This is just such an absurd scientific and immunologically ignorant answer that I see get trotted out again and again that I need to respond.
The mRNA vaccine is literally a scientific miracle. We introduce a piece of RNA, which is basically in the form of the RNA that viruses use to hijack the protein generating machinery of our cells, in order to produce an antigen our immune system can respond to without the runaway potential of an actual infection.
The mRNA is broken down, antigen production stops, and our immune system is primed against a new foreign and potentially deadly pathogen.
There is no conceivable mechanism for long term effects (and here I am responding to claims around impotence, infertility, ‘changing your Genome’) - you’re literally just getting the immunological benefits of antigen stimulation without having to go through an infection. It’s Nobel prize winning. Just because it’s new doesn’t mean it isn’t highly well understood and characterised. It’s such an ignorant statement it literally hurts
Why does this matter? Perhaps it's not wise to mRNA vaccinate against every infectious disease under the Sun until the dust settles on the covid campaign. Hold that Nobel Prize for a while.
From "TFA":
In principle, a molecule can act as an anti-viral drug if it “inhibits some stage of the virus replication cycle, without being too toxic to the body’s cells [21].”
Bleach doesn't quite meet that standard. Ivermectin helps according to the clinical trials, and that lines up according this study. It's not their opinion, it's backed by evidence.
Yes we have the "fricking vaccine", but the spike protein is the problem as its toxic. Whether the vaccine's spike protein is toxic is up in the air, like Covid, the long term effects of mRNA "vaccines" are unknown entirely.
If something works better that we've been putting in humans for a lot longer, why not look into it? Why dismiss it as dewormer?
Calm down and stop running to the opposite side of the ring.