Suppose you took the time to read the article instead of making remarks that have no basis. I stated that no matter the science behind the vaccine, trials need to go on for longer. That is science. You don’t rush into this haphazardly the way this is being pushed. Even the scientist admit they do not know if there will be adverse side effects down the road. The pressure is on to get the vaccine out there, and that is skewing thought processes. Read panic.
I didn’t say the vaccines wouldn’t work or would cause harm. I said we need more time. How the hell do you say that is horsefeathers? You can go screw. Why don’t you keep your words to yourself until you’re able to form a thought that isn’t based on your inability to comprehend what you’ve read?
I’ve been reading the science, and it looks like spectacular progress, but the truth is mRNA therapeutics have never been used before to treat viruses in humans, and the consequences are unknown. And I wasn’t quoting Netanyahu but using the ideas put forth by Tal Brosh, head of the Infectious Disease Unit at Samson Assuta Ashdod Hospital. I also researched mRNA through Harvard research in this article as well as others:
I presented a viewpoint and didn’t dive into all the science. That would have taken a much longer story. Nothing in my short was ‘unresearched.’ You want to step to me then get your facts straight or back the hell the off.
