Originally Posted by ThumbsUp

I see a lot of people bringing up the EUA version vs the FDA approved version, but why does it matter if they are the same thing? That's a serious question.

Originally Posted by ThumbsUp

I see a lot of people bringing up the EUA version vs the FDA approved version, but why does it matter if they are the same thing? That's a serious question.

Originally Posted by GolferNJ

Awesome, so are you adding a google-JD degree to your google-PhD in virology?

Originally Posted by iceman21

No, just good at reading comprehension.

This is directly off of the FDA approval letter.

Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by GolferNJ

Are you sure you understand what “reading comprehension” means? From the portion of the approval you didn’t bold:



“The licensed vaccine has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine and the products can be used interchangeably to provide the vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns…”



So, your concern revolves around licensing of the name Comirnaty, which has nothing to do with what goes in your arm.

Originally Posted by Ualhvyjet

Third booster jab to be rolled out Sept. 20th.

Can’t wait to watch the triple-vaxxers get ****ed off at the double-vaxxers now.

Originally Posted by GolferNJ

Well you’ll have the “TMAAT you ignored science and attempted to push unsafe and unproven medical advice” down, if you can get past the Hogan.

Originally Posted by fishn

I’m just glad I got the J&J, AKA “Bro Shot”, unlike you jokers having to get your boosters LMAO

https://www.fool.com/amp/investing/2...ould-overtake/

Originally Posted by Thedude86

First, your article calls it conspiracies but then gives a grand total of exactly 0 reasons or data as to why. Your article is from a news station that doesn’t cite ANYTHING from any doctor or scientist or even an 8th grade biology student. This is equivalent to a pilot sayin lift helps an airplane fly and then Bob who works at Kenny Shoes says, “Nope. That’s a conspiracy. Airplanes fly because magic.”

Second, they also portray that it’s a conspiracy that Dr. Fauci has ever funded outbreaks. It’s common knowledge now that Dr. Fauci and the NIH help fund the exact lab where every organization including the CDC, the WHO, and even the Bribes Administration believes Covid originated from. Whether they helped fund the specific Covid virus is still up for debate but the evidence is showing that is what most likely happened. Regardless, Fauci and the NIH at a minimum help fund the lab.

Third, the article claims there are no benefits of hydroxychloroquin when just about every single doctor that has used it for the last 60 years including the last 1.5 years for Covid has said it is highly effective. This was also reported by CNN after the election. So either your article is pushing conspiracies or CNN is pushing conspiracies. Which is it? CNN is the most trusted name in news and I don’t see any kind of statement like that on your local news article so I’d say case closed. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn...udy/index.html

The only people who say there’s no benefit is the FDA who never see any actual patients. Find me an article that shows an actual doctor using either Ivermectin or HCQ in actual practice that says there’s no benefit. The FDA also says Ivermectin is only for horses even though over 2.8 BILLION doses in HUMANS have been given out in Africa since 1987. The WHO also classifies it as an essential medicine in HUMANS. Either the FDA doesn’t know how to do research or they believe Africans are animals.