When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
The FDA is morally bankrupt and completely compromised.
I have Ivermectin and HCQ in my medicine chest, purchased for pennies while on vacation in Puerto Vallarta. The rest of the world uses these drugs while the FDA and the MSM prevent the general population from even knowing about them. Or worse yet, demonizing them like the above ad.
I have Ivermectin and HCQ in my medicine chest, purchased for pennies while on vacation in Puerto Vallarta. The rest of the world uses these drugs while the FDA and the MSM prevent the general population from even knowing about them. Or worse yet, demonizing them like the above ad.
Earlier this year China sent out a press release saying that they had eradicated Malaria in their country, which hasn't been the case since the 1940's. The obvious reason for this is that the country is using HCQ and Ivermectin as a prophylactic for Covid, which also treats and prevents Malaria. However, the WHO and the CDC won't breath a word of this, and it won't be mentioned by the MSM.
you have to take the vaccine in order to know how bad it is for you!
“While millions of people have already safely received COVID-19 vaccines, we recognize that for some, the FDA approval of a vaccine may now instill additional confidence to get vaccinated. Today’s milestone puts us one step closer to altering the course of this pandemic in the U.S," Acting FDA Commissioner Janet Woodcock said.
Why do they think more people getting a vax that doesn't stop the spread will somehow help alter the course? By alter, do they mean accelerate?
On August 23, 2021, having concluded that revising this EUA is appropriate to protect the public health or safety under section 564(g)(2) of the Act, FDA is reissuing the August 12, 2021 letter of authorization in its entirety with revisions incorporated to clarify that the EUA will remain in place for the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for the previously-authorized indication and uses, and to authorize use of COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA) under this EUA for certain uses that are not included in the approved BLA. In addition, the Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine (Vaccination Providers) was revised to provide updates on expiration dating of the authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and to update language regarding warnings and precautions related to myocarditis and pericarditis. The Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers was updated as the Vaccine Information Fact Sheet for Recipients and Caregivers, which comprises the Fact Sheet for the authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine and information about the FDA-licensed vaccine, COMIRNATY (COVID19 Vaccine, mRNA).
Conditions Related to Printed Matter, Advertising, and Promotion
... This product has not been approved or licensed by FDA, but has been authorized for emergency use by FDA, under an EUA to prevent Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) for use in individuals 12 years of age and older; and ...
the EUA was extended. COMIRNATY was approved under the EUA. They just wanted to say it was approved to distract from Afghanistan and AZ and look good -- and to get around pesky phase 3 trial rules.
just a reminder:
Criteria for Issuance of Authorization
There is no adequate, approved, and available9 alternative to the emergency use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID‑19 Vaccine to prevent COVID-19
How does a vaccinated person testing positive for COVID diminish this?
I guess if we move the goalposts and redefine the word vaccine, then we've got a "vaccine" that works. If you check the top google results, they've already modified the definition. Spike protiens, RNA, a bunch of other bullshit.
If people can still get infected and are still contagious then why did they relax the mask mandates that totally worked? Is it because they thought the vaccine was a vaccine, in the old definition of the word? That is it would actually stop infection, or that it would stop transmission, or that it would even decrease the amount of "viral shedding" an infected person has? Big strike out on all of those, which I'd heard touted one after another.
What else are they about to find out going forward? That it doesn't actually do anything at all?
I guess if we move the goalposts and redefine the word vaccine, then we've got a "vaccine" that works. If you check the top google results, they've already modified the definition. Spike protiens, RNA, a bunch of other bullshit.
If people can still get infected and are still contagious then why did they relax the mask mandates that totally worked? Is it because they thought the vaccine was a vaccine, in the old definition of the word? That is it would actually stop infection, or that it would stop transmission, or that it would even decrease the amount of "viral shedding" an infected person has? Big strike out on all of those, which I'd heard touted one after another.
What else are they about to find out going forward? That it doesn't actually do anything at all?
They have said that additional jabs will likely be needed, possibly every year, in much the same was as flu shots are used today. I guess the obvious question I can't help asking then, is why do we not call the annual flu shot a vaccine too?
...which is at best 40% effective. And it's had historic lows of 10%, and highs of 60%. Which is why I don't ever get one. Another ******* scam.
They are also not RNA "vaccines," yet.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...rna-flu-shots/
"The messenger-RNA technology — used in the Pfizer and Moderna coronavirus vaccines that have been authorized by the Food and Drug Administration — would be a leap forward for flu shots, some of which still rely on a process developed in the 1950s involving chickens, petri dishes and dead viruses."
Funny bit is petri dishes and dead viruses actually works!
And this article I found calls them flu shots, and it's wapo...
And this article I found calls them flu shots, and it's wapo...
So... are we arguing about semantics, or linguistics here?
In British-speaking countries, it's common to use the term "jab" to describe annual influenza vaccinations. In American-speaking countries, it's common to use the term "flu shot."
The FDA and others are claiming that vaccination is effective at preventing serious illness and hospitalization as a consequence of COVID.
How does a vaccinated person testing positive for COVID diminish this?
It's pretty smart to develop a vaccine that doesn't prevent the spread of a mild virus, or illness, or hospitalization, and requires unlimited boosters to sorta work, and will be mandated by threat of death/fines/jail/unemployment/participation in the free market to take.
They have said that additional jabs will likely be needed, possibly every year, in much the same was as flu shots are used today. I guess the obvious question I can't help asking then, is why do we not call the annual flu shot a vaccine too?
08-23-2021, 11:35 AM
0
