Search Results
6/20/2025, 12:12:36 AM
>>935982887
>these results should be interpreted cautiously
4 years after hysterically vaxxmaxxing yourself with some untested concoction is a bit late to be "cautious" now, isn't it?
True, human and animal models aren't 100% the same. This effect on the Ovaries seen in rats could have been less, equal, or even WORSE in humans. We don't know, but also for the exact same reason that we don't know, that's why cautious should have been exercised and maybe NOT race to get injected with this crap, eh?
The proper testing process wasn't done. When Trump brags about how he got this approved in record time, this is what he actually means.
>these results should be interpreted cautiously
4 years after hysterically vaxxmaxxing yourself with some untested concoction is a bit late to be "cautious" now, isn't it?
True, human and animal models aren't 100% the same. This effect on the Ovaries seen in rats could have been less, equal, or even WORSE in humans. We don't know, but also for the exact same reason that we don't know, that's why cautious should have been exercised and maybe NOT race to get injected with this crap, eh?
The proper testing process wasn't done. When Trump brags about how he got this approved in record time, this is what he actually means.
Page 1