What are you pulling that definition from?
That is not the current definition of vaccine. Also, this is the first time I’ve seen a purposeful modifier such as “RNA” vaccine.
But again , this is my point, it’s either a vaccine or it’s not. Modifiers such as RNA vaccine only serve to confuse normal people. The method of delivery is not important to normal people as long as it does in the end what it’s purported to do.
Does an RNA vaccine do the same thing as the up till now standard vaccine? No it does not, therefore one is not a vaccine. I don’t care which one, but it’s dishonest at best.
Does an RNA vaccine do the same thing as the up till now standard vaccine? No it does not, therefore one is not a vaccine
Does a steam train do the same thing as an electric train?
No.
yet both are trains carrying people from A to B, they just use different ways to turn energy into rotational motion
It's relevant that people at the time thought that trains would kill you by suffocation
A steam train DOES do the same thing as an electric train. The mode of power is what’s different. But they both meet the definition of train. Such is not the case with the jab.
You were a little too eager to sound philosophical with that analogy. Regardless I understand the point you were making but I do disagree with it
A steam train DOES do the same thing as an electric train. The mode of power is what’s different. But they both meet the definition of train. Such is not the case with the jab.
No, the mode of power is irrelevant, fuel goes in, motion comes out. 99% of people have never even seen inside a train, they only see the motion
same for mrna vaccines, how you get to the end result of a human body producing antibodies is irrelevant, only that you get antibodies.
One day we might be able to make antibodies directly
(post is archived)