9th. Circuit: Rona shots were medical treatment, not vaxx

[SAN compnerd]

Therefore mandates were unconstitutional.

https://x.com/DrDMartinWorld/status/1799185938179899768

[Marauder2003]

This from the 9th? Has Hell frozen over?

[TrappedinCalifornia]

I've been saying since 2021 that...

I discussed this last night and earlier this morning on sd_shooter's thread... CDC asks vaccinated people to get re-tested

The current EUA vaccines do not eradicate the virus and it appears that was not the intent as a "correlate of protection" has only recently been discovered. As a result, the three vaccines currently in the U.S. are more akin to (prophylaxis) treatments than preventives and that's a major part of the hangup in that vaccines are generally viewed (not to mention 'marketed') as preventives. Or, as I phrased it on that thread...

...While it may meet the medical understanding of 'preventive,' the current EUA vaccines do not necessarily provide 'protection' in the way most understand the term. Given that 'protect' is a crucial element in the CDC's definition of 'vaccine,' if the COVID-19 vaccines being used under the auspices of the EUA do not 'protect' and, instead, mitigate, for the vast unwashed, that would make them more closely akin to how even the medical community defines... 'treatment.'...

You can go to the linked thread and find my more complete argument in Post #25 and Post #30.

By the way, what the panel decision indicates is...

Thus, the decision evidently hasn't declared that the so-called 'vaccines' are a treatment rather than true vaccines. What it is saying is that the opinion I proffered in 2021 is valid enough for the lawsuit to continue; i.e., that the so-called 'vaccines' don't meet the pre-pandemic definitional standards for a vaccine and more closely match the medical understanding of 'treatment.'

BTW: The 9th Circuit Panel's decision can be found... Here. Note the paragraph on Page 3...

[sd_shooter]

Not even a treatment, but a cancer and blood clot accelerator

[LBDamned]

?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.jpg
...

[Creeping Incrementalism]

In my opinion, Jacobson v. Massachusetts needs to be overturned, even if it helped in this case. Or else, the U.S. needs a constitutional amendment guaranteeing bodily autonomy.

Even if a vaccine works, the government has no right to force the unvaccinated to be treated as untouchables. And if a vaccine works, then the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated.

[Vangster]

So what did we win from aside from bragging rights ?????

[peekay331]

That twitter post takes the Ninth Circuit ruling completely out of context. The Ninth Circuit did not agree that the covid shots were not, in fact, vaccines. Instead, it held that ASSUMING the plaintiff's contention that the covid shots did not prevent the spread of covid but only minimized the symptoms, then they have sufficiently alleged it as a medical treatment and not a vaccine. Whether that assumption (i.e., the plaintiff's contention that the covid shots did not prevent the spread of covid but only minimized the symptoms) is valid is what the trial would be for, and the trial court wrongly granted a summary judgment. So nowhere did the Ninth Circuit agree that covid shots were not, in fact, vaccines.

[LBDamned]

So what did we win from aside from bragging rights ?????

Clean blood and soul.

[subscriber]

Even if a vaccine works, the government has no right to force the unvaccinated to be treated as untouchables. And if a vaccine works, then the vaccinated have nothing to fear from the unvaccinated.

Clearly, the vax was not expected to prevent covid:

[TrappedinCalifornia]

Clearly, the vax was not expected to prevent covid:

Which is why, in the linked posts I provided above, I noted that they changed the definition of vaccine from 'providing immunity' to 'creating an immune response.'

As I acknowledged at the time, had they come out and said we have a potential, prophylactic treatment, I wouldn't have been so askance. But, there's a reason I refer to it as a so-called 'vaccine' in that it never met the definition of a vaccine. That's without even looking to whether it was properly tested and evaluated prior to releasing and mandating it on the public.

The quote you're playing simply exacerbated the warning signals that were already out there in regard to the so-called 'vaccines.'

[subscriber]

The covax provided immunity for the manufacturer from liability.

It almost seems like the covid virus was engineered to kill the old and sick, while the covax appears to sterilize, attenuate and kill a percentage of the young and healthy. In the bight side, if the covax kills you, then it is 100% effective against preventing covid from killing you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLD3JIWqr6w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb2YMvfvm_M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq2qwql8xBs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DMYZg8_22y8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85ZicYaZsbQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFdSzzoMwcU

[LBDamned]

The covax provided immunity for the manufacturer from liability.

It almost seems like the covid virus was engineered to kill the old and sick, while the covax appears to sterilize, attenuate and kill a percentage of the young and healthy. In the bight side, if the covax kills you, then it is 100% effective against preventing covid from killing you.

And 99% effective at preventing you from spreading covid.

[Big Chudungus]

Great the Courts have finally ruled what everyone knew from the beginning. Its like Special Olympics for these types. They get a big hug and celebration for doing something everyone else does without even thinking about it.

Too bad they haven't figured out how to suck all that poison out of everyone that got forced to take it while all Judges were ruling Judges were one of the few totally exempt Employee/Student/Traveler/etc groups.