Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: T.B. Yoits

T.B. Yoits wrote: “No. It’s not. The CDC’s own emails show how they changed their definition because they knew the Jim Jones Jab is not a vaccine. THEY said it.”

They said the definition was modified because, just like all other vaccines, this vaccine is not 100% effective.

“When it comes to validity of the testing, Pfizer openly admitted to injecting their control group, ensuring that there was no control group anymore.”

The vaccine is offered to a control group when it becomes clear that it is unethical to withhold the vaccine from that group.


48 posted on 10/15/2022 4:52:23 AM PDT by DugwayDuke (Most pick the expert who says the things they agree with.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: DugwayDuke
They [the CDC]said the their definition was modified because, just like all other vaccines, this vaccine is not 100% effective.

Just stop. That's what they said publicly but their emails, that they had to be sued to release, showed they changed THEIR definition because the real definition was "problematic" and that people wouldn't accept the Jim Jones Jab since it wasn't a vaccine.

The vaccine is offered to a control group when it becomes clear that it is unethical to withhold the vaccine from that group.

Again, just stop. The Jim Jones Jab wasn't "offered" to the control group. It was directed in order to remove the control group data. Spin it any way you're paid to but if there's no control group, there's no valid experiment.

57 posted on 10/15/2022 9:07:13 AM PDT by T.B. Yoits
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson