They like to play a lot of parlor tricks like that. In this instance, they are illegitimately transferring conclusions which might hold in the immunological domain (not counting as vaxed until advertised antibody count is present and someone is regarded as "immunized") to the domains of whatever other paths the products go and have some …
They like to play a lot of parlor tricks like that. In this instance, they are illegitimately transferring conclusions which might hold in the immunological domain (not counting as vaxed until advertised antibody count is present and someone is regarded as "immunized") to the domains of whatever other paths the products go and have some sorts of (partially unknown) effects that have nothing to do with the "immunized" status.
Since this is so incredibly obvious, fraud must be the right term - they can't be *that* stupid.
They like to play a lot of parlor tricks like that. In this instance, they are illegitimately transferring conclusions which might hold in the immunological domain (not counting as vaxed until advertised antibody count is present and someone is regarded as "immunized") to the domains of whatever other paths the products go and have some sorts of (partially unknown) effects that have nothing to do with the "immunized" status.
Since this is so incredibly obvious, fraud must be the right term - they can't be *that* stupid.