Covid 19 virus plus vaccine was meant to kill us.

[Corn Pop]

I don't think you could ever claim that Donald Trump was a "globalist." We always hear about how he bungled the response to the pandemic, and in the early stages, he did. But he also promoted the rapid development of a vaccine that saved millions of lives.

I don't know if the jab saved millions of lives. It's hard to know because some high risk people were not jab and took up hospital beds or died covid related, and other high risk people were jab and took up hospital beds or died covid related. So how could just say well the jab obviously just didn't work for those who did take it and those who did take it, look see the jab worked and saved there life.

98% of people jab or no jab got mild cold and flu like symptoms and were not high risk of getting seriously sicm. The jab would be for the higher at risk.

I have a question for you and if you can lead me to some evidence maybe I can be convinced to believe it did save lives. How do you know it saved lives?. How do you know a person who got jabed it was only the jab that saved them from hospital or death when they did get infected?

 

[Barbarian]

I have a question for you and if you can lead me to some evidence maybe I can be convinced to believe it did save lives. How do you know it saved lives?

Fully vaccinated people had COVID death rates 1/14 of the COVID death rates for unvaccinated people. And they had COVID death rates 1/3 of the COVID death rates for those with only one vaccination.

COVID-19 Incidence and Death Rates Among Unvaccinated ...

This report describes higher protection against COVID-19 infection and death among people who received an updated booster than people who received a monovalent booster.

www.cdc.gov

What rational person would go against odds like that? It is true, BTW, that vaccinated people were also less likely to get infected, even though the vaccine was formulated primarily to prevent severe infections.

How do you know it saved lives?

Vaccinated people had much lower death rates than unvaccinated people. Same way I know that driving sober is a lot safer than driving drunk.

How do you know a person who got jabed it was only the jab that saved them from hospital or death when they did get infected?

It is possible to drive drunk and get home safely. But the odds aren't in your favor. Casinos get rich on people who can't figure that out.

 

[Barbarian]

It was a global problem. The benefits outweighed the risks…

There are people who get injured by automobile seat belts. But it's pretty dumb to ride without being belted up.

 

[Corn Pop]

There are people who get injured by automobile seat belts. But it's pretty dumb to ride without being belted up.

Yea but seatbelts get properly tested first, they don't get pushed and rushed through as an experiment mandated on the people. And it's a bit different, it's not consuming some corps product inside there body. It's just a seatbelt.

 

[Corn Pop]

If the jab was all about keeping people more safe and protected then those who had it should have felt safe and protected in general and if they did get infected. But apparently the jab did not want to be around the unjab as they needed more confidence.

Well that's what the PM of the country I was living assumed at the time and said. The most safe and protected were somehow afraid of the least protected and most vulnerable so the most safe and protected got more rights in society than others as they needed more confidence that was used as a tool to try drive up jab rates.

 

[Barbarian]

Yea but seatbelts get properly tested first, they don't get pushed and rushed through as an experiment mandated on the people.

Did you really believe that they didn't test the vaccines? That was the whole point of Trump's "lightspeed" program. C'mon.

And it's a bit different, it's not consuming some corps product inside there body.

You seem to be confused about the vaccine. Can you show me (evidence required) that a particular vaccine was made of corpses?

It's just a seatbelt.

And like the COVID vaccines, it saves lives. As you now see, unvaccinated people died at a rate 14 times that of vaccinated people.

 

[Barbarian]

If the jab was all about keeping people more safe and protected then those who had it should have felt safe and protected in general and if they did get infected. But apparently the jab did not want to be around the unjab as they needed more confidence.

You've got that precisely backwards. It was taken by medical personnel who had exposure to the unvaccinated. Because they were exposed.

Well that's what the PM of the country I was living assumed at the time and said.

Was the PM an immunologist or a physician? Why would we give your PM more credibility than those fluffs making You Tube videos?

The most safe and protected were somehow afraid of the least protected and most vulnerable so the most safe and protected got more rights in society than others as they needed more confidence that was used as a tool to try drive up jab rates.

Could you rephrase that in English?

 

[Corn Pop]

Did you really believe that they didn't test the vaccines? That was the whole point of Trump's "lightspeed" program. C'mon.

Correct me if im wrong but the FDA gave emergency use so that can authorize unapproved products?. Not sure how the 19 vac could have been be developed and tested in such a short amount of time for full approval.

Correct me if im wrong vacine development takes around 10-15 years of laboratory research and there is also like 4 phases before they are fully approved.

I'm not arguing if the jab was good or bad just if it is classed as a scientific experimental product because it was given emergency use through the FDA and seemed to be available quite quickly.

 

[Barbarian]

Correct me if im wrong but the FDA gave emergency use so that can authorize unapproved products?

The law permits emergency authorizations when people are dying who can be helped by a product that is tested and found effective, but not through the approval process.

Before COVID-19, most of us probably weren’t familiar with the term “emergency use authorization.” And two years into the pandemic, the meaning of this regulatory step is still a little foggy—even though it’s constantly mentioned in news reports about COVID-19 vaccines, tests, and treatments.

Put simply, an emergency use authorization (EUA) is a tool the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can use to expedite the availability of medical products, including drugs and vaccines, during a public health emergency. An EUA can only be granted when no adequate, approved, available alternatives exist, and when the known and potential benefits outweigh the potential risks. An EUA also only lasts as long as the public health emergency for which it was declared.

It is the job of the FDA to ensure medical products meet rigorous safety and efficacy standards, a process that can take years for what’s called “full approval.” Though that timeline is condensed when an EUA is granted, the FDA still upholds its strict standards.

Since the start of the pandemic, the FDA has granted numerous EUAs related to COVID-19. So far, two vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech, for ages 16 and up, and Moderna, for 18 and up) and one treatment (Gilead Science’s remdesivir) have gone on to receive full FDA approval.

So, does getting a vaccine or taking a drug that is under emergency use authorization mean it’s any less safe than one that has full FDA approval? And how does the process work? Below, we take a closer look at the details.
...
The FDA established its EUA program in 2004 in response to threats of bioterrorist attacks, including anthrax. Later, it was used for H1N1 (swine flu), Ebola, avian flu, Middle Eastern Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), and other major public health threats. EUAs in these instances included tests, an anthrax vaccine, antiviral treatments, and personal protective equipment.
...
Amid the myriad paperwork/administrative differences between the two options (more detail below), there are two standout differences—and they have nothing to do with the scientific rigor of the trials.

1. For an EUA for a COVID-19 vaccine, for example, the FDA requires that at least half of the clinical trial participants be followed for at least two months after vaccination. For full FDA approval of a COVID-19 vaccine, participants are followed for at least six months.
2. The full approval requires more data about the vaccine-maker’s processes and facilities, including inspections of manufacturing plants.

Emergency Use Authorization Vs. Full FDA Approval: What’s the Difference?

A primer on the difference between an FDA 'full approval' and 'emergency use authorization.'

www.yalemedicine.org

I'm not arguing if the jab was good or bad just if it is classed as a scientific experimental product

As you see, it's not. There are individual authorizations for investigational treatments (I was a patient involved with one of those that turned out quite well) but you don't get authorizations for such things for large numbers of people.