Interesting terms they use.

I would note that the study used to get FDA approval made no mention of the need for boosters and said that the period between the first and second shot was critical and that the same manufacturer must be used. Now, they urge a booster, no specific period after the 2nd shot, mix and match okay. And, even now, are talking about the need for a 4th, 5th, and 6th injection to fight omicron.

And as for the FDA approval, also not mentioned, is the key elements for previous FDA approvals, the 3 and 5 year studies, are waived for these jabs and the manufacturers are blocking the release of the data being gathered as part of their promised monitoring.

So, at the time of FDA approval, the need for boosters were being called a conspiracy theory, you can't sue the manufacturer if you're harmed, and the data being collected is being hidden from the public.

So, even if you don't think that these fucks are just lying their ass off for $33 billion in annual profits for their former and future employer, they have been clearly wrong on many levels.

So, other than saying they are safe and effective, what proof has been provided that the are?

450 million doses given out over a year, with "rare" occurrences of people dropping dead from clots and heart/ immunity system issues, over that year, is hardly a claim of safety, and the need for a booster, a 4th, 5th, and 6th injection that wasn't even a consideration, and no testing related to boosters, mixing and matching manufacturers, etc. A claim of effective is hardly believable.

Do you have any evidence that doesn't come from a federally-funded source?