>>13712505>So a surgery isn't a surgery anymore if it's done by laser and robot instead of humans hands and knifes?Strawman. The mechanism of surgery was not included in the definition of surgery. "Vaccine" for the past 150 years required a dead, attenuated, or even live virus to be present because it was included as the mechanism for immune response
**On a side note, if you were given a shot that causes your body to artificially "excise" a tumor it obviously would not be called surgery. This is analogous to COVID jabs. You are given a shot that DOES NOT have antigenic material within it. You are given a shot that makes your body produce the antigenic material which your body then thinks is the virus and naturally builds an immune response to it. Same goal, vaguely similar mechanisms, but it's completely differ than "surgery" and nobdy would ever call it that.
Your example of "robot vs human hands" is such a similar mechanism it's practically like the different ways to kill a virus for a real vaccine.
>A stove isn't a stove anymore if it doesn't run on wood and fire?Strawman. The mechanism of heating was not included in the definition of a stove."Vaccine" for the past 150 years required a dead, attenuated, or even live virus to be present because it was included as the mechanism for immune response
>We don't invent entire new words for basically the same thing "Immunomodulation" is not a new word which is what the COOF jab is: a therapeutic mRNA immunomodulator, not a vaccine.
Some immunomodulators are vaccines, some are not. The correct way to determine if an immunomodulator is a vaccine is whether or not it has dead, attenuated, or live viral organisms in it.
Now, with the new highjacked definition of vaccine, nano robots will someday fit the definition as long as they have angigenic properties. Are robots vaccines? Fucking of course not. They should be called "immunomodulator-bots" But that is where this dishonesty has left us.
