EVERYONE WHO HAS HAD AN MRNA INJECTION DIES WITHIN 3 TO 5 YEARS!

[rudder]

.....life insurance premiums are going to have to go up. They might have to market them as vaxxed versus unvaxxed policies.
.....If the shots are dangerous, I'm expecting percentage point changes, maybe more.
.....Everyone who took it dead in 4 to 5 years seems a bit outlandish.

Which life insurance policy might be more expensive? the one for the vaxxed or the other one for the unvaxxed...is the question.

If the vax blows up hearts (some of them) after a while, being unvaxxed, or rather un-mRNA-vaxxed might lead to a lower premium. That might go against the political trends.

I am thinking about getting another life insurance policy before the numbers get to high.... or else waiting and getting an unvaxxed premium.

If all the hearts of the vaxxed did explode in the next five years (an unlikely scenario, IMO), then the world might be in too much chaos for life insurance to pay out anyway, but there might be plenty of land available, possible, for rock bottom prices since there would be few inhabitants.

I would not be surprised if we'd see some percentage points of the population, or less, decrease due to sensitivity to the mRNA virus, but not everyone who took it dying off.

At this point it is impossible to know all the downstream effects of these injections. Nanolipid particles have been demonstrated to circulate throughout the body into all tissues including reproductive tissues, across the blood brain barrier and the placenta. They are designed to penetrate cell walls. Circulatory problems are just one potential negative manifestation that you have mentioned. Why are some people demonstrating negative effects while others OK?
If you gave everyone on earth a high sugar/PUFA diet, would you expect them to all die at the same time from the same physical manifestation? Would their health decline at the same rate?

[MrMan]

.....life insurance premiums are going to have to go up. They might have to market them as vaxxed versus unvaxxed policies.
.....If the shots are dangerous, I'm expecting percentage point changes, maybe more.
.....Everyone who took it dead in 4 to 5 years seems a bit outlandish.

Which life insurance policy might be more expensive? the one for the vaxxed or the other one for the unvaxxed...is the question.

If the vax blows up hearts (some of them) after a while, being unvaxxed, or rather un-mRNA-vaxxed might lead to a lower premium. That might go against the political trends.

I am thinking about getting another life insurance policy before the numbers get to high.... or else waiting and getting an unvaxxed premium.

If all the hearts of the vaxxed did explode in the next five years (an unlikely scenario, IMO), then the world might be in too much chaos for life insurance to pay out anyway, but there might be plenty of land available, possible, for rock bottom prices since there would be few inhabitants.

I would not be surprised if we'd see some percentage points of the population, or less, decrease due to sensitivity to the mRNA virus, but not everyone who took it dying off.

At this point it is impossible to know all the downstream effects of these injections. Nanolipid particles have been demonstrated to circulate throughout the body into all tissues including reproductive tissues, across the blood brain barrier and the placenta. They are designed to penetrate cell walls. Circulatory problems are just one potential negative manifestation that you have mentioned. Why are some people demonstrating negative effects while others OK?
If you gave everyone on earth a high sugar/PUFA diet, would you expect them to all die at the same time from the same physical manifestation? Would their health decline at the same rate?

We don't know if it will affect a small segment of the population adversely. or a wide variety in a variety of ways. The everyone dead in five years seems to be wild speculation.