Everyone in the world knows what someone mean when they that a vaccine targets something.

You didn't even correct, you just said "technically the vaccine doesn't target anything".

>Technically no the vaccine doesn’t target anything

Is this some weird pedantism about that it's the antibodies that does the targeting?

Why? People are not gonna stop getting cancer.

What a hero

Muh reAl sPOrtS

Your stomach acid is neutralized, by the pancrease releasing bicarbonate, when it enters the small intestine. Your intestines are not a straight line from your stomach to your anal sphincter, so there is plenty of mixing going on.

If you read the paper it's questioning the reservoirs of the disease, not if it's rat or fleas.

Transmitting via fleas still requires the rats to move them, so to speak.

Would be super inconvenient if you get swelling and/pain.

Efficacy is impossible to know if not tested.

This guy is just desperate to get traction on this shitty posts.

It's really motivating when you start your motivational speech describing how low effort it is.

What would they laugh at?

>The "needs some work" was there to show that the costume could use some refinement.

Isn't that what critique is?

Take a chunk of skin in your mouth and see how hard you actually have to bite to make it hurt, let alone draw blood. Takes quite a bit of force before you get through the entire skin.

If you really want to test, try to bite through a chicken wing bone, and see how much force that takes. And a chicken bone is less dense.

How does this still come up? It's so far from the truth. If your finger bones were only as strong as a carrot you would break them every time you bumped into something, and small children would chew their fingers off.