Who was vaccinated on this forum ?

[ABC2019]

on the other hand, why would the vaccine cause more malformations than the virus itself?

Have you ever heard of birth defects due to covid? No because otherwise, it would still be pure pipeautage on your part. So: Sources?

no and therefore no vaccine either, no more than zero is ... zero.

[GuyGadeboisTheBack]

on the other hand, why would the vaccine cause more malformations than the virus itself?

Have you ever heard of birth defects due to covid? No because otherwise, it would still be pure pipeautage on your part. So: Sources?

no and therefore no vaccine either, no more than zero is ... zero.

Oh yes, for vaccines yes, they are also all strongly discouraged for pregnant women.
Ps: So I don't see what this "therefore" does in your answer.

[ABC2019]

Have you ever heard of birth defects due to covid? No because otherwise, it would still be pure pipeautage on your part. So: Sources?

no and therefore no vaccine either, no more than zero is ... zero.

Oh yes, for vaccines yes, they are also all strongly discouraged for pregnant women. .

not recommended as a precaution, but "Have you ever heard of birth defects due to vaccines? No because otherwise, it would still be pure pipeautage on your part. So: Sources?"

[ABC2019]

Oh yes, for vaccines yes, they are also all strongly discouraged for pregnant women.

in addition, it is false: https://www.huffingtonpost.fr/entry/a-q ... a7e4108b6f

[Obamot]

P'taing double talk ...

A vaccine that does not prevent the transmission of the virus, do you call it a vaccine?

you misunderstood, we do not yet have absolute proof that it is blocking it

Ah, but the vaccinations have started when the testing phases are not over and we are not sure whether he is vaccinating?

We can not yet call it a “vaccine” then, epistemological question you agree or?

But for hydroxychloroquine which has existed for 70 years, and has demonstrated its harmlessness prescribed in due form, it is not the same, we cannot prescribe it ....? that's it...? ahaaaa ...., double standard! What does the nit-picking zetetician say about the little details?
Rather than a haphazard cure with HCQ, it is better to die without taking any risk?

[ABC2019]

I knew the thread would go wrong if the horns came back ....

[Obamot]

You were already at 3 warnings.

[3] official warnings attributed to ABC

What did I say wrong?

[ABC2019]

nothing, nothing ... (sigh).

[Janic]

a B C

it is not the RNA of the virus, it is the RNA of a protein of the virus, which on its own cannot do anything except trigger the production of antibodies.

This is a presupposition without sufficient hindsight, not all scientists specializing in RNA / DNA are of the same opinion and their opinions have been given here! On this subject Pfitzer is judge and party on this particular point. The future will tell who was right, but it is too early to be positive of any kind.

obamot

Rather than a haphazard cure with HCQ, it is better to die without taking any risk?

You really did not understand anything! We first say to the sick: "wait until we have done double-blind" scientific "studies (the word miracle!) ... etc ... and as we will have the results in 3 months, wait until then"which will allow them to go to intensive care.

I knew the thread would go wrong if the horns came back ....

said the clown on duty who came back to the other sons!

[Obamot]

nothing, nothing ... (sigh).

Then answer objectively, otherwise I will have to note that you insulted me!