The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results. Or rejecting all papers about not-a-vaccine "efficiency". They should be rejected for the exactly same reason you reject VAERS data - there is no any solid scientific proof of the link between the cause and result.

Either you completely throw out all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data and not-a-vaccine "efficiency" data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)

VAERS data is exactly same kind of data you suddenly praise for promoting coronahoax and not-a-vaccine "efficiency". If you accept latter, you shoud accept former. If you deny former, you should deny latter. Only if you are honest man, of course.

Sorry, but you fucked yourself up. Again.

The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results. Or rejecting all papers about not-a-vaccine "efficiency". They should be rejected for the exactly same reason you reject VAERS data - there is no any solid scientific proof of the link between the cause and result.

Either you completely throw out all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data and not-a-vaccine "efficiency" data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)

VAERS data is exactly same kind of data you suddenly praise for promoting coronahoax and not-a-vaccine "efficiency". If you accept latter, you shoud accept former. If you deny former, you should deny latter. Only is you are honest man, of course.

Sorry, but you fucked yourself up. Again.

The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results. Or rejecting all papers about not-a-vaccine "efficiency". They should be rejected for the exactly same reason you reject VAERS data - there is no any solid scientific proof of the link between the cause and result.

Either you completely throw out both, all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data and not-a-vaccine "efficiency" data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)

VAERS data is exactly same kind of data you suddenly praise for promoting coronahoax and not-a-vaccine "efficiency". If you accept latter, you shoud accept former. If you deny former, you should deny latter. Only is you are honest man, of course.

Sorry, but you fucked yourself up. Again.

The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results. Or rejecting all papers about not-a-vaccine "efficiency". For the exactly same reason - there is no any solid scientific proof of the link between the cause and result.

Either you completely throw out both, all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data and not-a-vaccine "efficiency" data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)

VAERS data is exactly same kind of data you suddenly praise for promoting coronahoax and not-a-vaccine "efficiency". If you accept latter, you shoud accept former. If you deny former, you should deny latter. Only is you are honest man, of course.

Sorry, but you fucked yourself up. Again.

The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results. Or rejecting all papers about not-a-vaccine "efficiency". For the same reason - there is no any solid scientific proof of the link between the cause and result.

Either you completely throw out both, all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data and not-a-vaccine "efficiency" data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)

VAERS data is exactly same kind of data you suddenly praise for promoting coronahoax and not-a-vaccine "efficiency". If you accept latter, you shoud accept former. If you deny former, you should deny latter. Only is you are honest man, of course.

Sorry, but you fucked yourself up. Again.

The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results. Or rejecting all papers about not-a-vaccine "efficiency". For the same reason - there is no any solid scientific proof of the link between the cause and result.

Either you completely throw out both, all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data and not-a-vaccine "efficiency" data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)

VAERS data is exactly same kind of data you suddenly praise for promoting coronahoax and not-a-vaccine "efficiency". If you accept latter, you shoud accept former. If you deny former, you should deny latter. Only is you are honest man, of course.

The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results. Or rejecting all papers about not-a-vaccine "efficiency". For the same reason - there is no any solid scientific proof of the link between the cause and result.

Either you completely throw out both, all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data and not-a-vaccine "efficiency" data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)

The same terms is completely applicable to the using of PCR technology that can't be used for testing due to its working principle. But I don't see you insisting on rejecting all PCR "tests" results.

Either you completely throw out both, all PCR "tests" data along with all VAERS data according to your "logic", either you are just cheap low IQ hypocrite propagandist. :)