RE:RE:RE:RE:Rapid Tests In fact he was the author of the words ....all of them ....not only the part of them used in a title to convey a "completely" different narrative. He was NOT the source of the article (while he may have been the subject) or it's headline (obviously you weren't). My response ....an accurate one, was that the article source/writer was purposefully taking words out of context. What are you talking about ....he (the head of the FDA) was specifically referring to not authorizing vaccines unless the two reasons given were met.
Actually it's terrible DD imho because you've tried to justify your response by taking everything out of context ...just like the individual who wrote the headline.
Testing is a great thing ...it's why I'm invested in THRM. At least we can agree on that.
Cheers!
martindale wrote: Sure context needs to be accounted for, agreed. But. 1 IDID NOT WRITE THE HEADLINE.. 2 CORRECT please Reread that sentence and understand it’s meaning.. 3 it has not been Authorized has it.. ? , 4 The suspect source WAS ThE HEAD of the FDA...he left in JANUARY 2021. How’s that for DD. Oh Nd 5 I am not anti anything if it is BENIFICIAL.. testing isn’t a bad thing.. treating something is a whole different bag of cats.. JMO.. figure out what yours is..
Smokey1958 wrote: You need to finish the sentence ....or this is unbelievably misleading ....and we don't need bashers seizing on false info.
The actual statement reads "In the end FDA will not authorize or approve a vaccine that we would not be comfortable giving to our own families."
Also in part ".....authorize or approve a vaccine that has met the agencies rigorous expectations for safety and effectiveness...."
While the article may be recent (very suspect source) the announcement was from months ago. Fabricated articles like this try to completely destroy credibility. Please carry out DD before you post.
Cheers!