bottom line- this vaccine wasn’t tested for transmissibility

Yet look how many people chose to believe it - something that never exists!!! Why? It's either these people have been lied to or these people have lost their minds which are supposed to be capable of thinking independently.

Pfizer 現在需要選擇哪個罪過更大，是推向市場之前從沒做過防傳染測試罪過大呢，還是沒有做過卻撒謊說做過了的罪過大？很顯然MSM幫Pfizer 做了選擇 - 我們沒說過喵能防傳染，誰信誰傻！哈哈實在太逗了。

接下來呢？接下來是否需要debunk 喵防重症？what about 喵引起的中長期副作用？喵是否讓人更易感染？it's all just a matter of time. Let's wait and see. 

所有跟帖： 

• 一開始不是說大於90%防感染？ -周老大- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 13:34:40

• 你把一開始的東西找出來，看哪裏說了防感染？ -TBz- ♂ (53 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 21:22:30

• 三期臨床，驗證保護率的是什麽？ -TBz- ♂ (218 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 21:26:39

• 你真能洗地啊。解釋一下你老板的說法吧。見內 -冷月亮- ♀ (409 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 21:38:42

• 這是個老帖子，英文鏈接已被移除（我沒有accept cookie） -周老大- ♂ (114 bytes) () 10/15/2022 postreply 10:39:28

• 再加一個 -周老大- ♂ (114 bytes) () 10/15/2022 postreply 10:44:22