On a separate note, this paper doesn't seem to mention any "negative aspects of the vaccine" - It seems to be concluding that [the likes of AstraZeneca etc. perform better on some measures than the mRNA favorites.] edit: I previously stated the conclusion backwards.
> In a setting of HIV vaccination, a study compared repeated immunizations with two related HIV vaccine formats. The authors described that the protection of one vaccine composition correlated with the induction of IgG1 and IgG3 Abs, whereas the other vaccine composition hardly showed any protection, which correlated with the generation of IgG4 upon repeated immunizations instead.
Right; self-proving point. Also notice I wasn't even espousing them as fact in this context, just providing examples of things one isn't allowed to say.
At the cost of my own karma, let me tell you why. This entire thread is a digression from the articles topic, and meanders around the well worn parts of a contentious political talking point. It serves no purpose. You shouldn’t have responded to the OP. No one should have responded to you, and I should have also left this piece of old flame bait alone.
We aren’t supposed to have pointless arguments and I insightful snark. We are supposed to bring up tangents only if we have something new to add.
I agree with you, but I think it's fine to continue commenting on these threads once they've been flagged, because at that point only people who opt into [showdead] will be able to see them.
Devil's advocate: They'll also "survive" being "misgendered." Maybe embarrassing/rude event, to be avoided if possible, but not everything has to be "systemic -ism."
This would otherwise be expensive and wasteful of water and energy, but it doesn't take much of either to keep the shower flooded with steam. Plus I'm not drying out my skin while trying to stay warm with too-hot water; cool water in the hot environment feels great for wash 'n rinse. It also feels good to breathe the steam.
