed the jabs, knowing them to be useless.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/dr-deborah-birx-knew-covid-vaccines-not-protect-against-infection
She also admitted that 50% of those who died from omicron were both older and fully vaccinated.
But it gets worse.
Here's the first paragarph of a recent article from Virology Journaln (BMC Part of Springer Nature):
Recently, The Lancet published a study on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines and the waning of immunity with time. The study showed that immune function among vaccinated individuals 8 months after the administration of two doses of COVID-19 vaccine was lower than that among the unvaccinated individuals. According to European Medicines Agency recommendations, frequent COVID-19 booster shots could adversely affect the immune response and may not be feasible. The decrease in immunity can be caused by several factors such as N1-methylpseudouridine, the spike protein, lipid nanoparticles, antibody-dependent enhancement, and the original antigenic stimulus. These clinical alterations may explain the association reported between COVID-19 vaccination and shingles.
Note that -- not just immune response to COVID-1984 variants, but overall immunity is impaired by the clot shots.
Get rekt, troll.
It’s clear from the context why mRNA in general was classed in the “gene therapy” category by the government bureaucracy even though the snippet of mRNA in the vaccines does not act as a gene therapy and permanently alter DNA. The following sentence, which you choose to ignore, clearly states so. Cherry picking.
I will ignore your silly accusations and name calling as not worth my time or attention. As for your claim about my “lying through my foul teeth” regarding articles you posted, here are your posts of those articles:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4074238/posts?page=1045#1045
https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/4074238/posts?page=1032#1032
Now who is lying? You must think highly of these people and what they have to say. Why else would you share links promoting them?
As for the Q tie-in, that’s legitimate. After Q stopped dropping and you’d worn out the “Ashli Babbitt was a crisis actor and isn’t really dead and it was all fake blood” type stuff, you switched to Covid, then when the vaccines rolled out you became obsessed with vaxx doomers. Nearly every article posted here from some clickbait vaxx doomer site run by grifters was posted by active posters on the Special Q Thread (your little snowflake sanctuary where none may challenge your nutty conspiracy theories about such things Biden’s earlobes, the Pence family’s dead bunny, and Trump retaining possession of the nuclear football to this very day.). These articles claimed the vaccines contained all sorts of preposterous things, including teeny weeny razor blades, tiny mechanical octopuses, wiggly wormy parasites, and King Cobra snake venom.
People who get sucked into one conspiracy theory tend to get sucked into more. Like those who believe the moon landing was a hoax are more likely to believe in the chemtrail thing and that the Sandy Hook shooting was fake and all were “crisis actors”. Hence the plethora of conspiracy theories embraced by Q followers. And you are a die-hard Q follower yourself.
Moving a!ong, yes, although in development for decades, mRNA vaccines are a really new thing. Hence, uncertain regulatory pathways and all the rest.
Next you start mixing in legitimate concerns about the vaccines with unproven theories.
Yes, it normally takes a decade for a vaccine to be approved for general use after extensive clinical trials. Yes, long-term effects are a genuine legitimate concern. Yet another reason I am against mandates.
It’s true that that the vaccines are not effective against newer strains of Covid. Last year’s flu vaccine is usually not effective against this year’s strain, either. And it happens too often that they guess wrong and this year’s flu shot isn’t much good, either. Viruses mutate. Some rapidly. Corona viruses tend to mutate rather quickly. Frankly, this was to be expected (at least I expected it), as Birx finally acknowledged.
Do you have any legitimate source to cite proving the spike protein “is the harmful part of the virus” all on its own? Any at all?
You are assuming a number of competing pharmaceutical companies and biotech firms in various countries all produced the equivalent of the Pinto in vaccine form at the same time, all of them knowing in advance they were harmful. Seriously? That’s quite the coincidence or conspiracy or collusion.
Where is your proof the adverse events in the clinical trials “were so bad”?
The Pfizer “whistleblower” was someone in sales, IIRC (it was a long time ago that you guys were carrying on about him). I don’t recall that he “published” any “internal results” just that he made accusations. Again, it’s been a long time, so if you want to cite this guy as a credible source (and not some disgruntled employee looking for $ and his 15 minutes of fame) you really need to post a link to whatever he “published”.
Yes, it’s true that Fauci & Friends had the full force of the media behind them. That’s why I especially fault them to telling us bald faced lies. But that does not mean the vaxx doomers are lily white and can do no wrong. They get plenty wrong.
The Virology Journal “article” you touted is not peer-reviewed article, but a letter to the editor of said journal by Kenji Yamamoto, a Japanese doctor (link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9167431/ ). The Lancet study is the one he cites to support his statement that “the study showed that immune function among vaccinated individuals eight months after the administration of two doses of the COVID-19 vaccine was lower than that among the unvaccinated individuals” in his footnote 1, but this is a gross misunderstanding or misrepresentation of that study, perhaps a translation error. The Lancet study absolutely DOES NOT support your assertion that “not just immune response to COVID-1984 variants, but overall immunity is impaired by the clot shots.”
If you bother to check out The Lancet study yourself, you will find it says no such thing. It does show the vaccines’ efficacy wanes considerably over time, especially in the elderly (and recommends boosters). While the study does show immunity to the Covid virus lessens over time as vaccine efficacy wanes, there is never any claim or question that overall immune function is depressed.