3 ms·
> Saying that the virus is dangerous doesn't make the vaccine safe in the long term. You might be right, but you have no basis to suppose it's safe in the long
by CogitoCogito 5y ago
> Saying that the virus is dangerous doesn't make the vaccine safe in the long term. You might be right, but you have no basis to suppose it's safe in the long run. You are just betting it because tv told you so.
I'm not supposing it's safe in the long term. I'm supposing _nothing_ about the long term because we don't have that information. Maybe it is not safe in the long term. We'll find out some day I guess. Maybe it will lead to unexpected health _benefits_ in the long term? Who knows? So why would you weigh the potential dangers over any other potential advantages of taking it?
Anyway here are two serious questions to you:
1. Specifically how long is long enough before you'd consider the vaccine safe (compared of course to all the problems that can be caused by not taking the vaccine).
2. Do you feel ashamed allowing your fellow citizens to take on this potential risk and you forgoing when it helps end the pandemic for you and them? (Feel free to ignore this question if you are vaccinated, but are just being argumentative.)
- codeflow2202 5y ago1. Normal vaccines take 5 to 10 years to be approved. Covid mrna therapies have been rushed and they aren't even experimenting it correctly. The only data they are taking is what goes in the VAERS database, but if you even try to mention those numbers you get the usual answer that those numbers are meaningless. So tell me: if someone wants to know what the benefit/risk ratio of the therapy is, where should the numbers be found? 2. You cannot force people into taking experimental therapies even if you tricked half of the population into taking them.