Professor goes over previous experiments in coronavirus RNA vaccines.

The vaccines ultimately fuck your immune system up so that if you get corona in the future you are liable to have serious complications.

You may have had the sniffles with corona before but after the vaccine if you get it again you could be put on a ventilator or worse 6 feet under.

That is why the RNA vaccines were never approved in the past. They were seen as too dangerous.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/uhjG1LVSL9gB/
image.png

@Terry How legit is this? Is this common for people who contract the disease after getting the vaccine?

@realcaseyrollins @Terry mRNAs have been rejected in the past because they kept killing/injuring the animal models in a statistically significantly higher amount than classical vaccines.

@icedquinn @realcaseyrollins I believe the Israelis and the Russians are getting doses without the MRNA

@Terry @realcaseyrollins i have heard various stories that the russian one is just saline water, and other stories its just a classical vaccine.

either way coronavirus vaccines have been resounding failures throughout history

@Terry @realcaseyrollins before i wander off back to what i was doing

if coronavirus vaccines were legit then why is it the annual flu vaccine has continuously failed to extinct coronaviruses.

if they are so safe that only some rounding error of people get injured by them, why do they have liability protection.

@icedquinn @realcaseyrollins @Terry
>if coronavirus vaccines were legit then why...
Maybe because the flu is not a coronavirus.

>why do they have liability protection
That's probably standard practice. It's like asking "if a surgeon is competent, why does he have malpractice insurance."

@alyx @realcaseyrollins @Terry also liability protection != malpractice insurance.

vaccine liability protection means the government blocks lawsuits against vaccine companies.

malpractice insurance reimburses the surgeon if they lose a suit.

@alyx @Terry @realcaseyrollins https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300aa-22 surgeons don't have access to this

@icedquinn @realcaseyrollins @Terry
A surgeon isn't expected to perform on 300 million people at the same time either.
My response was that companies have protections even if a vaccine is declared safe for the same reason a competent surgeon still has insurance, because something completely unforeseeable can always happen, no matter how prepared you are.
Your dissatisfaction is why they have this specific type of protection, that is above what malpractice insurance offers. And the answer should be obvious, there's magnitudes of degrees difference between the risk faced by the two. A company making a vaccine for 300 million people has a lot more opportunities for something unpredictable to happen than a doctor that would treat at best tens of thousands of patients during their lifetime.

Also, my understanding is that malpractice insurance doesn't reimburse the surgeon, it reimburses the ones suing directly.