-LightSpeed- Cool, you didn't have to reply.
Just interested how this is all going down,
manufacturers of a non traditional treatment, given non liability clauses,
the government stating that it is the personal responsibility of the individual to educate themselves on side effects and not mandatory hence no government liability.
Personal choice but government imposed restricted travel and access to services, when we have know right from the start that the "vaccine" does not stop transmission, but if you have a passport it's all good, the paper stops transmission?
Not a vaccine in the traditional sense, issues regarding informed consent, specifically since we are still in the trial timeframe, Treatment has not been approved only use allowed under emergency situation(which would not exist if definition of pandemic was not changed, and if alternate treatments were not available. which they are, as demonstrated by Pfizer releasing pill treatments of ivermectin in India when India refused the liability waiver....which brings up all sorts of questions, does it work? data says yes, but if it works... arghhhh, if it doesn't is Pfizer ripping off the Indians?)
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33113270/
Conclusions drawn from the study and clinical implications: The specific and significant COVID-19 risk of ADE should have been and should be prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects currently in vaccine trials, as well as those being recruited for the trials and future patients after vaccine approval, in order to meet the medical ethics standard of patient comprehension for informed consent.