Nice backpedal - but it's too late, I already caught your lie. You didn't post that it was being developed - you posted that it was used. Conveniently vague, but always to skew in favour of the narrative you support.

And no quotes of posts where I "lied".

So I guess that makes it just one more instance where you made chit up.

S'all good, man. Acknowledging the clinical trial you undoubtedly found wouldn't get many reps

Populism ain't just for politicians

Saying "clinical trials" = "used" is some real sophistry. Sure it'stechnicallycorrect, but you know what you were doing...

It's more that you are misinterpreting the documents. But s'ok

Nah..when Pfizer made the claim themselves, I’ll take their words over yours..but just this one time..

Oh, interesting.

List of mRNA vaccines, aside from BNT162b2 and MRNA-1273 must surely be compiled by now?

It's cool man. It's not straightforward

Actually it kinda is, they even give you some color coded pics to follow along with..

I still do not see a list of mRNA vaccines that are currently "used in humans", aside from BNT162b2 and MRNA-1273, to prove that they aren't "new".

So they are in trials, but they "ain't new".

Add another lie to the ever growing list:



Why do beavercels feel the need to make chit up all the time?

Yeah. But understanding what's in those overlaid immunohistochemistry figures is key

Don't need to - it is irrelevant.

It's funny how you cannot make a simple list of all the mRNA vaccines that are currently "used in humans", aside from BNT162b2 and MRNA-1273, and decide to dance around "clinical trials" instead.

I wonder why that is ( I don't really, since I know exactly why ).

I think it’s pretty clear..per the link I posted..S-protein from vaccines in nucleus

the S-Protein is literally in the nucleus. Antigen refers to the spike protein itself that is produced by genetic material introduced by the vaccine.

If you go to page 34. the first image is showing you transfection, how effectively the different vaccine constructs were effecting the cells..(entering the cells). When just the RNA itself was used (the black bar) the other (grey bar is the vaccine within a lipid molecule (the RNA encapsulated). Now lets move to page 35..

Page 35 shows Spike Protein inside the nucleus. Start with the top column..cells that were transfected with the vaccine 1st column(blue)..stains nuclei..where the genetic material is being housed..the next column is antibodies being tagged..attaching to proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum.the 3rd column showing you spike protein is present everywhere in the cell..the last column is the merge..blue showing nuclei is present within the cell, red representing endoplasmic reticulum, green, representing the spike protein, the yellow is an overlapping signal of the red (ER) and the green (spike protein), the vast majority of ER is showing yellow, meaning spike protein is being produced actively..you can also see green signal only in the nucleus..we are talking about only vaccinated spike protein..just as the Sweedish study showed.

https://www.tga.gov.au/sites/default...oi-2389-06.pdf

See..it’s not so hard to understand..

Source?

You didn't link anything - Your source was basically "go google it".

Still waiting on the list of mRNA vaccines currently "used in humans", aside from BNT162b2 and MRNA-1273.

Take care - Until the next time I call you out for making chit up!

Make sure you support Mr. Fancy Socks!

Nah, the only thing you succeeded in was getting called out for making chit up again.

I didn't need to google either of those as I was already aware of them - but whoever does google them will know exactly how full of chit you are.

Yep. That's what this forum is now. Thread after thread of complete retardedness with a handful of funny/interesting threads sprinkled in.

The ratio is getting to the point that it's not worth it anymore.

Um.

Cliffs?

Have you not seen the breakdowns of the lots yet Katya? There's a site tracking them, "ismylotbad.com" or something. Honestly this person on Reddit seems hysterical, immediately jumping to the conclusion that there are certain good or bad (or placebo) lots at that instant she was told how the govt orders chit. I don't doubt there were bad lots, but this person seems like a larp using readily available info to mold a story for some reason (attention?). Stopped reading at that point. Less story telling, more facts, facts, figures, and research.

Tl;Dr this chit may be happening, but this story reeks of larp.

See: post #10

Link to NIH page so you can verify the source.

You would cede that "history is written by the winners", yes?

So why wouldn't you believe that there is an ongoing narrative battle taking place?

- pharmaceutical companies are in business to make money

- the big pharma companies have an established history of fudging data and even of selling products they are aware will be damaging to some number of people after "doing the math" and deciding that the size of the profit outweighs any potential damages they may have to pay if successfully sued

- the pharma companies are the source of most of the funding for the pharma regulators



- the pharma companies were granted a blanket liability shield for whatever product they could produce

- these injections sold to the public as vaccines were not put through the standard long term testing [average 10 years development]

^^^

So IMO being skeptical of the safety and effectiveness of a product produced by this industry under these conditions just looks like critical thinking to me.

That without even touching on gain of function research, who funded it, what they were actually trying to do, how the virus was released and why, the lies about the virus and about the shots, the mandating of these shots, and so on, and so on.

I think that people like NYPat believe that anything that isn't broadcast or published by approved mainstream media and endorsed by their chosen political group is a "conspiracy theory".

conspiracy theory: any story counter to the official narrative regardless of plausibility, proof, or the qualifications of the originator

Vaccines = bad

mRNA is brand new and untested, even though it isn't.

It's hilarious that you use a blanket statement like "vaccines = bad" when no one is saying that. We're saying that the COVID VACCINE is bull****, which it is.

You don't create a new vaccine in less than 48 hours, which 2 pharm companies did, IIRC. You don't create a vaccine that hasn't been sufficiently tested in many scenarios and say it's safe for everyone, which they did. You don't attack people for questioning the efficacy of the vaccine when it doesn't work, which they did. So many more that can be said, but here you are still defending them.

Truly amazing.

Did you miss the "should I vaccinate my kid" thread?

Google Curevac and have your mind blown - but not in the way Justin's Little Cuck would expect. I was actually surprised he would use Curevac to try and bolster his argument, but I guess he didn't expect me to know any better.

Google Curevac and have your mind blown - but not in the way Justin's Little Cuck would expect. I was actually surprised he would use Curevac to try and bolster his argument, but I guess he didn't expect me to know any better.

Then why did you bother trying to cover up the lie?

I guess I can't expect a beavercel to have any character.