[gas_dr]

Takes a straw man to know one sir. The question I asked is not the one you want to answer because you cannot. You pivot.

And as a matter of law and ethics it is absolutely on the parents. They are the guardian of the child. They consented fo a high risk operation knowing blood transfusion was likely. Now they are boo hooing saying it’s not their fault.

They could have waited or sought different treatments. And then they come with this nonsense that they aren’t even sure their child received blood from vaccinated donors. It’s laughable.

Your defense of it though valiant in terms of nor giving an inch is preposterous. You can’t answer a question. Ecuador it’s obvious and will weaken your entire theme. So you throw mud.

It’s obvious. And somewhat entertaining.

[bagster]

Takes a straw man to know one sir. The question I asked is not the one you want to answer because you cannot. You pivot.

Ya can't pivot if you maintain the original point. Which is the doc didn't use unvaccinated blood like the parents requested. And somehow you want to blame it on the parents for trusting the doctor. As if the doc didn't discuss the surgery with the parents from the get. They f'd up. They trusted him.

And as far as your strawman argument goes, there is sufficient evidence from the bazillions of vaccines poked, that there is a connection between the vax and blood clots, amongst other things.

Go read a medical journal. Its time you updated your data base.