This is definitely a free speech/democracy issue. Why nobody discusses the facts instead: - no vaccine was/is ever tested against inert placebo in clinical tri

This is definitely a free speech/democracy issue. Why nobody discusses the facts instead: - no vaccine was/is ever tested against inert placebo in clinical trial. How the hell can we let manufacturers get away with this? - majority of (media) cited epidemiological studies around safety are just (very) bad - so as a result we have here following situation: people claiming to be injured (also killed) by untested and massively deployed product (that also saves lives, yes) and we have no data to calculate the benefit/risk ratio. Instead we just vilify them. I can understand how/why (majority of) scientific community maintains the old reductionist paradigm. But how this can stay out of scope of investigative media is beyond me. (edit: formatting/grammar)