I can predict the future because I am aware of sufficient facts and variables. Remember this discussion when you are in your doctor's office and they give you the news.
You keep saying delusional things however. I did not give you one link but many, and if you were not closed minded you could find more on your own.
As for your other links there wasn't much science, was there? A pre-print and a paper on a single patient - but "no severe case with liver failure" - out of the billions who have received an injection.
Apart from everything else, the onus of proving the vaccines is safe is on the companies and the authorities trying to make everyone take them. It is not up to me to prove that they are unsafe.
The fact that they were unleashed on the public after 9 weeks of study, when normal vaccines usually undergo 5 years of rigorous double blind studies, should in and of itself be reason to not take them. There is no way they know what the long term effects are, especially since mrna vaccines have never been used before.
But we are seeing clear indications that they cause health problems, and this is to be anticipated and on top of issues with what mrna modification does to your body, the fact is that these vaccines cannot control for dosage.
In normal vaccines, one of the key steps in determining safety is determining what is a safe dose. In normal vaccines the manufacturer can control for how many deactivated or weakened viral particles you get in the injection because you only get what is in the syringe
With these mrna vaccines they can control how much they put into the syringe but they cannot control how many spike proteins your body produces once the vaxx hijacks your dna. Results will vary. This is probably why some experience myocarditis. However these early effects are nothing compared to the long term damage.
You are wrong about that. Astrazeneca and JJ both modify mrna and just through a different vector. JJ even modifies dna. Astrazeneca perhaps hasnt done as good pr as pfizer but in many countries it has been withdrawn for causing more deaths and complications than it prevents. This is after people were told it was safe and pressured to take it with vaccine mandates. You can't undo that oops.
Astrazeneca is an object less of what I am saying. It was approved. It was deemed effective and that the risks outweighed the benefit. People took it in good faith on the advice of the establishment and subject to coercion by mandates only to find out later that it was not safe and was withdrawn. What makes y ou think that the same will or should not happen to the other vaccines in time. The problem is that those who have taken it cannot undo their choice. Many have died. And this is only because the correlation between the effects and astra were to obvious to ignore. The other vaccines will have their turn. We are already starting to see the warning signs like a canary in the coal mine.
The Canadian made vaccine based on tobacco plants looks interesting but it too lacks rigorous long term statement. We have no idea what injecting plant based analogues of the spike protein actually does long term. If you go to their website you will see that they only tracked adverse effects for a few weeks of administration. So there is no way of knowing what it does long term.
You probably wouldnt eat a food product with some sort of untested novel additive, maybe made from genetically modified tobacco, yet you think it is okay to inject people and coerce them to do so.
You seem to think that rushing a vaxx to market in a few weeks is justified because of the deaths that could have happened in five years, being the usual term of testing. Then you should apply that logic to every disease. If a vaccine is being developed it is most likely for something that can kill you. But you need long term studies to determine if the cost benefit risk of the vaccine is justified. In most cases, despite being tested for the prevention of various deadly diseases such as small pox, for example, the vaccine candidate fails the testing process. It sucks but the alternative is to just kill people with vaccines. All of these safeguards were ignored in a mad rush to develop vaccines for a low mortality disease. Further review of the raw data from pfizer raises questions about the validity of even their initial claims of effectiveness and safety.
I can predict the future because I am aware of sufficient facts and variables. Remember this discussion when you are in your doctor's office and they give you the news.
You keep saying delusional things however. I did not give you one link but many, and if you were not closed minded you could find more on your own.
We'll see.
As for your other links there wasn't much science, was there? A pre-print and a paper on a single patient - but "no severe case with liver failure" - out of the billions who have received an injection.
Apart from everything else, the onus of proving the vaccines is safe is on the companies and the authorities trying to make everyone take them. It is not up to me to prove that they are unsafe.
The fact that they were unleashed on the public after 9 weeks of study, when normal vaccines usually undergo 5 years of rigorous double blind studies, should in and of itself be reason to not take them. There is no way they know what the long term effects are, especially since mrna vaccines have never been used before.
But we are seeing clear indications that they cause health problems, and this is to be anticipated and on top of issues with what mrna modification does to your body, the fact is that these vaccines cannot control for dosage.
In normal vaccines, one of the key steps in determining safety is determining what is a safe dose. In normal vaccines the manufacturer can control for how many deactivated or weakened viral particles you get in the injection because you only get what is in the syringe
With these mrna vaccines they can control how much they put into the syringe but they cannot control how many spike proteins your body produces once the vaxx hijacks your dna. Results will vary. This is probably why some experience myocarditis. However these early effects are nothing compared to the long term damage.
What are the effects of covid during those 5 years?
Please compare their impacts to that of covid in terms of hospitalizations and deaths. Round numbers will do.
Canada has approved 6 vaccines. Only 2 are mRNA. https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/drugs-health-products/covid19-industry/drugs-vaccines-treatments/vaccines.html
Says the car mechanic who admitted not having any science or math education.
You are wrong about that. Astrazeneca and JJ both modify mrna and just through a different vector. JJ even modifies dna. Astrazeneca perhaps hasnt done as good pr as pfizer but in many countries it has been withdrawn for causing more deaths and complications than it prevents. This is after people were told it was safe and pressured to take it with vaccine mandates. You can't undo that oops.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/3/15/which-countries-have-halted-use-of-astrazenecas-covid-vaccine
https://time.com/5947134/astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-stopped/
Astrazeneca is an object less of what I am saying. It was approved. It was deemed effective and that the risks outweighed the benefit. People took it in good faith on the advice of the establishment and subject to coercion by mandates only to find out later that it was not safe and was withdrawn. What makes y ou think that the same will or should not happen to the other vaccines in time. The problem is that those who have taken it cannot undo their choice. Many have died. And this is only because the correlation between the effects and astra were to obvious to ignore. The other vaccines will have their turn. We are already starting to see the warning signs like a canary in the coal mine.
The Canadian made vaccine based on tobacco plants looks interesting but it too lacks rigorous long term statement. We have no idea what injecting plant based analogues of the spike protein actually does long term. If you go to their website you will see that they only tracked adverse effects for a few weeks of administration. So there is no way of knowing what it does long term.
You probably wouldnt eat a food product with some sort of untested novel additive, maybe made from genetically modified tobacco, yet you think it is okay to inject people and coerce them to do so.
You seem to think that rushing a vaxx to market in a few weeks is justified because of the deaths that could have happened in five years, being the usual term of testing. Then you should apply that logic to every disease. If a vaccine is being developed it is most likely for something that can kill you. But you need long term studies to determine if the cost benefit risk of the vaccine is justified. In most cases, despite being tested for the prevention of various deadly diseases such as small pox, for example, the vaccine candidate fails the testing process. It sucks but the alternative is to just kill people with vaccines. All of these safeguards were ignored in a mad rush to develop vaccines for a low mortality disease. Further review of the raw data from pfizer raises questions about the validity of even their initial claims of effectiveness and safety.