I don't remember you specifically repeating that claim, but I've seen it plenty of times. That claim, which consists of semantic word-play by professional antivaxxers does not change the scientific understanding of what a vaccine is or how the immune system adaptive response occurs.
The professional antivax working definition of a vaccine seems to be that it is a magical shield which completely protects everyone who receives it from getting sick with a vaccine-preventable disease. Professional antivaxxers imply that the vaccine is a substance which stays in the body forever (or at least for years) providing protection, and that if it doesn't completely protect everyone, it isn't a vaccine.
However , the professional antivax characterization of a vaccine does not match reality at all.
In reality, a vaccine is a vehicle to deliver an antigen in order to produce a specific adaptive immune response. An antigen is any protein that provokes the immune response. The result of the immune system activation is the maturation of T-cells and B-cells that recognize the antigen. The B-cells, in turn, make antibodies that attach to the antigen. The antigen itself does not remain in the body for more than a few days.
The adaptive immune response is just that: the production of antigen-specific T-cells, B-cells and antibodies.
No amount of word-play and obfuscation by professional antivaxxers can change what an immune response is.
The antigen in a vaccine doesn't have to come from a pathogen at all. The vast majority of vaccines are used to cause animals to make antibodies. Antibodies have many different uses in research. A subset of vaccines cause animals to make antibodies for medical or diagnostic use. Another subset of vaccines are intended to make humans (or domestic animals) make antibodies. While most vaccines used in humans or domestical animals are used to cause them to make antibodies against pathogens, some (still in research, I don't think any have attained FDA approval yet) are intended to cause humans to make antibodies against proteins that are prevalent on cancer cells.
The reason a vaccine against, for example, measles "works" is that it causes the body to make T-cells, B-cells, and antibodies against measles proteins. Later, if measles viruses enter the respiratory passages of the vaccinees, the antibodies attach to proteins on the outside of the measles virus. This both inhibits the virus's ability to attach to and enter cells. The antibodies also target the virus for destruction by other immune cells. Depending on how well the immune system responded to the initial exposure to the antigen from vaccination, the vaccinee's immune system will clear out the viruses without the person ever being aware that they inhaled virus particles.
Immunology textbook: Immunology: A Short Course, 8th Edition.
Overview of some uses of antibodies in research: Immunological Techniques in Research and Clinical Medicine.
Not as much Marxist, Orwellian Newspeak covering for corruption.
And then compare to the definitions given after Pfauci took over.
Obvious lie is obvious: given the obvious changes, you know, from dead or attenuated virus, or pieces thereof, to an LNP enclosing synthetic mRNA.
And, you know, given the specious promises given by PFauci et al at the start of the scamdemic.
And Pfizer's hiding the pitch to their investors about continuing revenue streams.
Nice chatting with you Dingbat.
Thanks for ducking the questions about the 16-subject, 2-month long trial SPONSORED BY PFIZER in the New England Journal of Graft, I mean, Medicine.
Dingbat.