Those mRNA shots are not vaccines.
During David's interview he addressed the misuse of the term 'vaccine' when talking about mRNA technology.
Dr. David Martin: 'Definition' of mRNA and use of the term 'vaccine' [transcribed from Focus on Fauci Interview]
For anyone working on legislation in your state it will become imperative to get the terms right and not stipulate that mRNA is a vaccine.
It is apparent that we will need to ensure that we add language that
addresses a [no to a mandate for a medical device mandate] which
is not on most legislators radar at this time.
RE-Capped below. Starts at around 1 hour and 40 minutes into this program.
David Martin from January 5, 2021 Focus on Fauci event
Let’s make sure we are clear… This is not a vaccine. They are using the term “vaccine” to sneak this thing under public health exemptions. This is not a vaccine.
This is mRNA packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell. It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator. It is not a vaccine. Vaccines actually are a legally defined term under public health law; they are a legally defined term under CDC and FDA standards. And the vaccine specifically has to stimulate both the immunity within the person receiving it and it also has to disrupt transmission.
And that is not what this is. They (Moderna and Pfizer) have been abundantly clear in saying that the mRNA strand that is going into the cell is not to stop the transmission, it is a treatment. But if it was discussed as a treatment, it would not get the sympathetic ear of public health authorities because then people would say, “What other treatments are there?”
The use of the term vaccine is unconscionable for both the legal definition and also it is actually the sucker punch to open and free discourse… Moderna was started as a chemotherapy company for cancer, not a vaccine manufacturer for SARSCOV2. If we said we are going to give people prophylactic chemotherapy for the cancer they don’t yet have, we’d be laughed out of the room because it’s a stupid idea. That’s exactly what this is. This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small package of technology that is being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.
And I refuse to stipulate in any conversations that this is in fact a vaccine issue. The only reason why the term is being used is to abuse the 1905 Jacobson case that has been misrepresented since it was written. And if we were honest with this, we would actually call it what it is: it is a chemical pathogen device that is actually meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It is a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, it is not a biologic system, it is a physical technology - it happens to just come in the size of a molecular package.
So, we need to be really clear on making sure we don’t fall for their game. Because their game is if we talk about it as a vaccine then we are going to get into a vaccine conversation but this is not, by their own admission, a vaccine. As a result it must be clear to everyone listening that we will not fall for this failed definition just like we will not fall for their industrial chemical definition of health. Both of them are functionally flawed and are an implicit violation of the legal construct that is being exploited. I get frustrated when I hear activists and lawyers say, “we are going to fight the vaccine”. If you stipulate it’s a vaccine you’ve already lost the battle. It’s not a vaccine. It is made to make you sick.
80% of the people exposed to SARSCOV2 are asymptomatic carriers. 80% of people who get this injected into them experience a clinical adverse event. You are getting injected with a chemical substance to induce illness, not to induce an immuno-transmissive response. In other words, nothing about this is going to stop you from transmitting anything. This is about getting you sick and having your own cells be the thing that get you sick.
When the paymaster for the distribution of information happens to be the industry that’s doing the distributing, we lose. Because the only narrative is the one that will be compensated by the people writing the check. That goes for our politicians… and our media - it has been paid for - if you follow the money you realize there is no non-conflicted voice on any network.
 The word “vaccine” originates from the Latin Variolae vaccinae (cowpox), which Edward Jenner demonstrated in 1798 could prevent smallpox in humans. Today the term ‘vaccine’ applies to all biological preparations, produced from living organisms, that enhance immunity against disease and either prevent (prophylactic vaccines) or, in some cases, treat disease (therapeutic vaccines). From: http://www.phrma-jp.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/old/library/vaccine-factbook_e/1_Basic_Concept_of_Vaccination.pdf
This is a mRNA, packaged in a fat envelope that is delivered to a cell.
It is a medical device designed to stimulate the human cell into becoming a pathogen creator.
It is not a vaccine.
Vaccine is a legally defined term. Under Public Health Law and CDC/FDA Standards.
A vaccine has to stimulate both immunity within the person receiving it
and also has to disrupt transmission.
The use of the word ‘vaccine’ is wrong.
This is a mechanical device in the form of a very small packet of technology – being inserted into the human system to activate the cell to become a pathogen manufacturing site.
Do not stipulate that this is a vaccine issue.
It is a chemical pathogen device meant to unleash a chemical pathogen production action within a cell. It's a medical device, not a drug because it meets the CDRH definition of a device. It is not a living system, not a biological system. It is a physical technology. It just happens to come in the size of a molecular package.