Mrna: this is horrible

originally posted by: SentientBunnySuit

An interesting counterpoint is, where are the pharmaceutical industry defamation suits if these claims are false?

That is a damn if you do, damn if you don't scenario... lose lose either way, but one way costs a ton of money. I have seen companies pay off employees to leave when the company is in the right, but the payoff is cheaper than to win in court. We both also do not know how far a place like FOX can push it all and still be in a position to not get sued, but their lawyers surely know.

a reply to: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Itisnowagain

Do you know which way he walked though?

True science...

He voted with his feet.

He didn't take the covid vaccine....maybe you were not aware that he decided not to?

Yesterday I listened to Bret Weinstein speaking to Dr Aseem Malhotra on his podcast, it was 2 hours long and brilliant......have you watched it?
If you watch it, you will hear him say why he did not take it...

originally posted by: Notabot12345666
a reply to: zandra

They made it mandatory to take an experimental injection.

The real question is why. I don't think the real reason is out there yet.

a reply to: Xtrozero
The Epoch Times said it was a lab leak back in April 2020.

Boosters for spring 23 only available for 75 year old and over in the UK.

originally posted by: enament

The Epoch Times said it was a lab leak back in April 2020.

Everyone but Fauci said it was a lab leak back then. My point is they suggest peer review to give it creditability and it was an article and not some study peered reviewed. I think I explained earlier what it takes to actually be peer reviewed, and it is a lengthy process of many other credible groups showing the same results.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: enament

The Epoch Times said it was a lab leak back in April 2020.

Everyone but Fauci said it was a lab leak back then. My point is they suggest peer review to give it creditability and it was an article and not some study peered reviewed. I think I explained earlier what it takes to actually be peer reviewed, and it is a lengthy process of many other credible groups showing the same results.

It was a lab leak. Game over:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Itisnowagain

They obviously consider plus seventy-five years old useless eaters.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: enament

The Epoch Times said it was a lab leak back in April 2020.

Everyone but Fauci said it was a lab leak back then. My point is they suggest peer review to give it creditability and it was an article and not some study peered reviewed. I think I explained earlier what it takes to actually be peer reviewed, and it is a lengthy process of many other credible groups showing the same results.

No not everyone said it was a lab leak back then, very few did and if you did say it was a lab leak back then you were considered a conspiracy nut. I remember this because thats what people were calling me up until the idea gained traction and credibility. One person actually apologized to me saying there seems to be substance to your claim.

Go figure you could hit the Wuhan wet market with a sling shot from the Corona Virus research lab in Wuhan.

originally posted by: enament

Go figure you could hit the Wuhan wet market with a sling shot from the Corona Virus research lab in Wuhan.

Go figure the lab also burned to the ground too.

a reply to: Xtrozero

When did that happen, thats the first I've heard of that.

Destroy the evidence?