43 year old gets stroke.

[dmlfarmer]

DML it isn’t vaccines we are questioning. It is unproven/untested vaccines that we are questioning.

Care to answer the bolded question since forage ran away?

Isn't trying to thwart health canada's testing procedures more anti-science than waiting for them to go through their normal procedure?

Sure I will answer that. The Pharmaceutical companies are not trying to "thwart" Health Canada. As I explained above the companies are doing the same amount of human testing they have done for other vaccines. There has never been a requirement for vaccines to be tested in Canada, only that Health Canada is presented with a complete application and data from testing be presented before Health Canada will approve a vaccine for use in Canada. The Trump government instituted Operation Warp Speed which was intended to shorten the time period it takes to bring a vaccine to market WITHOUT NEGATIVLY IMPACTING SAFETY OR EFFICACY TRIALS. The same science is being used in testing as well as the same science is used in evaluation of the trials and data that has always been used. Here I thought Agrivillers would appreciate a more efficient government system built to work faster but apparently you prefer the inefficiency of traditional government approval processes.

[red rider]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/two-year-old-virginia-die-vaccine/

[flea beetle]

So it begs the question, if this is in fact all true, why is it labeled an emergency approval rather than just a regular approval?

[dmlfarmer]

So it begs the question, if this is in fact all true, why is it labeled an emergency approval rather than just a regular approval?

Here is the answer to your question direct from FDA https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emergency-use-authorization-vaccines-explained https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/vaccines/emergency-use-authorization-vaccines-explained

Also verifies what I said earlier about testing for safety and effectiveness

[flea beetle]

so they didn't even complete phase 3 trials, yet allowed the vaccine to be administered? Yeah, so much for following regular protocol.

[oldguy48]

so they didn't even complete phase 3 trials, yet allowed the vaccine to be administered? Yeah, so much for following regular protocol.

One interesting thing is that they authorized the "vaccine" because there supposedly " Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives." They were able to do this as they said that HCQ was not safe even though Faucci himself said back in about 2010-2012 that HCQ was a good drug to use to fight SARS. Also very slow to even acknowledge that Ivermectin is of any benefits. How convenient.

[burnt]

As bad as yours?

There is still Phase 1 testing with similar numbers of people. There is still phase 2 testing with similar numbers of people. There is still phase 3 testing, however instead of variable numbers of volunteers, which ranged from a thousand to tens of thousands the FDA asked for 30,000. Changes that were made at the testing stage dealt with monitoring and recording of the trials. Because of the transmissibility of Covid remote monitoring of the trial was allowed. Another change allowed was letting a company to begin the next phase of testing before the previous phase was completed. This does not mean the protocol was skipped; simply the time frame was shortened. The biggest change was allowing companies to submit data as it was collected to health agencies until waiting until testing to be completed and submitting the entire package to be submitted at once. But that does not change the data, only the reporting of it.

These changes were instituted under the direction of Trump's Warp Speed in order to get the vaccines as quickly as possible. But there is still the same amount of testing on people, and the same oversight by Health Agencies in each country before the vaccines are approved.

Here is how Warp Speed tightened the timeline.
https://media.defense.gov/2020/Aug/13/2002476369/-1/-1/0/200813-D-ZZ999-100.JPG https://media.defense.gov/2020/Aug/13/2002476369/-1/-1/0/200813-D-ZZ999-100.JPG

So why don't you tell us how what I claim is wrong and where the protocals re actual testing have changed if you want to have any credibility

Not at all difficult -

It was your kind of justification spawned the need for the Nuremberg Code.

What a coincidence that the definition of "pandemic" was rewritten about 10 years ago.

And once you understand what happened at that juncture, you will understand the term "Follow the money" and why time-proven testing methods were ignored.

[dmlfarmer]

One interesting thing is that they authorized the "vaccine" because there supposedly " Under an EUA, FDA may allow the use of unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions when certain statutory criteria have been met, including that there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives." They were able to do this as they said that HCQ was not safe even though Faucci himself said back in about 2010-2012 that HCQ was a good drug to use to fight SARS. Also very slow to even acknowledge that Ivermectin is of any benefits. How convenient.

HCQ has never been tested for treatment of Covid therefore use for Covid would be considered an unapproved use of a medical product. It would require an EUA for HCQ to be used legally until testing is done. Where is the CONTROLLED testing of HCQ for efficacy on Covid that you are demanding vaccines have? So you are in favor of EUA or should HCQ have had to go through complete testing for Covid too before being used?. Point 2. HCQ is a treatment not a preventive measure as a vaccine is so to claim HCQ is an alternative is incorrect and does not meet the requirement of alternative in the EUA

[dmlfarmer]

Not at all difficult -

It was your kind of justification spawned the need for the Nuremberg Code.

What a coincidence that the definition of "pandemic" was rewritten about 10 years ago.

And once you understand what happened at that juncture, you will understand the term "Follow the money" and why time-proven testing methods were ignored.

So if it is not difficult why don't you provide the answer other than going off on some Nuremberg rant?

[checking]

Not at all difficult -

It was your kind of justification spawned the need for the Nuremberg Code.

What a coincidence that the definition of "pandemic" was rewritten about 10 years ago.

And once you understand what happened at that juncture, you will understand the term "Follow the money" and why time-proven testing methods were ignored.

This just in.

Hugh flock of woodpeckers spotted circling Ontario wood lot.

Best to stay inside for two weeks of quarantine, burnt. Your trees will be okay, but I worry about your safety!

[burnt]

So if it is not difficult why don't you provide the answer other than going off on some Nuremberg rant?

Why do I get the idea that trying to give further explanation than I already have - and which you appear to have missed completely - would be yet another exercise in futility?

It's really hard to tell if you are deliberately obtuse or just suffering from an abysmal lack of comprehension.

[fjlip]

It's DENIAL, lots of conversations I have end like " I rather not know the facts", to doubt my decision, that I might be at risk of a VAX.

[checking]

Just thinking about burnt's "Biden girl" analogy.
Not meant to be, "a scary story", Jazz. It is how common a story it is. 85% of normal is not recovered, or normal. Stats are high for long Covid for those who get mild Covid.
Not, "BS", sumdumguy. It was an unsolicited call from a friend who wanted to get this off his chest. I'd hope that you would also take such a call to listen to your friend.
Is "100% chance of covid if you don't take extraordinary precautions", jwab, but you missed out that part, for some reason. So did your "like", cult.
The rest of the story is that because he has employees, he informed his workers of his status. Do I need to say why he did that? Asked that they get themselves tested for covid, and a normal general physical for work. One refused the covid test, which was his right, and choice. That left him with his only option as an employer, which was his right, to say, okay, you are to go home, and to quarantine for two weeks. You can get the physical after your quarantine to return to work. The employee rethought the test idea, and took it. Everyone came back negative for covid. Suspect that is why my friend, said he did not know how he caught it. It certainly was not from work. Some bosses do work with their employees. Can't all be like jwab!! One general physical came back bad, which may have saved his life. Guess which one?

[burnt]

Just thinking about burnt's "Biden girl" analogy...

My memory must have suffered a few holes from the woodpeckers - would you please refresh me on "burnt's Biden girl" analogy?

[checking]

I really like your thoughtful response. It reminds me of someone else very special -

This one. I think your picture should show up. Take care.