Where is the debate here? All we see in that video is a nursing instructor - his PhD is in nursing education, not medicine - reviewing a paper from January 2021 .
A debate would feature a second person in the video, preferably someone with a relevant background - you know, an infectious disease or a public health specialist, or maybe a virologist or an immunologist.
Instead all we get is a non-expert's unchallenged opinion.
Here's some of what the paper says (he provides the link
"Primary pharmacology studies indicate the vaccine ... conferred some protection of monkeys from infection."
"The sponsor has generally conducted adequate studies on pharmacology and toxicity (GLP compliant repeat dose and developmental and reproductive toxicity studies) with BNT162b2 (V9)."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was found to be immunogenic in non-clinical studies in mice, rats and rhesus macaques. BNT162b2 (V9) induced humoral and cellular immune responses in mice and monkeys."
"The vaccine protected monkeys from infection when challenged 55 days after the 2nd vaccine dose based on viral RNA load and radiographic lung lesions."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was tolerated in rats without evidence of systemic toxicity. Rats administered BNT162b2 (V9) (3 IM doses once weekly at 30 μg/dose, ~200 times the clinical dose on a μg/kg basis)'
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"Considering the chemical structure of the excipients and limited potential lifetime exposure, the excipients are not expected to pose genotoxicity or carcinogenicity potential."
Some of the conclusions drawn were:
"Repeat dose toxicity studies with the proposed vaccine and a variant, both in the LNP formulation, in rats raised no safety issues."
"Neither the mRNA nor the lipid excipients of the LNP formulation are expected to have genotoxic potential."
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"There are no nonclinical objections to the provisional registration of the vaccine"
Not a single person from your side showed up to speak.
It was a covid misinformation meeting folks. The speakers were invited by Johnson, and he didn't include anyone who would speak in favour of the vaccines.
"U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson on Monday convened a group of doctors and scientists who have been criticized for spreading COVID-19 misinformation" https://archive.is/nDTHq
Total cowards
Do you think she's embarrassed about spreading misinformation folks?
Folks Bullshityouharder says she doesn't like "people unwilling to publicly debate"
Where is the debate here? All we see in that video is a nursing instructor - his PhD is in nursing education, not medicine - reviewing a paper from January 2021 .
A debate would feature a second person in the video, preferably someone with a relevant background - you know, an infectious disease or a public health specialist, or maybe a virologist or an immunologist.
Instead all we get is a non-expert's unchallenged opinion.
Here's some of what the paper says (he provides the link
"Primary pharmacology studies indicate the vaccine ... conferred some protection of monkeys from infection."
"The sponsor has generally conducted adequate studies on pharmacology and toxicity (GLP compliant repeat dose and developmental and reproductive toxicity studies) with BNT162b2 (V9)."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was found to be immunogenic in non-clinical studies in mice, rats and rhesus macaques. BNT162b2 (V9) induced humoral and cellular immune responses in mice and monkeys."
"The vaccine protected monkeys from infection when challenged 55 days after the 2nd vaccine dose based on viral RNA load and radiographic lung lesions."
"BNT162b2 (V9) was tolerated in rats without evidence of systemic toxicity. Rats administered BNT162b2 (V9) (3 IM doses once weekly at 30 μg/dose, ~200 times the clinical dose on a μg/kg basis)'
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"Considering the chemical structure of the excipients and limited potential lifetime exposure, the excipients are not expected to pose genotoxicity or carcinogenicity potential."
Some of the conclusions drawn were:
"Repeat dose toxicity studies with the proposed vaccine and a variant, both in the LNP formulation, in rats raised no safety issues."
"Neither the mRNA nor the lipid excipients of the LNP formulation are expected to have genotoxic potential."
"A combined reproductive and developmental study showed no adverse effects on female fertility, embryofetal development and post-natal development (up to weaning) in rats."
"There are no nonclinical objections to the provisional registration of the vaccine"
For extra points folks: figure out how much money Dr. John Campbell has made so far off that one video given that it has 273,000 views to date: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/much-youtubers-213800157.html
It was a covid misinformation meeting folks. The speakers were invited by Johnson, and he didn't include anyone who would speak in favour of the vaccines.
"Republican U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson plans to bring together a panel of scientists and doctors who have been criticized for expressing skepticism about COVID-19 vaccines and promoting the use of unproven medications for early treatment of the disease." https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2022/01/18/ron-johnson-hosting-panel-covid-19-day-after-mandates-protest/6557936001/
"U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson on Monday convened a group of doctors and scientists who have been criticized for spreading COVID-19 misinformation" https://archive.is/nDTHq
Do you think she's embarrassed about spreading misinformation folks?
Me neither.
She'll do it again at the first opportunity.