XponentialChaos
Platinum Member
- Jul 25, 2018
- 28,659
- 10,516
- 435
It supports it.LOL - Answer my question and you will see.Answer my question and I will answer yours. Simple. Why would scientists bother developing a vaccine if there is no immunity.One way conversations don't work. At least you and I, although we dislike one another, answer each other's questions. I asked him a simple one and he refuses. Only defect is him. And you, Lone Leftists, if you agree with him.
I've made one simple request from you. Show me a medical expert who agrees with your statement.
I don't think that's too much to ask. And look how you've responded. You're avoiding that like the plague.
Coronavirus vaccines: how to choose the best
Developers and funders are laying the groundwork for efficacy trials, but only a handful of vaccines are likely to make the cut.www.nature.com
Be specific. How exactly are you going to answer my question after I answer yours?
Mine is a simple one. Funny how you avoid answering and I gave you a link. Want a link on how vaccines work? I can provide that too.
Do you think the link supports your argument? Because it doesn't. Just like the other three.
Show me a link that supports your argument.
Vaccines work on the assumption of immunity. There would not all these vaccines in the work if scientists did not believe receiving a tiny dose gives you immunity.
We still don't know if the vaccines work yet, dumbass. That's why they're going to start testing them.
You claim to know that you're immune. Show me a source that confirms that. You keep ignoring this. I wonder why.
The theory behind how vaccines work is still the same. Assumption of immunity.
Sure. But we don't have a vaccine yet, at least not one that is proven to work. Yet you're claiming that you're immune. Show me a source that confirms this.
I answered your question. Now it's your turn. Quit dodging.