06-17-2024, 01:52 PM
(06-17-2024, 12:58 PM)Karl12 Wrote: Hopefully it will wake a few people up mate - just like them lying through their teeth about 'not forcing anyone to do anything'.
The bullsh•t meter really went off the scale on that one.
Regarding the recent Court ruling I don't claim to know much about U.S. law but won't this new development in some way affect liability status?
So, several things here...
- The liability issue (or lack thereof) with a true "vaccine" is why vaccines are held to a much higher and rigorous testing standard. Significantly higher. And this is why "vaccines" take so much longer to get to market. I think I read somewhere that the average duration is about 7 years from start of testing.
- This is also why all the pharmaceutical companies were trying to bend the rules (lie basically) about this jab being a "vaccine", because they would have no liability. But this wasn't true. At the time, the jab was covered under what was known as an FDA "Emergency Use Authorization" (EUA), but even then it still wasn't to be called a "vaccine" although virtually all the pharma's called it a 'vaccine'.
- The first covid shot approved under the EUA was called the COVID-19 (vaccine), but it was never fully FDA approved (this is a very key distinction, so more on this in a moment)
- The first fully approved FDA shot (not under an EA) was not called a COVID-19 shot, but rather a "Comirnaty" vaccine, and it was NOT the same as the original COVID-19 shot, contrary to even more lies. The Comirnaty vaccine was arguably very similar to the original covid vaccine, but it was not identical (again, contrary to many lies spread around the world). (I believe one was live and the other was dead, but my memory is a little thin on that one). The pharmaceutical companies arguments were it the same "for all intents and purposes"; this was their explanation of the differences between the two, and nobody pushed it further than that (unfortunately).
- Following some (convenient) changes in FDA regulations, Comirnaty was approved by the FDA in August of 2021, and it could be called a "vaccine". The drug companies demanded that it be allowed to be called a "vaccine", but many of the changes in the regulations made the testing much less rigorous than all previous vaccines.
- I haven't done as much research on the subsequent boosters as I did on the original jab, but if I'm not mistaken the boosters are notably different than the FDA approved Comirnaty, and they are significantly different than the original covid vaccine. I am unsure if these boosters can technically be called "vaccines", but I don't believe they can.
