The protagonists of mRNA vaccines have been blowing their trumpets daily about how good these vaccines are and playing down on the risks and adverse events and encouraging the public to go for their jabs. They refused or have yet to tell the story of the other side of the coin to give a balance picture of the pros and cons of these vaccines, to educate the people and let the people make an educated choice.
On the other hand, there are scientists and experts who put their reputation and standings as experts on the line to say that the spike protein of mRNA is toxic or poisonous. In the scientific field of research, when faced with two contrarian views, the logical and scientific approach is to debate on the two opposing positions, do more scientific research to establish the truth. This is science.
Any scientist that refused to acknowledge a different view, in this case a very dangerous point of view that could cause lives, and turn away, not wanting to know or talk about it, is not behaving like a scientist. If this toxic interpretation of the vaccine is false, fake news, that the politicians can pofma them, even arrest them and charge them for spreading lies and fake information.
What is the scientific community going to do about this? Are the real scientists going just talk and talk like the ah pehs in the kopitiam and go home and have a nice sleep after that, without clarifying anything? Or are they going to take the matter up to study them scientifically to get to the bottom of it?
When this toxic claim is not dismissed, those that continued
to praise the goodness of the mRNA vaccines, encouraging people to be
jabbed, are no different from snake oil salesmen.
If the other party turns out to be right, that the vaccine is indeed toxic, and if the protagonists and govt refused to do anything about it but continue with the jabs, sometimes in the future, the surviving generation would look back in shock and horror and asking, 'Why did they do that, injecting the population with toxic potion, the scientists supporting it, the govts encouraging it, the people happily queueing up like sheep to be jabbed?'
This matter of toxicity of the vaccine cannot be ignored and simply brushed aside as if the other party are queers, laymen or ignorant quacks. They are professionals, scientists and experts in their own rights and did not publish this for fun. When they say it is poisonous, toxic, this must be proved or disproved for the sake of humankind.
What do you think?