Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 09:23:53 AMHeadline of your link:

Were Lab Animals Killed After mRNA Vaccination Trials to Hide Long-Term Adverse Consequences?

From the first sentence,

QuoteScientists could follow test animals for a while post-vaccination, to keep humans safe – but they chose not to

From further down in the article,

QuoteWe can see that not only this mouse became sick right when it was vaccinated, but her illness also went into overdrive after the booster shot.

We will probably be assured that this is an "extremely rare case."

I hope it is!

But how can we be sure it is "rare"?

After all, in most experiments, mice and monkeys were killed shortly after vaccination, as if the scientists intentionally did not want to follow them up.

Even further down,

QuoteSo, if mice could be followed for just 14 months, it would be roughly equivalent to following people for 38-47 years.

They did not do it!

Zen, by now even you should be getting the point of the article. rats in the vaccine experiment were not kept alive long enough to study long term effects. Do you get it now??   

Quote from: Possum on July 07, 2023, 10:47:06 AMFrom the first sentence, From further down in the article,
Even further down, 

Zen, by now even you should be getting the point of the article. rats in the vaccine experiment were not kept alive long enough to study long term effects. Do you get it now??   

You're moving goalposts.  The author who claims that the mouse became sick directly after the vaccination is making things up, unless they were one of the scientists.  The whole article is basically baseless speculation.

Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 10:53:23 AMYou're moving goalposts.  The author who claims that the mouse became sick directly after the vaccination is making things up, unless they were one of the scientists.  The whole article is basically baseless speculation.

Prove it.

Quote from: Possum on July 07, 2023, 11:06:56 AMProve it.

That's not how it works.  The person making the claim is required to support their claim to be believed.   

Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 11:22:24 AMThat's not how it works.  The person making the claim is required to support their claim to be believed.   

He did. You didn't.

Quote from: Possum on July 07, 2023, 11:24:45 AMHe did. You didn't.

He didn't provide support for any of his claims, that I remember.  He said the tumor showed up after that vaccination.  He had arrows pointing to a picture of a mouse as proof.  If he's not one of the scientists involved with developing/testing the vaccine, which I'd gladly be everything he's not, then there is no reason to believe that is even a mouse that was involved in the vaccine.  There's also no reason to believe, since it's not an actual mouse from the vaccine testing, that anything the arrows point to are tumors, much less tumor in mice involved in testing.  That doesn't even address that he never proved the alleged tumor came into existence after the vaccine.

Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 11:41:42 AMHe didn't provide support for any of his claims, that I remember.  He said the tumor showed up after that vaccination.  He had arrows pointing to a picture of a mouse as proof.  If he's not one of the scientists involved with developing/testing the vaccine, which I'd gladly be everything he's not, then there is no reason to believe that is even a mouse that was involved in the vaccine.  There's also no reason to believe, since it's not an actual mouse from the vaccine testing, that anything the arrows point to are tumors, much less tumor in mice involved in testing.  That doesn't even address that he never proved the alleged tumor came into existence after the vaccine.

Reread the article.

Quote from: Possum on July 07, 2023, 01:23:00 PMReread the article.

Quote from: Possum on July 07, 2023, 01:23:00 PMReread the article.

Ok  so I re-read it, and looked at the details of the actual study.  Here's my updated view of what is being claimed:

One mouse apparently died due to  a fast growing lymphoma. 

It's perfectly normal to kill test animals after testing.

The author is basically claiming that the other mice were killed to cover up something that COULD happen in the future, but hasn't yet.

So, overall  a non-story UNLESS a large number of people start dying from the same lymphoma.

Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 02:20:32 PMOk  so I re-read it, and looked at the details of the actual study.  Here's my updated view of what is being claimed:

One mouse apparently died due to  a fast growing lymphoma. 

It's perfectly normal to kill test animals after testing.

The author is basically claiming that the other mice were killed to cover up something that COULD happen in the future, but hasn't yet.

So, overall  a non-story UNLESS a large number of people start dying from the same lymphoma.

What was he author saying?

Quote from: Possum on July 07, 2023, 02:28:41 PMWhat was he author saying?

Again  he implies that something very normal, killing of test animals, was done to cover up something.

Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 02:39:50 PMAgain  he implies that something very normal, killing of test animals, was done to cover up something.

Then why didn't they let them live?

Quote from: Solar on July 07, 2023, 03:00:36 PMThen why didn't they let them live?

No idea. From what I've read, some animals are used more than once, while others are killed.  I don't know the criteria.

Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 03:05:37 PMNo idea. From what I've read, some animals are used more than once, while others are killed.  I don't know the criteria.

Real hard to study long term effects if the evidence is destroyed.

Quote from: ZenMode on July 07, 2023, 03:05:37 PMNo idea. From what I've read, some animals are used more than once, while others are killed.  I don't know the criteria.

As a former lab tech, very seldom are lab rats used more than once where testing toxins are concerned.
Effects of gasses, non lethal substances where simple reactions are categorized and noted, does not justifying destroying the animals.
But in this case, the only reason to destroy the animals, is autopsy, as to why the animal was too sick to continue testing.
My guess is, none of these animals were going to survive and they knew it. They also knew the Jabb was poison.