Right, I get it. I agree with everything you said. You are rational and correct. However, none of that is to my point. The OP said, "The US has an active, v

Right, I get it. I agree with everything you said. You are rational and correct. However, none of that is to my point. The OP said, "The US has an active, very vocal anti-vax community." and then said "The first sign of trouble of any kind with a new COVID-19 vaccine would result in a backlash of biblical proportions. It could be so strong as to derail any attempt at a follower." That's what I am objecting to, I don't think that anti-vaxxer superstition would be increased by a bunch of scientists saying, "yeah, there's a side-effect" because that's not superstition, eh? I'm finding it hard to articulate my point, which is weird because it seems to clear to me in my mind. I don't think the masses would chuck science in the bin and huddle in fear, unvaccinated, waiting to see if they live or die from covad, just because there is some side-effect of the vaccine, unless it was somehow more horrible than, uh, huddling in fear, vaccinated but with some side-effects, waiting to see if they live or die from covad.