4 ms·

I see that you’re suffering from the common affliction of having a strong opinion about something you have no clue about: vaccines have not been approved for th

by TomVDB 5y ago

I see that you’re suffering from the common affliction of having a strong opinion about something you have no clue about: vaccines have not been approved for those younger than 12. Now that your knowledge level has increased, will you please stop endangering others and take the vaccine? Thanks!

h_anna_h 5y ago
> vaccines have not been approved for those younger than 12 And I suggest that this should be changed. Chill and try to be less toxic please. You don't know if I have taken or not the vaccine so please don't assume.
- TomVDB 5y ago
  Apologies. I mistakenly thought that I was replying to the one I originally replied to, who stated they weren’t vaccinated. I have no empathy and patience left anymore for those people.
tomp 5y ago
I love how people repeat propaganda without thinking, claiming both “vaccines are 100% safe” and “we need to wait to make sure vaccines are safe for children” without even noticing the logical contradiction...
- TomVDB 5y ago
  I love how people like you think that building a strawman is effective at making an argument: nobody claims vaccines are 100% safe. They are not. But when the risk of adverse effects of a vaccine is lower than 0.001% and the risk of adverse effects of not having a vaccine is many orders of magnitude higher, the choice is obvious. It makes total sense to stagger the testing and deployment based on age groups, especially for COVID-19: due to the insane mortality rate a high age, the benefits of vaccine far outweighed the risk of not doing it. The fact that these elderly automatically functioned as a huge test group for further deployment for others was a very convenient additional benefit. Likewise, it also makes total sense to be more cautious for kids. The younger they are, the higher the consequences. Try again.

4 ms·

I see that you’re suffering from the common affliction of having a strong opinion about something you have no clue about: vaccines have not been approved for th

by TomVDB 5y ago

h_anna_h 5y ago
> vaccines have not been approved for those younger than 12 And I suggest that this should be changed. Chill and try to be less toxic please. You don't know if I have taken or not the vaccine so please don't assume.
- TomVDB 5y ago
  Apologies. I mistakenly thought that I was replying to the one I originally replied to, who stated they weren’t vaccinated. I have no empathy and patience left anymore for those people.
tomp 5y ago
I love how people repeat propaganda without thinking, claiming both “vaccines are 100% safe” and “we need to wait to make sure vaccines are safe for children” without even noticing the logical contradiction...
- TomVDB 5y ago
  I love how people like you think that building a strawman is effective at making an argument: nobody claims vaccines are 100% safe. They are not. But when the risk of adverse effects of a vaccine is lower than 0.001% and the risk of adverse effects of not having a vaccine is many orders of magnitude higher, the choice is obvious. It makes total sense to stagger the testing and deployment based on age groups, especially for COVID-19: due to the insane mortality rate a high age, the benefits of vaccine far outweighed the risk of not doing it. The fact that these elderly automatically functioned as a huge test group for further deployment for others was a very convenient additional benefit. Likewise, it also makes total sense to be more cautious for kids. The younger they are, the higher the consequences. Try again.