![From my town's newspaper. Which one of you is Sue ? [3024x4032 - 1.52MB]](https://pic8.co/sh/6Fsqwj.jpg){kind=link}
I disagree with your criticism of point 5. Gene therapy masquerading as a vaccine, which was traditionally a small sample of weakened cultures to familiarize your antibodies with, is something which should be more wider known and treated with much greater caution than has been displayed.
I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying in conversation with normies I know they kind of gloss over when someone bring up the gene therapy vs vaccine.
Not really
hur dur you're just anti-vax!
Vaccines make sense and have had stupid long test durations, this is not one.
Ive had this argument with 3 people.
Mongo only pawn in game of life.
Normies respond to fear, normies fear the unknown, gene therapy is unknown.
Honestly i havent followed much on the vax but the term 'gene therapy' is fucked up and i'm not touching anything like that till it has undergone extensive trial. Even then i reserve the right to outright refuse it
Pointing out that the vax is really gene therapy is too fine a distinction. Normie goes "no it's a vax because that's what the media calls it" and then you're bogged down trying to explain how it really is gene therapy and the normie doesn't even care because gene therapy sounds futuristic anyway. Better to point out it was hastily developed and the pharma companies can't get sued if you get hurt. Play the "big pharma is corrupt" angle which is well established in the culture and plays well. The gene therapy angle is true, but the yield is low.
(post is archived)