367
Comments (21)
sorted by:
13
thunderpussy 13 points ago +13 / -0

What does it say when Pfizer's own CEO refuses to take it "at this time" ???

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the company's product, I must say.

7
deleted 7 points ago +7 / -0
4
thunderpussy 4 points ago +4 / -0

Indeed.

4
Isolated_Patriot 4 points ago +4 / -0

"Planned months in advance to sell the stock immediately after the release."

Or "Planned the release day to happen two days before his previously planned selloff."

Either one of those should have put him in jail.

5
thisguy883 [S] 5 points ago +5 / -0

All I know is that I refuse to take this stuff and I already talked to my daughter's private school and they ensured me that they wont be forcing this vaccine on any of the students.

3
thunderpussy 3 points ago +3 / -0

I'm not taking it.

There are simply too many unknowns that outweigh any conceivable benefit.

3
SAW2TH 3 points ago +3 / -0 (edited)

There is no conceivable benefit when you have vaccine that is 94% effective against a virus that has a 99.97% survival rate.

1
thunderpussy 1 point ago +1 / -0

I mean, honestly.....this is getting insane.

7
macrolinx 7 points ago +7 / -0

To me it makes the argument against "mandatory" all the more easier.

Employer: This is mandatory.

Employee: So you're accepting full responsibility for any side effects and will sign paperwork stating as such? Because the maker isn't.

Employer: <Angry NPC Face>

1
FustercluckArmy 1 point ago +1 / -0

Review the relevant OSHA and DoL regulations regarding your legal recourse if an employer makes mandatory, as a condition of employment, assuming a known and significant health or safety risk without also assuming liability.

3
macrolinx 3 points ago +3 / -0

I legitimately doubt that any employers will want to take on the fight of trying to institute "mandatory vaccination." Not only is this a highly controversial topic out in the world, the relative newness of it would put them in a tricky legal situation. Not to mention as soon as the first medical exemption hits people would be lining up behind it saying "pound me too."

6
Ichabod 6 points ago +6 / -0

Since Pfizer refused to take it, it shows intent.

2
Ligersrule1 2 points ago +2 / -0

80-90% effective

Effective for 2 months

Potential side effects

Doesn't mean I can stop wearing a face diaper

All to prevent something with a 99.98% survival rate?

No thanks.

2
PaulRevere123 2 points ago +2 / -0

Makes sense, you are agreeing to be a guinea pig anyway.

2
MrQuacker2020 2 points ago +2 / -0

I won't give it to my kids because for one the WuFlu is basically harmless to kids sin their age group, and 2 even if it was nobody knows what the fuck this shit does. I see this commie morons rushing to inject themselves though for virtue points, so that's a little funny.

1
SAW2TH 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is Trump’s 4D chess to expose the entire vaccine industry as corrupt, ineffective and dangerous.

Change my mind.

1
Easter_Bunny 1 point ago +1 / -0

Don't worry people, the vaccine has got a 99.997% survival rate.

0
Nowsthetime 0 points ago +1 / -1

I’m all against the vaccine. But you do see that this is a way to demean what Trump is showing as his “miracle”?

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
2
Nowsthetime 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yes, sure. I’m afraid they’ll just do another campaign on how safe it is afterwards. You’re probably right though. No idea. I’m not taking it.