Yes they have. Thrombocytopenia and blood clotting was acknowledged as a side effect since 2021. Even the CDC had to include it on their stupid site and that was the explicit reason to discontinue AZ vaccination in most countries and not consider them for boosters.
I was told progress in medicine will make people healthier and increase longevity and quality of life. Why are things going in the opposite direction?
There's a difference to listing a potential side effect and confirming in court a proven side effect. Western medicine was corrupted before we were born.
I think the angle law firms are looking at is intentional medical malpractice by knowingly marketing a "vaccine" with incredibly dangerous side effects. That would nullify the consent agreement Astra Zeneca required when people received the vaccine. Also the blatant obfuscation of those side effects by hiding them away behind a QR code within the vaccine packaging and mountains of legalese sprinkled with medical terminology
You may have a point but the rug will be pulled only if the plan allows it (they will fess up to it if event 201 holds true). I've red the leaked vaccine contracts and it's made clear that in case of a faulty product that fails safety and efficacy standards, the contract is void.
Problem is since the gene shots were classified as a bio-warafre counter-measure commissioned by the military, the FDA standards are not the same as with regular drugs on the market. I don't think the FDA had any say in the regulation at all - instead they were just used as a front as to deceive people into thinking this is business as usual.
Yes they have. Thrombocytopenia and blood clotting was acknowledged as a side effect since 2021. Even the CDC had to include it on their stupid site and that was the explicit reason to discontinue AZ vaccination in most countries and not consider them for boosters.
I was told progress in medicine will make people healthier and increase longevity and quality of life. Why are things going in the opposite direction?
There's a difference to listing a potential side effect and confirming in court a proven side effect. Western medicine was corrupted before we were born.
I agree with that but this was a known side effect and they will wash their hands with this fact or just make the governments (meaning us) pay the bill: https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/astrazenecas-covid-19-vaccine-ema-finds-possible-link-very-rare-cases-unusual-blood-clots-low-blood-platelets
I think the angle law firms are looking at is intentional medical malpractice by knowingly marketing a "vaccine" with incredibly dangerous side effects. That would nullify the consent agreement Astra Zeneca required when people received the vaccine. Also the blatant obfuscation of those side effects by hiding them away behind a QR code within the vaccine packaging and mountains of legalese sprinkled with medical terminology
You may have a point but the rug will be pulled only if the plan allows it (they will fess up to it if event 201 holds true). I've red the leaked vaccine contracts and it's made clear that in case of a faulty product that fails safety and efficacy standards, the contract is void.
Problem is since the gene shots were classified as a bio-warafre counter-measure commissioned by the military, the FDA standards are not the same as with regular drugs on the market. I don't think the FDA had any say in the regulation at all - instead they were just used as a front as to deceive people into thinking this is business as usual.