>> misinformation
that it’s safe & effective?
That's a circular definition; "Vaccination is injecting a vaccine" does not define what a vaccine is.
The article is a massive straw-man argument. While maybe a few got confused and thought a dictionary definition was changed that was NOT what most discovered and SAW with our own eyes.
The CDC changed the “official” definition and dropped the word immunity and put “protection in it’s place.
https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/coronavirus/article254111268.html
It does not take much digging to find the real truth, this thread’s article is fake news and regime lies to misinform the public.
The simple answer is YES!
Newsweek lies. It says no vaccine was completely effective. Yet, here is the difference.
Vaccines were completely effective for those who’s bodies took them as intended and didn’t have a faulty immune reaction. For instance, the polio vaccine actually totally protected people from polio—if your body did what was needed.
Vaccines like COVID-19 were designed to never be effective at preventing the disease condition. Even when your body did everything right, it was still intended to never stop infection.
Newsweek LIES!
I remember that the CDC’s definition for “vaccine” changed several times. It was a recurring discussion here on Free Republic.
‘Science fact check’ == Big Med propaganda.
You might be opening Pandora's Box here, Nick, ... it's just full of "words", ... look for earnest, see if it's there.
NewswEEk talking about science is akin to Kamila talking about...well...anything. They are effing journalists...a study adjacent to studies and DEI.
And they added:
b: a preparation of genetic material (such as a strand of synthesized messenger RNA) that is used by the cells of the body to produce an antigenic substance (such as a fragment of virus spike protein)
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine
Definitions change. Used to be the definition of a TV had tubes and rabbit ears. Now it’s got wifi and flat screens of various types. In the end the definition is the goal, not the method. Vaccines try to help your immune system fight off illness, how is irrelevant. Just like how whether your TV gets signal from antenna, cable, or the internet is irrelevant.
"Speaking about the Merriam-Webster definition, Moore said: 'Immunity and immune response are basically synonymous terms for all practical purposes,' he said."
Lies - all lies. In time for 'vaccination' season, the Sequel.
Immunity and immune response are NOT, "basically synonymous terms for all practical purposes."
Using the article's conflation of 'immunity' and 'immune response', we can therefore consider that 'diplomatic immunity' means perhaps some the diplomat can be arrested, tried, receive some convictions and some jail time, but the convictions/time served will be milder. This isn't how we use the terms in question.
Immunity from a disease used to mean you don't get sick. Yes, there were exceptions (some individuals), but the rule was 'don't get sick.' The CDC post 2020 uses immunity to mean you may get sick and die, but you will be less sick and less likely to die, or will spend less time in the hospital. Only the CDC's 'new' definition doesn't appear to be valid for the vaccinated either.
The mRNA platform is gene therapy - the MOderna documentation reflecs this in one of their quarterly meeting publications. mRNA technology is not, as the article claims, "small messenger molecules that directly deliver instructions on how to spot the infection to our cells." In fact, Moderna put out a publication saying it wasn't messenger RNA in their product; it was 'modified RNA' (that's where they got their company name, Moderna).
The mRNA, gene therapy product, goes into cells and makes the cell start producing a specific antigen, supposedly to serve to provoke the immune system to respond. However these antigens can surface on any cell in the body (tests done after 'vaccine' distribution show that these spike proteins collect in the ovaries, testes, heart, lungs etc.) So the body's own immune system can 'attack' these organs in the body and can provoke substantial immune response (ADE). At least that's what happened to the animals in the trials for mRNA platform drug trials prior to 'Covid', and it's why there never was a human application of the platform until 'Covid'.
There isn't an 'off switch' for the production of this specific kind of antigen, so some people may sicken from illnesses they would normally resist just because their body is targeting a select antigen (spike protein) to the exclusion of other pathogens.
The article uses the strawman argument that the vaccine is not 100% effective. No one said vaccines have to be 100% effective. They also employ the false dichtomy - either you believe that true vaccines are 100% or you realize that a failed 'gene therapy product' pushed as a 'vaccine' is the best we can hope for. We were promised 'vaccines' on the decades long understanding of the term - whether or not there are individuals for whom the vaccine didn't - we were not told that the trial data for these gene therapy products was disastrous, distorted and limited as much as it was. For example, the trials did not test 'infectivity', but we were told we'd kill grandma unless we got the vax.
"In other words, these linguistic tweaks were designed to be informative, not sinister."
HAHAHAHAHAHA! The lies were backside covering and this NewsWeek article is more of the same.
"The vaccines have consistently retained their ability to protect against severe disease and death, which makes it a success."
FALSE. The CDC exaggerated the threat of the illness, refused to treat the illness, warned that people were dying from the illness when they were often dying from lack of treatment for the illness, and then claims that it saved lives. Where's the proof? They lied every day. Why would I believe cover stories now? These ghouls are back, 'warning' people to get the booster shots!
They changed the definition of what vaccine was to make this death shot fit.
Imperial College London
About as much credibility as Fauci, CDC, NIH, FDA, Astrazenica, Pfizer, Moderna
If you were stupid enough to get the Covid “vaccine” you deserve what you get.
Imperial College junk science absolutely drove the dysfunctional response to the covid bioagent scandemic
https://www.aier.org/article/the-failure-of-imperial-college-modeling-is-far-worse-than-we-knew/
Based on no evidence whatsoever.
These people just make this stuff up, then pat themselves on the back and ask for a raise.
Yes. It was.
Vaccine: a suspension of attenuated or killed micro-organisms (bacteria, viruses, or rickettsiae), or of antigenic proteins derived from them, administered for the prevention, amelioration, or treatment of infections diseases.