You got it backwards.

The people you are following who say that ADE is a real thing are promoting an idea that cannot be true.

They are saying that tests were done where:

1. Animals (such as dogs) were given a vaccine with a "live virus" or they were given a "vaccine" with mRNA (which, of course, is not a vaccine at all).

2. The animals were then exposed to the "wild virus."

3. The animals then got very sick and/or died.

Conclusion: The animals got sick and/or died because their immune system could not fight off the wild virus, due to having received the vaccine.

The first two could not have happened, and the third did not happen. Therefore, the conclusion was wrong.

Here is why:

1. There is NO LIVE VIRUS, isolated and purified, in ANY LAB, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. We are all told that these viruses exist, but it is NOT TRUE. It is a LIE. Since there is no live virus, there cannot be any vaccine made with a "live virus."

Now, if instead it is the mRNA "vaccine" used, then it is possible that such a drug could be injected into the dogs. But, there is NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE as to what these drugs do in the body. NO RESEARCH HAS BEEN DISCLOSED on this subject. So, there is no way to know if they do or do not cause problems. I suspect that they do cause problems, but nobody can say for sure, since such research either has not been done, or the research has been done but has not been disclosed to the public -- including to the doctors/researchers you are citing.

2. The animals being exposed to the "wild virus" is ... IMPOSSIBLE. Again, the virus is NOT available in any lab anywhere in the world. Therefore, no researcher could expose anyone or any animal to something that does not exist.

3. The studies that these people are referring to, where they are claiming the animals died ... DID NOT HAPPEN. The research DID happen, but the animals DID NOT GET SICK, and certainly DID NOT DIE. These people you are following have NOT reviewed the actual studies. You only THINK they did. Clearly, they did not if they got this basic thing wrong. The animals were killed by the researches so they could be studied, but they were not sick before they were killed, and they did not die from the "wild virus exposure" (which did not happen). These doctors/researchers simply did not read the actual studies, even though you assume they must have.

Therefore, their conclusion is not valid.

I have looked at BOTH sides of this issue, not just one side.

You, OTOH, have only looked at ONE side, and you refuse to look at the other side.

You are the close-minded one, my friend.

But you can change that, and take a look at the other side anytime you want.

I'm out for the day. Have a good one.

You got it backwards.

The people you are following who say that ADE is a real thing are promoting an idea that cannot be true.

They are saying that tests were done where:

1. Animals (such as dogs) were given a vaccine with a "live virus" or they were given a "vaccine" with mRNA (which, of course, is not a vaccine at all).

2. The animals were then exposed to the "wild virus."

3. The animals then got very sick and/or died.

Conclusion: The animals got sick and/or died because their immune system could not fight off the wild virus, due to having received the vaccine.

The first two could not have happened, and the third did not happen. Therefore, the conclusion was wrong.

Here is why:

1. There is NO LIVE VIRUS, isolated and purified, in ANY LAB, ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. We are all told that these viruses exist, but it is NOT TRUE. It is a LIE. Since there is no live virus, there cannot be any vaccine made with a "live virus."

Now, if instead it is the mRNA "vaccine" used, then it is possible that such a drug could be injected into the dogs. But, there is NO SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE as to what these drugs do in the body. NO RESEARCH HAS BEEN DISCLOSED on this subject. So, there is no way to know if they do or do not cause problems. I suspect that they do cause problems, but nobody can say for sure, since such research either has not been done, or the research has been done but has not been disclosed to the public -- including to the doctors/researchers you are citing.

2. The animals being exposed to the "wild virus" is ... IMPOSSIBLE. Again, the virus is NOT available in any lab anywhere in the world. Therefore, no researcher could expose anyone or any animal to something that does not exist.

3. The studies that these people are referring to, where they are claiming the animals died ... DID NOT HAPPEN. The research DID happen, but the animals DID NOT GET SICK, and certainly DID NOT DIE. These people you are following have NOT reviewed the actual studies. You only THINK they did.

Therefore, their conclusion is not valid.

I have looked at BOTH sides of this issue, not just one side.

You, OTOH, have only looked at ONE side, and you refuse to look at the other side.

You are the close-minded one, my friend.

But you can change that, and take a look at the other side anytime you want.

I'm out for the day. Have a good one.