16
Comments (20)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
0
Jericho-Trompete 0 points ago +1 / -1

You didn't read what I wrote. I had the Johnson & Johnson who uses a shell of a virus, NOT an RNA code, I won't have that.

2
Soviet-Canuckistani 2 points ago +2 / -0

It's similar enough, the only thing different is the delivery. They're using a genetically modified adenovirus (which goes inside a host cell to begin production of mRNA) instead of mRNA in a chemical shell. Still has the same problems as the other two: new technology, experimental, no FDA approval, unknown side effects. Basically, how does it feel to be a human guinea pig? Because that's what you are.

1
Jericho-Trompete 1 point ago +1 / -0

**So, you don't trust a private company, Johnson & Johnson but you trust the FDA? **

1
Soviet-Canuckistani 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, there's a process that all drugs have to go through before being federally approved. There's the preclinical trials, with animals, and the clinical trials, with humans. Once these trials have been successfully completed, federal approval is next. That's how we know drugs, vaccines in this case, are safe and efficacious. Normally, it takes 10-15 years to develop safe, efficacious vaccines.

However, with these experimental mRNA poisons, there's no published animal studies and clinical studies aren't finished yet. What's even more worrying is that they rushed these poisons through in 6 months. That's why the FDA approval is so important. It means we have all the data, but in this case, we don't. If that's not a massive red flag, I don't know what is.