I would just like to mention that this vaccine is designed for variants older up to Omicron Ba1 and has not been tested in humans.
Yatta! Keep giving the momentum, all the toshiyori will get it soon to protect nihon (so he can hurry up and open up!)
I would just like to mention that this vaccine is designed for variants older up to Omicron Ba1 and has not been tested in humans.
This would be wrong, since the knowledge that underpins protection and efficacy includes clinical knowledge, seeking to distort a bachelor’s check as if it were all that was presented to be demonstrably invalid and a transparent attempt to deceive people.
This would still be nothing new, for vaccines with prolonged knowledge new versions can be used in the public clinical knowledge, this is what has been done for the annual flu vaccines any problem.
Isn’t it too late!? The seventh wave is over.
Okay.
The coverage against long covid is not to get infected.
Being inflamed is a prerequisite for herbal immunity.
a period of 3 months or less, the ministry is shortening the period
Pfizer experts agree with this.
4 shots a year, each and every year.
I think it was in the brochure at the beginning.
Isn’t it too late!? The seventh wave is over.
Prevent/mitigate 8?
“I think it would be better to get one for the strain present lately. That doesn’t mean I’m going to get infected, however, I came here to get vaccinated so I don’t pass it on to others,” he said.
Masahiko is wrong!
Where did you get your information?
Being vaccinated won’t save you from infection and it won’t save you from transmitting the virus.
I yawn, are there still other people in it? Spend.
Yesterday I got my fifth shot of CoVid and the VA. He didn’t hurt me, but today he screwed me, just like the last two times. But it’s an indication that it’s working! However, I didn’t get a pacifier.
I highly recommend getting all the reinforcements you can get. We still don’t know all the ins and outs, but we will beat this pandemic. We want to use our heads and avoid hearing those conspiracy theories from new-age charlatans. . They are CEROS without evidence of identity.
@ffs: Neither does the annual flu shot. The updated Covid19 recall is based on the same building blocks as the billions of vaccines, which are tested and tested on humans that have already been administered.
4 shots a year, each and every year.
Their own arguments oppose their view, the only way this will be true is that covid still poses a significant enough threat to merit vaccination. This is not what is transmitted even now, where stimulus recommendations are no longer for blind vaccination. .
I think it was in the brochure at the beginning.
Does it mean that you think other people have time machines that would let everyone know when variants would appear, at what time, and the effect they would have on immunity received as a result of past infections and vaccines?
This is a logical argument.
Being vaccinated won’t save you from infection and it won’t save you from transmitting the virus.
But it’s helping any of the dangers (according to clinical knowledge that proves it), which is a pretty valid explanation for why you get it.
Ignore the “natural immunity” brigade.
Jaja. @Bronco: Yes buddy, like everyone knows what they’re dealing with in early 2020.
What a ridiculous statement. ” It should have been in the brochure. “
@Viviane Bo: And what about that? After all, they pay for it. This series of reinforcements is for those who have already won jabs. Why waste time and effort informing those who haven’t?
So the wave of omicron is over and now they are going to “vaccinate” with the bivalent “vaccine” linked to omicron (without human trials). . . a lot of wasted time. . . In addition to this, it is well documented that it does. Nothing to prevent transmission can cause myocarditis, especially in young men, among a plethora of other side effects. . . The threat-reward ratio is skewed towards the threat too high for those who are not under the threat of Covid, which represents 99% of the population!
The madness continues. . .
It’s too late to involve the seventh wave of COVID.
Last month, covid19 deaths in Japan were more than 7,000, adding up to patients who may not receive medical treatment at all.
So, the wave of omicron is over and now they will “vaccinate” with the bivalent “vaccine” linked to omicron (no human trials) ??A lot of wasted time
Do you have a reference where health experts or clinicians say it’s a waste of time?Or is it just their private opinion contrary to what they recommend?
In addition to this, it is documented, it does nothing to prevent transmission, it can cause myocarditis, especially in young men, among a plethora of other side effects.
Except it’s wrong, it’s helping to reduce transmission and infection, and prevents myocarditis, especially in young men, compared to letting them get sick from covid, giving them a much higher risk of more serious complications.
The threat-reward ratio is skewed towards the threat too high for those who are not under the threat of Covid, which accounts for 99% of the population!
This remains absolutely false too, being vaccinated reduces the threat of covid for all those to whom the vaccine is recommended, i. e. the majority of the population.
“I think it would be better to get one for the strain present lately. That doesn’t mean I’m going to get infected, however, I came here to get vaccinated so I don’t pass it on to others. “
Well, getting vax doesn’t save you from spreading.
It’s too late to involve the seventh wave of COVID.
Which is good, as the withdrawals are earmarked for risks related to the expected buildup in the fall and winter events.
This is the correct type and advised use of vaccines, to prevent them from falling instead of waiting and vaccines arriving too late.
Well, getting vax doesn’t save you from spreading.
But it’s helping to decrease it, which also happens with all other vaccines, the challenge is to pretend that anything that is not one hundred percent effective is automatically effective at 0%, which is false.
So after all this time the anti-vaxxers keep saying that vaccines are more harmful than diseases lol.
My defeated father gave me a very sensible recommendation about doing what everyone else does to be compatible or being carried away by his peers to use drugs.
Walk away and say NO.
My defeated father gave me a very sensible recommendation about doing what everyone else does to be compatible or being carried away by his peers to use drugs.
Walk away and say NO.
Good for you =)
Thanks Ian. Su wisdom was forged then and forged now.
My defeated father gave me a very sensible recommendation about doing what everyone else does to be compatible or being carried away by his peers to use drugs.
Fortunately, vaccines have transparent clinical knowledge that supports their protection and effectiveness, so no one has to do what everyone else does, just make a rational decision about what’s most productive based on the evidence you have. If everyone also does the rational thing that is irrelevant.
@ Stragerland. Je I think it’s okay and it’s your choice.
As long as they have been stressed or bullied by their peers.
I don’t agree with that.
As long as they have been stressed or bullied by their peers.
I don’t agree with that.
That’s fine with me. I would agree with your father’s in this case.
Be like Denmark.
This is what I would call “shopping in the countryside. “Make a point, even opposite the tide, and that of the 195 nations of the world that lately are doing what you stand for.
By now, we all deserve to have learned that if it is a global pandemic, its effects and mandatory countermeasures differ significantly from country to country. Governments around the world make their own individual decisions, and not for clinical reasons at all. Moreover, each country has screwed it up in one way or another.
Japan is not Dinamarca. Ni Japan is Israel, Madagascar, Sri Lanka, South Africa or Sweden. Do you need me to convert it or take it at face value?
Imagine you buy a car and want to upgrade your seat belt.
Imagine attending a clinic on vaccines and the human immune formula with an analogy to the car.
Thanks Ian. Su wisdom was forged then and forged now.
Of course.
It is better not to do anything alone under peer pressure, bullying even more.
With medicines and vaccines, it is more productive to see the doctor you accept as true.
Some users here have 10 out of 30 alone.
We understand that you believe the vaccine is safe and effective for everyone, a Thai study (which has not yet been peer-reviewed) shows a large number (percentage figures) of cardiac side effects from Pfizer vaccines in young men.
But to be fair, everyone can and deserves to know for themselves how to plan for their private physical care. To date, each faction of this “war” has shown fascist tendencies, without depriving the other side of its freedom of choice. .
I are dealing very badly with this factor between us.
Personally, I haven’t had COVID19 in 3 years while spending dozens of hours with other contagious people without mask or vaccinations (before getting vaccinated twice). I didn’t restrict my leisure activities any more than mandatory and stopped wearing a mask altogether in the spring. I have a peak of vitamin D, known to fight respiratory diseases, I am fit, I am not overweight, I am rather young, as healthy, without comorbidities. Personally, I chose not to get vaccinated. I also wouldn’t ever get four shots a year, as I just can’t rest four weeks a year due to vaccine side effects (I’ve had flu-like side effects after each of the vaccines, adding chest tightness after time one).
I don’t know why other people deserve to hate themselves so much and pretend they know which selection is more productive for someone else. Because NOBODY knows, not even the most productive scientists. We are reaching new waters every day with more studies. Compiled about this virus and its solution options. So, leave others a little slack and avoid pretending you know everything. This necessarily applies to either party.
Get it, you think the vaccine is safe and effective for everyone, a Thai study (which has not yet been peer-reviewed) shows a large number (percentage figures) of cardiac side effects from Pfizer vaccines in young men.
No, it is not, as it absolutely distorts general electrocardiographic findings as if they were pathological (among other serious disorders that disqualify the findings). That is why it is vital that articles are peer-reviewed before being used as arguments, omitting this component means you can use erroneous references as if they had already been discussed very well about the disorders.
https://jp. reuters. com/article/factcheck-heart-teens-vaccine-idUSL1N2ZT2B5
But to be fair, everyone can and deserves to know for themselves how to plan their private fitness treatments. To this day, every faction of this “war” has shown fascist tendencies, except to deprive the other aspect of its freedom. of choice. *
No one does that, simply arguing that other people don’t try to falsely provide their private resolution as valid or based on clinical evidence when they don’t, anyone can make irrational resolutions if necessary (and face the consequences of that resolution), but deceiving other people who need to make rational resolutions is invalid and should not be allowed.
Appealing to rumors and private parties as if they were studios involving thousands of participants is what is extraordinarily irrational. The most productive resolution based on that, they can put the effort and time to be as qualified as the Mavens, or settle for the recommendation of the Mavens who have done just that.
@Virusex
But it’s helping any of the dangers (according to clinical knowledge that proves it), which is a pretty valid explanation for why you get it.
You to mention the harm/benefit aspect. . .
As it continues to provide a contribution of clinical knowledge, here are some peer-reviewed clinical insights posted on the government’s online page of the National Institutes of Health. Published on August 31, 2022.
https://pubmed. ncbi. nlm. nih. gov/36055877/
In summary: “The exaggerated threat of serious adverse events discovered in our study highlights the need for formal threat and benefit analyses, i. e. , those stratified by threat of severe COVID-19 outcomes. These analyses will require publication of data at the point of participants’ datasets. “
If you are healthy and at low risk of serious COVID effects, there is indeed something to question.
You to mention the harm/benefit aspect. . .
No, that is the total point of reducing the risk, that the benefits obtained outweigh the damage, if that were the case, there may be no relief in the risk.
Since you continue to contribute clinical knowledge, here are some peer-reviewed clinical insights published on the National Institutes of Health government site. Published on August 31, 2022.
A report that has already been discredited due to an unethical manipulation of knowledge that absolutely disqualifies the conclusions is not a reference to be used, let alone to refute the medical consensus.
https://sciencebasedmedicine. org/peer-review-fail-vaccine-publishes-antivax-propaganda/
When extraordinarily apparent manipulations like counting each patient multiple times for vaccines (so a user who has nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea is counted as 3 cases) when covid patients are counted only once, regardless of whether they had to be hospitalized and spend a month in extensive care with dozens of problems, It is transparent that the authors intend to push invalid conclusions methods of poor quality.
This becomes even more evident because the trials are designed in particular to stop after an additional benefit has been discovered (otherwise it would be unethical), meaning that every vaccinated patient was in complete threat of any side effects, but as not all of them were at risk of infection at the time, It is clearly not possible to know the overall risk of COVID disorders they would have.
There is an explanation for why this report was heavily criticized because it is a preprint.
If you are healthy and at low risk of serious COVID effects, there is indeed something to question.
According to experts around the world, the knowledge of billions of vaccinated people is false.
Reuters fact-checking? Not about that.
What arguments do you have against those included in the article?They are transparent and backed by professionals who name them.
Are they all (along with many others who have criticized the studio) in a conspiracy now?Why does it not address the reasons given for disqualifying the conclusions drawn from the report?Are any of them fake?
Bob, thanks for a point well done, never worry that I disagree with all this.
His point to which I would like to strongly object: in a social construct, faced with a challenge that vitally considers the whole of society, it is not fascist to strip other people of their private choice. It’s a necessity.
Humans are creatures of comfort. When we are given to choose between two actions, we opt for the one that is simplest, the most comfortable. (One may wonder what this “comfort” means individually, but for many other people it means inactivity. ), we will actually invest power to protect this selection until this investment is greater than the power required for the alternative. It can even become a self-amplification procedure: some other people will invest power in protecting their defenses. At some point, turning one’s brain and rabbit’s hollow into fabricated ideals and excuses demands more power than simply protecting one’s maximum sensitive layer of defenses. Unchecked, this amplification loop can lead to radicalization, anti-scientific dogmatism in this case.
As far as we are concerned, it is clear to me that in many cases, the feeling “anti-vaccine” does not really come from a healthy skepticism but from a deep-rooted preference for comfort, inactivity, the preference for everything to remain the same, for “do nothing that leaves me alone is my life thank you very much”.
This habit is much less pronounced in Japan, where “gaman” (the distinguishing feature of enduring hardship (not only, but also) for society’s greater intelligence) is intrinsic to social construction. Without the gaman, this country would no longer exist. exist. Imagine if the Japanese, with all the herbal bugs every year, with massively saturated private infrastructure, behaved like those in many very Western countries. This is one of the reasons why it is so complicated and debatable. talking about those issues on a seemingly Japan-oriented online page that is nevertheless very much aimed at a foreign audience, why do the talking points clash so strongly here?
One that has already been denied. . .
Every study that opposes the pharmaceutical narrative will lead others to criticize them. This is not called discrediting.
When extraordinarily apparent manipulations like counting patients several times for vaccines. . .
Every patient? No, some patients were included more than once, as they counted adverse reactions. But the authors communicate it in their paper and show that it is not their conclusion. It is better to read the actual newspaper, rather depending on the so-called “debunkers”.
Multiple studies have shown that, apart from the elderly and/or those with other fitness issues, the relevant threat with the injection is greater than the infection-like threat: for every Covid hospitalization we have avoided through the injection, we discharge between four and a hundred (depending on the study) the serious adverse effects of the vaccine.
And the taxpayer-funded experiment continues. . . Guto Laku
Obviously, many in Japan seem unaware of how useless and destructive those vaccines are. The facts are that in Australia, covid deaths are more than 3x higher among other vaccinated people compared to those who are not, and in the last reporting cycle, only 7 of the more than 900 people admitted to hospital for Covid are unvaccinated. Ask yourself who fills the emergency departments of hospitals in Australia and other highly vaccinated countries, and what exactly are they used for?
Every study that opposes the pharmaceutical narrative will lead others to criticize them. This is not called discrediting.
This is the case when you cannot disqualify any of the multiple reasons given for discrediting the report, as you don’t even make the effort to talk about it, which means you settle for them as valid and the exam as discredited.
Every patient? No, some patients were included more than once, as they counted adverse reactions. But the authors communicate it in their paper and show that it is not their conclusion.
No, they don’t, because they refused to compare the number of patients with the number of patients, which is the apparent way to make a valid comparison, they tried to justify their invalid way of comparing, but they did not succeed because after all, the apparent way of doing more ignored since it was proven the opposite of what they intended.
Multiple studies have shown that, apart from the elderly and/or those with other fitness issues, the relevant threat with the injection is greater than the infection-like threat: for every Covid hospitalization we have avoided through the injection, we discharge between four and a hundred (depending on the study) the serious adverse effects of the vaccine.
No, that is still completely false. There have been extraordinarily transparent attempts to distort every thing reported in the databases as if it were the outcome of vaccines, which is easily proven false when those disorders occur at the same rates in unvaccinated people, this is not a valid way to make any conclusion, this is only pro clinical misconduct and identified as such.
And the taxpayer-funded experiment continues. . . Guto Laku
When something is used for curative purposes, it is not an experiment, and less when it relies on the effects of billions of vaccines already made around the world.
Many in Japan are obviously unaware of how useless and destructive those vaccines are. “
Why would other people want to know something so true?
The facts are that in Australia, covid deaths are three times higher among vaccinated people than among those who are not.
While those deaths are expected to be more than 20 times higher depending on demographic differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, only 3 times higher means that other vaccinated people are very effectively protected. Obviously, anti-vaccine propaganda will try to hide this and claim that other vaccinated and unvaccinated people are the same, when this is not the case.
Japan on Tuesday began rolling out vaccines opposed to the Omicron variant of the coronavirus as part of efforts to stem the country’s ongoing seventh wave of COVID-19 infections.
As they say in the world of surfing, you that wave.
No, they don’t, because they refused to compare the number of patients with the number of patients, which is the apparent way to make a valid comparison, they tried to justify their invalid way of comparing, but they did not succeed because after all, the apparent way of doing more ignored since it was proven the opposite of what they intended.
Yes, the authors talked about it.
No one does that, simply arguing that other people don’t try to falsely provide their private resolution as valid or based on clinical evidence when they don’t, anyone can make irrational resolutions if necessary (and face the consequences of that resolution), but deceiving other people who need to make rational resolutions is invalid and should not be allowed.
On the contrary, and your argument is circular.
While those deaths are expected to be more than 20 times higher depending on demographic differences between vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, then only 3 times higher means that other vaccinated people are very effectively protected.
This is a completely false claim that easily opposes available government data.
As they say in the world of surfing, you that wave.
You perceive that vaccines are intended for other people for long-term exposure, right?They are not meant to solve illnesses caused by existing waves (although they could come at a cost in doing so) but to spare you the illnesses that are expected to occur. It happens with the season update that will probably generate a new wave in the short or long term.
On the contrary, and your argument is circular.
To say that they can make the resolution they want, but not to distort irrational resolutions as if they were rational is not circular in any way.
This is a completely false claim that easily opposes available government data.
Ah, do you mean the information you are looking for to use as an argument but never contribute because only you can see it?Where is this epidemiologically analyzed information showing that vaccinated and unvaccinated people are equal when it comes to Covid risk?
One point I forgot to mention in my previous point is that studies that seem to indicate that the threat of injection was greater than the threat of infection are based on knowledge received before omicron.
But today we are dealing with a much milder virus and the vast majority of other people have become inflamed and have a point of herbal immunity, the benefit/risk ratio is much higher.
One point I forgot to mention in my previous point is that studies that seem to indicate that the threat of injection was greater than the threat of infection are based on knowledge received before omicron.
If knowledge is invalidly manipulated, it means that conclusions are also invalid, wherever they come from, so the medical consensus is that vaccines are a much greater option than contracting the infection.
Retracted and invalid studies with proven methodological disorders that the authors make no effort to correct (because they have a result to push even if it means doing clinically unethical things) are not evidence that the global medical and clinical consensus is wrong.
raw beer,
for every Covid hospitalization we have prevented through injection, we discharge between four and a hundred (according to studies) serious adverse reactions to the vaccine.
Unless you classify a mild fever the next day or a “vaccine arm” as a “serious adverse reaction,” this claim is obviously and maliciously nonsense. This would involve “serious adverse effects of vaccines” across millions across Japan, a number that cannot be hidden or ignored and would provoke a huge outcry in the medical community, no matter how much money a mysterious underground organization invests in corrupting doctors.
But, of course, let him cite your sources. I’m curious.
If knowledge is invalidly manipulated, the conclusions are also invalid,
As I wrote, the authors talk in the paper about the issues they discussed about their research of the data. The document was peer-reviewed and accepted. Therefore, your comments about this exam not being valid are only your opinion, which you cannot corroborate.
You perceive that vaccines are intended for other people for long-term exposure, right?They are not intended to resolve disorders caused by existing waves.
No to the article, if you understood it:
efforts to engage the ongoing seventh wave of COVID-19
To say that they can make the resolution they want, but not to distort irrational resolutions as if they were rational is not circular in any way.
Why do you say so? That’s the dispute.
Ah, you mean the knowledge you seek to use as an argument but never bring because you can see it?
Data that is seen, because you have not provided them.
As I wrote, the authors talk in the article about the topics they discussed about their research of the data.
But not in a way that justifies making invalid comparisons when the direct maximum would be the productive maximum to be made, they argue without addressing this point with arguments that have also been discredited when their arbitrary possible choices of what deserve to be thought of as an aspect effect and what does not also enter into the conspectration. This meant that they simply did not justify their resolution and instead gave more importance to anything that was also heavily criticized for manipulation.
Therefore, your comments about this being an invalid exam are only your opinion, which you cannot corroborate.
No, this is the case, the report of the examination made through professionals is already connected here, this reference is still there, it includes many other disqualifying disorders and this is only my non-public opinion.
No to the article, if you understood it:
Again, vaccines can be used to reduce the chances of an ongoing challenge (meaning they help deal with the existing wave), but the main goal is to immunize other people with enough time to avoid the challenges of the next wave. Most people get benefits from these boosters, but obviously they are not the only ones and some other people will also get benefits in this wave, but not so much.
Why do you say so? That’s the dispute.
You are the one who claims without foundation that everything is circular even explaining how it is.
Data that is seen, because you have not provided them.
You said that the claim is false according to the data, and you did not provide anything like that, I guess it is a way of retracting what you said, but not very direct.
And when on serious adverse occasions related to the vaccine, they are explained as “an adverse occasion that manifests itself in any of the following conditions: death; risk of life at the time of the occasion; hospitalization or extension of an existing hospitalization; patience or disability/disability; a birth defect/birth defect; a medically vital occasion, founded on medical judgment. “
It’s not just someone who reports arm pain or diarrhea.
raw beer,
and you, honestly, with a direct face, claim that those things happened by millions all over Japan without realizing or alerting?The same Japan that recalled Moderna’s vaccines from its shelves after noticing impurities in a batch of vials?
Be real.
And when on serious adverse occasions related to the vaccine, they are explained as “an adverse occasion that manifests itself in any of the following conditions: death; risk of life at the time of the occasion; hospitalization or extension of an existing hospitalization; patience or disability/disability; a birth defect/birth defect; a medically vital occasion, founded on medical judgment. “
Apparently, this is addressed in the review of the article, they decide to arbitrarily forget about the disorders when they were provided after infection, and only come with disorders that were similar to others for vaccines (all considered a “significant deficiency”) all with the very apparent effect of skewing the results.
Or how obviously the report is written about the criticism
Perhaps the most important factor is that “COVID-19 events” were excluded, which at first glance makes sense, but, since COVID-19 cases were much less unusual in the placebo-controlled group, it distorts the effects for others. SAE to the vaccine group.
Simply put, they are the number of NCDs, not the number of patients who underwent an NCS. This type of research guarantees double counting of SAES – at least! – because some of the CAS or SAES teams will be linked.
Thus, again, authors may simply not (or have not wanted) to justify their decisions, which end up being subjective and evidently manifest subjectivity and a preference for invalidating effects in an invalid way.
None of the other criticisms, such as inflation bias, discovering the threat of covid in an era when covid infections were low, the absolutely opposite effects received from reports of literally billions of doses delivered worldwide, etc.
The central government plans to provide the vaccines, which are free, to those who need them until the end of the year, before the highly contagious period of the end of the year and New Year.
It is striking to see how the government predicts that the end of this year will be highly contagious, while this summer it was absolutely unprepared by the existing wave, whose infections in Japan have become the highest in the world.
This meant that they may not have simply not justified their resolution and instead gave more importance to anything they also strongly criticized for manipulation.
There is no justification for this claim.
Again, vaccines can be used to decrease the chances of an ongoing challenge (meaning they deal with the existing wave), but the main goal is to immunize other people with enough time to avoid the challenges of the next wave.
Again, badly. Especially if the next wave is directed through another variant of the one for which the new reinforcement is designed.
You are the one who claims without foundation that everything is circular even explaining how it is.
It’s there.
You said that the claim is false according to the data, and you did not provide anything like that, I guess it is a way of retracting what you said, but not very direct.
No knowledge has yet been provided; We will take that as an admission that you have one.
It is striking to see how the government predicts that the end of this year will be highly contagious, while this summer it was absolutely unprepared by the existing wave, whose infections in Japan have become the highest in the world.
How does the relief in mortality rates consistent with the case of infection mean it was taken by surprise?Omicron has higher cases everywhere, Japan adding, but if the measures were enough to lessen the threat of those infections, the desired outcome is very important. , especially for Omicron, where measures aimed at cutting instances are much less effective, so the cost/benefit ratio will have to change to cutting complications, which is advised by the world’s experts.
There is no justification for this claim.
Do you mean in the short text that you should quote? Well, no, that justification is in the rest of the text that you have to put aside to pretend that there is rarely any.
Again, badly. Especially if the next wave is directed through another variant of the one for which the new reinforcement is designed.
First, it’s not a sure thing, and second, having a greater immune reaction to the variant with the highest propagation functions means it’s much more likely to be superior for any new theoretical variant that may come after omicron than the original movements. , so it wouldn’t be and your explanation why it doesn’t do it that way.
It’s there.
And you still don’t argue that it’s circular reasoning, which means you settle for getting it wrong.
No knowledge has yet been provided; We will take that as an admission that you have one.
Since it is you who said that knowledge refuted what you quoted, that means that it is you who admit that you do not have the knowledge to make this accusation, and you recant.
and you honestly, with a straight face, claim that those things happened to millions all over Japan without realizing or alerting?
No, I don’t.
I don’t know where you get the unit numbers. Have vaccines prevented millions (or several hundred thousand) of hospitalizations in Japan among young, healthy people?