Vaccine claims?

[Harry Bloomfield, Esq.]

nightjar laid this down on his screen :

Thanks, that was something which puzzled me.

[gareth evans]

That neither the volunteers nor the testers knew who had the vaccine and who had the placebo is irrelevant to the point that I was making.

(You would become the loser in a debate should you resort to personal remarks)

[Brian Reay]

Then I suggest that you used an entirely inappropriate form of words for that task.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaa ...

[Michael Chare]

Also there was the lockdown in the UK. I believe these were reasons why some of the trials were conducted abroad in places were the virus was more prevalent.

[John Rumm]

You claimed "If none, then the claims being made are groundless", suggesting you believed that the highly unethical practice of deliberately infecting your test subjects[1] is a requirement to get meaningful results from the study.

[1] One name for such a practice would be "manslaughter"

This is nonsense. As long you have adequate participants altogether, both groups in the study are drawn from the same general population, and exist in the same environment, then the comparative results will be meaningful.

I was not ridiculing the size of your penis. Just highlighting that your reasoning was flawed.