You know very well that new drugs or biological given outside of a proper RCT makes it impossible to know either way.
There is excess mortality within working age employed ppl which is not cv19.
We also know that with new drugs, even just temporal assn with death leads to a pause
The cautionary principle would lead us to err on the side of suspending the program.
The vx still have EUA protection despite there being no “emergency”. Why?
The Pfizer trial data is horrifying.
There is no long term trial data.
Claiming that only “fringe” MDs are opposed to the cv19vx is meaningless and political, especially considering that MDs who say anything against the vx and/or for early treatment (unapproved) face sanctions including loss of job and loss of license to practice.
Uptake of cv19vx here in TX was lower than 50% until mandates were imposed.
Not an insignificant number of MDs and nurses have fake vx cards.
I described the vx AEs of people around me in a previous post, and you never responded. I won’t post them again. At some point if parents make the connection that their student children were killed by an unnecessary and dangerous treatment, it could get very ugly.
We also know that with new drugs, even just temporal assn with death leads to a pause
Under NORMAL vaccine trials.....just ONE death, puts the trial on alert.
Once 25 - 50 deaths have occurred, the trial is STOPPED, typically, worldwide.
But, these shots are NOT normal....nor, are they even vaccines, in the traditional sense, since they do NOT prevent disease, or, contracting the china virus.
Any real doc knows this.
I will point you again to post 80. Please feel free to comment.
I only see one question and it is relative to EUA. This has little to do with the science of the vaccine but the politics. It is an irrelevant red herring to the discussion. The rest are statements to which there is either debate or are incorrect.