seems to be true) and it holds through SCOTUS, this is huge, and there’s gonna be Hell to pay. And pay. And pay some more…
From a different article:
The plaintiffs alleged that the vaccines do not prevent someone from becoming infected with COVID-19 and characterized it as a treatment rather than a “traditional vaccine.”
See, I don’t know how one can rationally argue that it is a vaccine. For me, I value real vaccines. But this is not one. It does not prevents infection, nor does it prevent an infected person from spreading it. In short, it is not a vaccine. It is simply a treatment. And as a treatment it has NO legal protection–only a vaccine does. It theoretically might reduce severity (though I am not at all convinced that is true–but whatever), but then it is a treatment, not a vaccine.
Bottom line: The 9th Circuit said that the jab is not legally a vaccine, it is a treatment. And therefore it has no legal immunity, as was granted for a vaccine. THAT is my understanding of the ruling.
Attorneys everywhere rejoice, because there are going to be some BIG money suits over this…