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 现在需要选择哪个罪过更大，是推向市场之前从没做过防传染测试罪过大呢，还是没有做过却撒谎说做过了的罪过大？很显然MSM帮Pfizer 做了选择 - 我们没说过喵能防传染，谁信谁傻！哈哈实在太逗了。

接下来呢？接下来是否需要debunk 喵防重症？what about 喵引起的中长期副作用？喵是否让人更易感染？it's all just a matter of time. Let's wait and see. 

所有跟帖： 

• 一开始不是说大于90%防感染？ -周老大- ♂ (0 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 13:34:40

• 你把一开始的东西找出来，看哪里说了防感染？ -TBz- ♂ (53 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 21:22:30

• 三期临床，验证保护率的是什么？ -TBz- ♂ (218 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 21:26:39

• 你真能洗地啊。解释一下你老板的说法吧。见内 -冷月亮- ♀ (409 bytes) () 10/14/2022 postreply 21:38:42

• 这是个老帖子，英文链接已被移除（我没有accept cookie） -周老大- ♂ (114 bytes) () 10/15/2022 postreply 10:39:28

• 再加一个 -周老大- ♂ (114 bytes) () 10/15/2022 postreply 10:44:22