The "vaccine" was never advertised as a way to not get the China Virus. Rather it was advertised as preventing serious illness or death should the person receiving the "vaccine" contract the virus.
To this day, I fail to understand why it's called a "vaccine" since traditional vaccines actually prevent an infection.
Good point @ 12.
I think in hindsight, if Trump could have pushed anything harder during Covid he wishes he had pushed treatments as hard as the vaccine push. We could have done both.
I hear people say all the time that if there was a remedy they would not have gotten the EUA to allow the vaccines to be approved. That was nothing more than a pen swipe for Trump.
Instead, we let the media dominate the response for partisan purposes. The biggest bunch of moronic know-nothings in the history of humanity called the shots because orange man bad.
This is not true. Some vaccines confer sterilizing immunity, others just prevent the disease associated with the virus. Some are in between, and very few protect 100%. Polio vaccine (IPV) is a good example of a vaccine that does not prevent infection by the poliovirus, but prevents poliomyelitis, the associated disease.
People are setting unreasonable and unattainable expectations for COVID vaccines. They were never going to provide sterilizing immunity for 100% of people.
Then why are there are any freedoms or liberties offered to those who take this "vaccine" (be it on a cruise ship or at a place of employment)?
If someone who takes this "virtue vax" can still catch or transmit the virus (or even get seriously ill and die from it, which is still a possibility, despite what its promoters say), then they can't be allowed any more liberties than if they hadn't gotten it.
The mystery is why people are treating this shot as a cure-all even when they are faced with the evidence that it's not.