Covid jabs are called "bioweapons" in court!

[Thoughtful3]

When faced with a serious, life threatening global pandemic, time is of the essence, and, as a result, certain data-driven calculated risks have to be taken.

During the initial clinical trials, both B1 and B2 showed strong immunogenicity, but B2 stood out for its much better tolerability with markedly fewer severe adverse events. It was the right choice as it ultimately proved 95% effective in clinical trials and became the basis for the global COVID-19 vaccine rollout.

As for it always being the plan to have a vaccine they could boost as often as was needed, why would that be particularly concerning to you? Booster shots are a well-established public health strategy used to restore immunity that naturally wanes over time, so such a plan makes practical sense.

95% effective?   Where have you been? Effective at what exactly?

Here's Pfizer's latest assessment of effectiveness, and I don't see 95%. That was the original claim to hoodwink the public into taking a jab that had been developed on a completely new platform.

https://www.pfizer.com/news/announcement...9-vaccines


I don't know about you but it did not instill any confidence with me that Pfizer tested the booster on only 8 mice. Why bother testing on any or on any one.


https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/...ves-anyway

There is a good book that covers what was discovered in the Pfizer Papers. A judge forced Pfizer to release the detailed clinical study papers that they wanted to keep confidential for 75 years.

"The Pfizer Papers"- Pfizer's Crimes Against Humanity compiled by Naomi Wolf with Amy Kelly.