Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Allen's avatar

His response illustrates that he knows nothing about how trials are conducted. I'll openly challenge him to a debate and we can pick a specific vaccine of his choosing and go through how the trials were conducted with a fine toothed comb.

Doctors, all of them, are rigorously trained to not know this stuff. Ask any of them specific details on vaccine trials, vaccine ingredients, the history of vaccines and they'll run for the hills or you'll draw a blank stare.

If they did know this stuff they would then know they were violating their Hippocratic oath and informed consent.

Further how all vaccine trials have been done historically are completely fraudulent so this quack's comparison would not be able to get off the ground even if his comparison was accurate- which it isn't.

I challenge anyone to provide one single vaccine trial that is not fraudulent. Start with the fact that they never use a true placebo. While that is the most obvious fraud it is far from the only one.

There is no such thing as a "safe" vaccine and there never has been. There is also no need for them or most of the rest of the medicines that the medical cartel and their profit hungry quack doctors push.

Expand full comment
Seacat's avatar

He made a flimsy and ignorant response. The MHRA (I think), have advanced a similar 'defence', saying effectively that a multitude of scientists working in concert were able to condense the testing process , they might have said ' many hands make light work'!...... but not for developing a vaccine that could be affirmed 'safe and effective'. However many scientists were at it they couldn't magic up the time required....at least 5 years.

Expand full comment
10 more comments...

No posts