if it is “clinnical testing”, there is minimal history... how would anyone know before the fact “if the testing poses no more than minimal risk to the subjects and includes safeguards” ?
In the General/Chat forum, on a thread titled Q ~ Trust Trump's Plan ~ 01/10/2023 Vol.445, Q Day 1901, stylin19a wrote: if it is “clinnical testing”, there is minimal history... how would anyone know before the fact “if the testing poses no more than minimal risk to the subjects and includes safeguards” ?
I doubt Pfizer could test the 'vaccine' in 2020 and claim minimal information. mRNA 'vaccines' were failures for many, many years, had never been tested on humans because they were catastrophic for animal trials. How was that ever the basis of pioneering the use of mRNA 'vaccines' on the entire world? They had sufficient lab history.
Then PFizers results for their 2020 trials were not good. For example something like 85% of pregnant mothers lost their babies.
Then by February of 2021, about 2 months into the experimental rollout, Pfizer had 1200 deaths post vaccine. Normally they stop administration at 50 deaths.And while deaths are a useful litmus test at times, people suffering heart attacks and strokes or otherwise becoming disabled, changing their lives and often losing employement and functionality, should be considered 'safety signals.'
They have no legal excuse to get to where we are now, or to ever vaccinate children or babies when really - they had the data they needed before 2020, and that's why PFizer demanded that trial documentation be kept from the public for 75 years.