Another one who doesn't understand the purpose of the EMA and does not understand what decentralized agency means.
Nope. You're not going to do that. You're going to address the main issue, which is your false claim that a study indicated boosters destroy the immune system.
I know it's not entirely your fault because the Bloomberg article had an unfortunate headline, but you need to absorb this because you are still responsible for spreading disinformation:
--
Do you agree that the video of the news conference I referenced directly relates to the article you posted?
Did you watch the video I linked to, and did you see what was said at the 28 minute mark?
Do you agree that there is no study referenced in the article indicating that boosters "destroy" the immune system?
Do you agree that there is no study referenced in the press conference about which the article was written that indicates that boosters "destroy" the immune system?
Do you agree that the participants at the EMA news conference did not intend to suggest that boosters could "weaken" immune systems?
Do you agree that Marco Cavaleri makes no reference to any study as you asserted "[that] shows the damaging effects of continuing to push boosters against the virus showing they are destroying our immune systems."
Do you agree that Marco Cavaleri was talking about was the possibility of boosters becoming less effective with repeated boosters. And that he was NOT talking about the immune system being "destroyed" by the boosters.
Do you agree that what Marco Cavaleri was talking about when he said there was a risk "fatiguing the population" that what he was talking about was people getting irritated at having to get boosters all the time.
And for clarification, this is what I am referencing:
Marco Cavaleri: Yeah indeed there are two concerns here...is that if we have a strategy in which we give boosters let's say every four months approximately we will end up potentially having problem with the immune response and the immune response may end up not being as good as we would like it to be so we should be careful in not overloading the immune system with repeated immunization and secondly of course there is uh the risk of fatiguing the population with the continuous administration of boosters now as said if the situation from an epidemiological perspective is such that it might be the best option on the table then it can be done once or maybe twice but it's not something that we can think should be repeated constantly and it would be much better to start thinking about an administration of boosters that is more spaced in time and ideally if we want to move towards a scenario of endemicity then such booster should be synchronized with the arrival of the cold season in each of the hemispheres similarly to what we are doing with influenza vaccine so now we will have to think about how we can transition from the current steel pandemic setting to a more endemic setting in which this would be the desirable option."
And here is the associated section of the video:
( thread winner )
