And, I wonder if that was before or after or after this testimony. I think that he's saying the right things for what we need: he's rational, he's not a demagogue, he's not trying to force the vax on anyone. And it sounds like if this was after the 2023 statement that you're talking about for pregnant women that maybe he learned and maybe he's one who can actually admit that the forced vax etc etc was not beneficial I would take that over someone who is a forced vaxxer or someone who forever backs or "if you're not vaxxed to you're wack" type person.
The sauce is right here, on his Twitter timeline. He's telling pregnant women to get it in August of 2023. I knew that the shot was bad for pregnant women (and the population, at large) in 2021. Cope
Cool. I'm not sure if that "cope " is directed at me but that is silly and unnecessary. Like, are you actually taking offense that I was asking for where that quote actually came from? Grow the Fu6k up. You stated something out of the blue and didn't provide any reference. And, I was just asking for where youvgot that from out of the entire world if media. I'm not even defending the dude I don't think that pregnant women should get the jibby jab. I don't think ANYONE should.
I was just simply curious if he had made that statement about pregnant women getting the shot before or after his testimony as in the video that is in this literal thread. Meaning has a reflected has more data come out, has he been able to look at things more objectively now rather than in the midst of the pandemic, does he actually need to be someone who needed to be a vax denier or someone who was suspicious of the vaccine from the very beginning? No he does not. The only thing that he needs to be is someone who realizes that it's our body our choice and I don't want nobody telling me what I need to put in my damn body. He needs to protect medical freedom.
Thank you for linking the sauce period and as a matter of fact as he says he says *recommend did he say force? No. Did he says necessitate? No. Did he say ridicule no. He's not even supporting the guideline that seemed to have come out during that time which if you take his whole comment in perspective is what he's saying. Posting it here:
I generally recommend the vaccine to pregnant women who have never had Covid before (btw not two doses 3/4 wks apart). But this is a terrible way to do medical science and a good way to lose public trust.
This quack encouraged pregnant women to get the shot in August of 2023. No thanks
Where is the sauce for that?
And, I wonder if that was before or after or after this testimony. I think that he's saying the right things for what we need: he's rational, he's not a demagogue, he's not trying to force the vax on anyone. And it sounds like if this was after the 2023 statement that you're talking about for pregnant women that maybe he learned and maybe he's one who can actually admit that the forced vax etc etc was not beneficial I would take that over someone who is a forced vaxxer or someone who forever backs or "if you're not vaxxed to you're wack" type person.
The sauce is right here, on his Twitter timeline. He's telling pregnant women to get it in August of 2023. I knew that the shot was bad for pregnant women (and the population, at large) in 2021. Cope
https://x.com/MartyMakary/status/1695081452801605882
Cool. I'm not sure if that "cope " is directed at me but that is silly and unnecessary. Like, are you actually taking offense that I was asking for where that quote actually came from? Grow the Fu6k up. You stated something out of the blue and didn't provide any reference. And, I was just asking for where youvgot that from out of the entire world if media. I'm not even defending the dude I don't think that pregnant women should get the jibby jab. I don't think ANYONE should.
I was just simply curious if he had made that statement about pregnant women getting the shot before or after his testimony as in the video that is in this literal thread. Meaning has a reflected has more data come out, has he been able to look at things more objectively now rather than in the midst of the pandemic, does he actually need to be someone who needed to be a vax denier or someone who was suspicious of the vaccine from the very beginning? No he does not. The only thing that he needs to be is someone who realizes that it's our body our choice and I don't want nobody telling me what I need to put in my damn body. He needs to protect medical freedom.
Thank you for linking the sauce period and as a matter of fact as he says he says *recommend did he say force? No. Did he says necessitate? No. Did he say ridicule no. He's not even supporting the guideline that seemed to have come out during that time which if you take his whole comment in perspective is what he's saying. Posting it here:
I generally recommend the vaccine to pregnant women who have never had Covid before (btw not two doses 3/4 wks apart). But this is a terrible way to do medical science and a good way to lose public trust.
And yet he was a vaccine proponent! Hmmmmmmmm!
This makes the Nancy brow woman (surgeon gen) a lightening rod for truth telling re medicine. Interesting dichotomy.
Tell us something we don't know.
** No one in the government is going to jail,
This dope believes in the vax even though any person with just a bit of intelligence would see that the vax appears not to work too well, if at all.
Wasn't Dr. Atlas the one that suggested we rely on natural immunity? Maybe Trump should have tapped him for this position.