WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2026 Poal.co

203

Is it done intentionally, or did the vaccines just so happen to have some of the worst side effects in the history of drug making?

And another question:

If indeed the vaccines are intensionally made deadly, does the pharmaceutical companies keep track of the vaccines by batch number and send the deadliest batch numbers to the areas where they think conservatives will be living?

Is it done intentionally, or did the vaccines just so happen to have some of the worst side effects in the history of drug making? And another question: If indeed the vaccines are intensionally made deadly, does the pharmaceutical companies keep track of the vaccines by batch number and send the deadliest batch numbers to the areas where they think conservatives will be living?

(post is archived)

[–] [deleted] 0 pt (edited )

My opinion is, we are still using ancient technology to create vaccines the traditional way. We will eventually encounter a TRULY deadly viral pandemic, and our existing technology will not be able to prevent the worst of it.

New tech, like mRNA, has promise, and with a production/distribution infrastructure in place, could handle that future deadly pandemic, at least a lot better than the traditional vaccines.

But that tech is relatively untested in humans. There had previously been no large scale testing in people, and while models and animals can help develop drugs and vaccines, the true effect can't be known without human testing.

We are the human testing, that will move that technology forward. Deaths from the shots are nothing but data points. I don't think deaths and side effects are intentional, I think they're incidental, and acceptable sacrifices as far as "they" are concerned. They see the end result, lots of data on what does and doesn't work, what is and isn't a major concern, in every possible demographic.

Historically, we've used Africa and other poor countries to mass test vaccines and drugs, so this isn't a stretch. They believe it's for the greater good. They justify the means with the intended ends. One day, when ebola goes airborne and is able to kill 50%, they'll say it was all worth it.

That's at one level. Clearly others are in it just for the money, while others are exploiting all of this for power and to move their agendas forward. They may all be tied together in conspiracy, or they may be unaligned forces taking advantage of the situation.

The only thing that leads me to believe there's a greater conspiracy between governments, media, and the biotech industry, is that they are pretty much in lockstep on everything.

So no, I don't think they're killing us on purpose, but I don't think our lives are valued as anything but datapoints. That said, that's always been the case. We're datapoints that just helped the biotech industry shave 5-10 years off human testing. And they got a fat paycheck for it.

For the batch weirdness, that could, and I'd guess is, them testing variations on their recipes to see what happens. I have my doubts about batches being specific to a particular political party.

Or not, but if this is a bioweapon, it's a really shitty one.

[–] 1 pt

ya its a great idea, they just need to test it for 20 years before i will try it

[–] 0 pt

I would agree about the data points except they are doing literally everything to not collect them.