>>13414605>>13414612Yeah they do. Now see if you can answer this: If there aren't any risks associated with the mRNA injections, why would the companies making the medication pre-emptively say they will not cover any adverse reactions? Furthermore, if they stand to profit billions of dollars from the injections, why can't they just cover any adverse reactions from their profit pool?
The choice is clear. COVID19 has an incredibly high survival rate, the risks --if healthy and normal-- are just a headache, loss of smell, fever, or cold symptoms for a week. Long covid is rare and can be beaten with supplements like NAC, Niacin, vitamin D, zinc, etc. The risks are known.
On the other hand we have this experimental mRNA injection where the long-term risks are unknown. You are simply weighing very mild risks vs unknown risks.
>but the fda approved the pfizer injectionThey also approved talcum powder, look what happened with that and countless other FDA approved substances.
If you have comorbidities, ivermectin or hydrocloroquine are medicines with incredibly positive results with KNOWN risks.
You have to be either an idiot or an actual at-risk person to get the "vaccines". That much is clear.
