8 ms·

I don't think we understand the true legal ramifications yet, of forcing an experimental vaccine on so many. We knew about the pericarditis, the myocarditis, t

I don't think we understand the true legal ramifications yet, of forcing an experimental vaccine on so many. We knew about the pericarditis, the myocarditis, the blood clots, and the autoimmune disorders, the deaths, they are well documented in VAERS, even if massively undercounted. And yet, our political class did not stop Then Delta emerged, and vaccine efficacy dropped wholesale. Work was made conditional based on jabs. Science became a mantra, but in actuality it was ignored as the strong evidence for natural immunity was silenced. Bigtech previcated, and floundered, attaching notes to obituaries and criticism. Disinformation replaced information, as vaxxes were pushed on those with de minimis risk of covid, the 18 year olds without co-morbidities with 1 in 5 million chances of dying. And yet, our political class did not stop. Now, other democracies with medical systems in many cases matching our own are halting some of the vaccine distribution. It looks like the Chinese with their attenuated vaccines definitely had a better approach. But there is still an active mandate in several sectors of the economy, and an unconstituional campaign to deny religious exemptions that will likely eviscerate employment. Nurses are leaving in droves rather than vaccinate, having seen the side effects up close and personal. When will our political class stop? I sincerely believe we are ahead of the curve on a wave of class action lawsuits the likes of which this country has never seen. Tobacco, Asbestos, and every other toxic substances could pale in comparison to the potential payouts from the deaths, injuries, and reduced longevity coming from these leaky, toxic vaccines.

margalabargala 5y ago
>forcing an experimental vaccine on so many I'm not aware of an experimental vaccine being forced on anyone, can you provide an example? Back when all vaccines were operating under an EUA and were experimental, there were zero vaccine mandates. After a vaccine was fully approved and shown to be unequivocally safe and effective, it was then no longer experimental. Mandating vaccines that are shown to be effective and safe is as old as the USA is as a country, and this is no outlier.
- bjt2n3904 5y ago
  Yeah, it wasn't forced on anyone! Nobody grabbed you and held you down and injected you... You just couldn't travel, go out in public, work at your job, or send your kids to school without it. Totally voluntary.
  - margalabargala 5y ago
    What country are you in that disallowed being in public without a vaccine? That didn't happen anywhere in the US that I'm aware of. As for the rest, again, mandating vaccination is something the US has been doing over and over since the year 1777. This is nothing new. The parent claimed that this vaccine mandate was specifically paired with the vaccine still being in an experimental state, which to my knowledge is not the case.
    - rajin444 5y ago
      I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. Especially when the definition was changed in the past year.
      - margalabargala 5y ago
        > I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. That's a fair point, I agree. > Especially when the definition was changed in the past year. Could you elaborate on this part? I went ahead and checked the dictionary definition: > A substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease. Which tracks with what I remember from my molecular bio degree ten years ago.
        grillvogel 5y ago
        the CDC recently changed their definition of vaccine from (paraphrasing) "something that provides immunity to disease" to "something that provides protection from a disease" https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article254111268.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article25411126...
- iammisc 5y ago
  There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Most working people now need one to work or they face termination as loss of livelihood Stop pretending it's not required. We're not all trust finders.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Comirnaty (Pfizer-BioNTech) is fully approved for those 16 and over, and has been since late August.
    - hhw3h 5y ago
      From my understanding you can’t get the actual distinct Comirnaty version when you go in and get the shot. They only have EUA Pfizer supplies. Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile.
      - dragonwriter 5y ago
        > Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile. AFAIK, any different liability profile between an EUA and approved product is moot in the case of COVID vaccines, because they are out of both normal liability regimes and standard vaccine liability regimes and covered by the PREP Act pandemic countermeasures regime which does not make a distinction.
      - iammisc 5y ago
        Yup... A different liability and legal profile.
  - margalabargala 5y ago
    You're mistaken. The Pfizer vaccine is fully approved and available in the United States. Source: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr... I never claimed it wasn't required, just that what was required was not experimental.
- colechristensen 5y ago
  Unequivocal? There is literally no doubt as to the “safety”? That is demonstratively not true. On several occasions, several of the vaccines have been halted by several separate health authorities over safety concerns. That is not zero doubt. This story is about exactly that. You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. People don’t understand risks very well nor can they compare risks very well and that has been demonstrated over and over again. Covid vs vaccine risks vary quite a lot depending on what kind of person you are. If you are quite old or have significant health problems, it is pretty easy to demonstrate with high confidence that the vaccine risk is way smaller than the Covid risk (many orders of magnitude). If you are very young (say a healthy teenager) the Covid risk is very low and the uncertainties of the vaccine risks start to compete where it is much harder to have confidence that for a population vaccinating is a better idea. People also can have different appetites for risk and different appetites for the good of the individual vs the good of the many. The problems with vaccination are many people pretend they are perfect or evil who are either knowingly distorting the truth or repeating lies or dogma. Also many people desire authoritarian solutions for everyone to agree with them. What is actually needed are attempts to accurately represent risks and unknowns, and comparisons of those risks and unknowns which update over time as the unknowns get smaller. There also needs to be the ability to acknowledge that a crossover point may exist where on one side one decision may be better than on the other. People though are being used to turn any contentious issue into political dogma and opportunities to signal morality. The situation is not as simple as you and many people make it.
  - margalabargala 5y ago
    > You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. I think you may have misread my comment. I agree that "emergency authorization" constitutes "experimental". My point is that there is now a vaccine that is no longer experimental, i.e. is as fully FDA approved as any other, and the mandates in place were put there after that approval. To the rest of your comment, when dealing with a contagious disease which spreads throughout society, I think that the people participating in a society should be able to set prerequisites for participating in that society. One person's rights end where another's begin, and with contagious diseases, a given person's low risk of death does not prevent them from spreading it to someone with much higher risk.
- StanislavPetrov 5y ago
  >After a vaccine was fully approved and shown to be unequivocally safe and effective Nothing developed 15 months ago can be shown to be "unequivocally safe". No matter what your position on COVID vaccines, its simply a matter of fact that there's no way to know the long term effects of something that hasn't been around for long.
  - margalabargala 5y ago
    There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. But that's a fair point, "unequivocally" is a strong word. Would you be okay with "safe and unequivocally effective"?
    - shock 5y ago
      > There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. Unless, the vaccine causes a "reprogramming" of the immune system, like some viruses do. Have you considered this vector in your analysis?
- shock 5y ago
  In Europe all the vaccines that are authorized have a "conditional marketing authorization" with a 1 year time limit, and many countries have vaccine mandates. Under EMA, for a vaccine to be "fully approved" it needs to have a standard marketing authorization; none of the COVID vaccines do.
  - orra 5y ago
    And? The original bullshit claim was that the vaccines are “experimental”. A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this.
    - shock 5y ago
      > A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this. Please provide a citation for this claim. My reading of the EMA page for Conditional Marketing Authorization states: "Its use is also intended for a public health emergency (e.g. a pandemic). _For these medicines, less comprehensive pharmaceutical and non-clinical data may also be accepted_". The fact that less comprehensive farmaceutical data is accepted for CMA leads me to believe they are experimental.
      - orra 5y ago
        See the section "What are the main differences between the EU's Conditional Marketing Authorisation and the Emergency Use Authorisation issued by some other countries?", onwards. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_20_2390 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... (this is from the EC, not as I remembered the EMA) It explains amongst other things that a Conditional Marketing Authorisation (CMA) is a real, controlled and robust, authorisation of the vaccine; this is unlike the Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA), which is really an authorisation of the use of an unauthorised vaccine. A CMA requires data on safety and efficacy, showing the benefits outweigh the risks. An EUA has no such requirement.
- angelzen 5y ago
  > California pushes 1st US vaccine mandate for schoolchildren https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-education-california-gavin-newsom-575ef3be2c5c2600664fa48c08041abd https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-educa...
orra 5y ago
> Then Delta emerged, and vaccine efficacy dropped wholesale. This is bollocks. Pre-Delta, if double vaccinated the vaccines are about 95% effective against severe illness and death. Post Delta, about 92%. That's still incredible, and actually pretty high as vaccines go.
- stock_toaster 5y ago
  Further, even in cases of "breakthrough" infection, mortality rate is significantly reduced with the vaccine vs unvaccinated. I think people just assume that a "breakthrough" means "didn't work", but that isn't necessarily the case!
  - Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
    Yup! Breakthrough infection and breakthrough disease are entirely different things. Ask any ICU nurse what percentage of their COVID patients are unvaccinated. Every article I've seen reports at least 90% are unvaccinated, and of the remaining 10% that were, they were either very old or had a severe immune deficiency.
    - vkou 5y ago
      > Ask any ICU nurse what percentage of their COVID patients are unvaccinated. Every article I've seen reports at least 90% are unvaccinated, and of the remaining 10% that were, they were either very old or had a severe immune deficiency. My grandfather was vaccinated, but is immuno-deficient, and just caught it from a visit to the hospital. Between his age, and the state of his immune system, he was at death's door for two weeks. If the hospital weren't full of unvaccinated COVID patients to begin with, it's far less likely he would have picked it up there (He doesn't exactly leave the house, except to go the doctor.) As it turns out, the prevalence of the former leads to the latter.
      - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
        A leaky vaccine means that many vaccinated are spreading it. Evidence: "New data was released by the CDC showing that vaccinated people infected with the delta variant can carry detectable viral loads similar to those of people who are unvaccinated, though in the vaccinated, these levels rapidly diminish. There is also some question about how cultivatable—or viable—this virus retrieved from vaccinated people actually is. " [1] "Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people. Physical distancing measures remain critical to reduce SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant transmission." [2] [1] https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/new-data-on-covid-19-transmission-by-vaccinated-individuals https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/new-data-on-covid-19-trans... [2] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897733 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897733
paganel 5y ago
Vaccine is the only thing that can (and does) make this pandemic manageable. I write this comment from Bucharest, where vaccine hesitancy (among other factors) have made it so that only about 30% of the adult population is vaccinated. We have ambulance queues in front of most of the Covid hospitals, patients are "deposited" (for lack of a better word) on hospital hallways, the luckier ones on make-shift beds, the more recent ones on chairs, hanging on to an oxygen tube between their legs. Almost all the other European countries have higher vaccination rates than us, they do not have our current problems.
- shock 5y ago
  > Vaccine is the only thing that can (and does) make this pandemic manageable. This is false. There are treatments available, like monoclonal antibodies, they just have not been publicized as much. Somebody, somewhere made a choice to push the vaccines and not the monoclonal antibodies. As an interesting fact, before the pandemic the knowledge to produce the nanolipid capsule existed in only 2 small companies worldwide. Big scale facilities for producing the nanolipid particles necessary for the mRNA vaccines were non-existent, they had to be built. Just as well, facilities for producing monoclonal antibodies en-masse could have been built, but were not.
  - cedilla 5y ago
    Nobody made that choice. Treatment and prevention are not the same thing.
  - koboll 5y ago
    Monoclonal antibodies cost thousands of dollars per transfusion. A vaccine costs a couple bucks. We are not going to make the pandemic manageable with monoclonal antibodies. The reason governments made the choice to push vaccines over them is because vaccines are actually in the range of economic possibility.
    - shock 5y ago
      The vaccines cost in the tens of dollars, depending on the negociating power of the country/bloc. Their cost, as well as the cost of monoclonal antibodies, depends on the economies of scale. Monoclonal antibodies are easier to produce than mRNA vaccines, so at similar production scale should be cheaper.

margalabargala 5y ago

>forcing an experimental vaccine on so many I'm not aware of an experimental vaccine being forced on anyone, can you provide an example? Back when all vaccines were operating under an EUA and were experimental, there were zero vaccine mandates. After a vaccine was fully approved and shown to be unequivocally safe and effective, it was then no longer experimental. Mandating vaccines that are shown to be effective and safe is as old as the USA is as a country, and this is no outlier.

bjt2n3904 5y ago
Yeah, it wasn't forced on anyone! Nobody grabbed you and held you down and injected you... You just couldn't travel, go out in public, work at your job, or send your kids to school without it. Totally voluntary.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  What country are you in that disallowed being in public without a vaccine? That didn't happen anywhere in the US that I'm aware of. As for the rest, again, mandating vaccination is something the US has been doing over and over since the year 1777. This is nothing new. The parent claimed that this vaccine mandate was specifically paired with the vaccine still being in an experimental state, which to my knowledge is not the case.
  - rajin444 5y ago
    I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. Especially when the definition was changed in the past year.
    - margalabargala 5y ago
      > I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. That's a fair point, I agree. > Especially when the definition was changed in the past year. Could you elaborate on this part? I went ahead and checked the dictionary definition: > A substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease. Which tracks with what I remember from my molecular bio degree ten years ago.
      - grillvogel 5y ago
        the CDC recently changed their definition of vaccine from (paraphrasing) "something that provides immunity to disease" to "something that provides protection from a disease" https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article254111268.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article25411126...
iammisc 5y ago
There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Most working people now need one to work or they face termination as loss of livelihood Stop pretending it's not required. We're not all trust finders.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Comirnaty (Pfizer-BioNTech) is fully approved for those 16 and over, and has been since late August.
  - hhw3h 5y ago
    From my understanding you can’t get the actual distinct Comirnaty version when you go in and get the shot. They only have EUA Pfizer supplies. Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile. AFAIK, any different liability profile between an EUA and approved product is moot in the case of COVID vaccines, because they are out of both normal liability regimes and standard vaccine liability regimes and covered by the PREP Act pandemic countermeasures regime which does not make a distinction.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      Yup... A different liability and legal profile.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  You're mistaken. The Pfizer vaccine is fully approved and available in the United States. Source: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr... I never claimed it wasn't required, just that what was required was not experimental.
colechristensen 5y ago
Unequivocal? There is literally no doubt as to the “safety”? That is demonstratively not true. On several occasions, several of the vaccines have been halted by several separate health authorities over safety concerns. That is not zero doubt. This story is about exactly that. You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. People don’t understand risks very well nor can they compare risks very well and that has been demonstrated over and over again. Covid vs vaccine risks vary quite a lot depending on what kind of person you are. If you are quite old or have significant health problems, it is pretty easy to demonstrate with high confidence that the vaccine risk is way smaller than the Covid risk (many orders of magnitude). If you are very young (say a healthy teenager) the Covid risk is very low and the uncertainties of the vaccine risks start to compete where it is much harder to have confidence that for a population vaccinating is a better idea. People also can have different appetites for risk and different appetites for the good of the individual vs the good of the many. The problems with vaccination are many people pretend they are perfect or evil who are either knowingly distorting the truth or repeating lies or dogma. Also many people desire authoritarian solutions for everyone to agree with them. What is actually needed are attempts to accurately represent risks and unknowns, and comparisons of those risks and unknowns which update over time as the unknowns get smaller. There also needs to be the ability to acknowledge that a crossover point may exist where on one side one decision may be better than on the other. People though are being used to turn any contentious issue into political dogma and opportunities to signal morality. The situation is not as simple as you and many people make it.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  > You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. I think you may have misread my comment. I agree that "emergency authorization" constitutes "experimental". My point is that there is now a vaccine that is no longer experimental, i.e. is as fully FDA approved as any other, and the mandates in place were put there after that approval. To the rest of your comment, when dealing with a contagious disease which spreads throughout society, I think that the people participating in a society should be able to set prerequisites for participating in that society. One person's rights end where another's begin, and with contagious diseases, a given person's low risk of death does not prevent them from spreading it to someone with much higher risk.
StanislavPetrov 5y ago
>After a vaccine was fully approved and shown to be unequivocally safe and effective Nothing developed 15 months ago can be shown to be "unequivocally safe". No matter what your position on COVID vaccines, its simply a matter of fact that there's no way to know the long term effects of something that hasn't been around for long.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. But that's a fair point, "unequivocally" is a strong word. Would you be okay with "safe and unequivocally effective"?
  - shock 5y ago
    > There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. Unless, the vaccine causes a "reprogramming" of the immune system, like some viruses do. Have you considered this vector in your analysis?
shock 5y ago
In Europe all the vaccines that are authorized have a "conditional marketing authorization" with a 1 year time limit, and many countries have vaccine mandates. Under EMA, for a vaccine to be "fully approved" it needs to have a standard marketing authorization; none of the COVID vaccines do.
- orra 5y ago
  And? The original bullshit claim was that the vaccines are “experimental”. A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this.
  - shock 5y ago
    > A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this. Please provide a citation for this claim. My reading of the EMA page for Conditional Marketing Authorization states: "Its use is also intended for a public health emergency (e.g. a pandemic). _For these medicines, less comprehensive pharmaceutical and non-clinical data may also be accepted_". The fact that less comprehensive farmaceutical data is accepted for CMA leads me to believe they are experimental.
    - orra 5y ago
      See the section "What are the main differences between the EU's Conditional Marketing Authorisation and the Emergency Use Authorisation issued by some other countries?", onwards. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_20_2390 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... (this is from the EC, not as I remembered the EMA) It explains amongst other things that a Conditional Marketing Authorisation (CMA) is a real, controlled and robust, authorisation of the vaccine; this is unlike the Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA), which is really an authorisation of the use of an unauthorised vaccine. A CMA requires data on safety and efficacy, showing the benefits outweigh the risks. An EUA has no such requirement.
angelzen 5y ago
> California pushes 1st US vaccine mandate for schoolchildren https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-education-california-gavin-newsom-575ef3be2c5c2600664fa48c08041abd https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-educa...

orra 5y ago

> Then Delta emerged, and vaccine efficacy dropped wholesale. This is bollocks. Pre-Delta, if double vaccinated the vaccines are about 95% effective against severe illness and death. Post Delta, about 92%. That's still incredible, and actually pretty high as vaccines go.

stock_toaster 5y ago
Further, even in cases of "breakthrough" infection, mortality rate is significantly reduced with the vaccine vs unvaccinated. I think people just assume that a "breakthrough" means "didn't work", but that isn't necessarily the case!
- Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
  Yup! Breakthrough infection and breakthrough disease are entirely different things. Ask any ICU nurse what percentage of their COVID patients are unvaccinated. Every article I've seen reports at least 90% are unvaccinated, and of the remaining 10% that were, they were either very old or had a severe immune deficiency.
  - vkou 5y ago
    > Ask any ICU nurse what percentage of their COVID patients are unvaccinated. Every article I've seen reports at least 90% are unvaccinated, and of the remaining 10% that were, they were either very old or had a severe immune deficiency. My grandfather was vaccinated, but is immuno-deficient, and just caught it from a visit to the hospital. Between his age, and the state of his immune system, he was at death's door for two weeks. If the hospital weren't full of unvaccinated COVID patients to begin with, it's far less likely he would have picked it up there (He doesn't exactly leave the house, except to go the doctor.) As it turns out, the prevalence of the former leads to the latter.
    - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
      A leaky vaccine means that many vaccinated are spreading it. Evidence: "New data was released by the CDC showing that vaccinated people infected with the delta variant can carry detectable viral loads similar to those of people who are unvaccinated, though in the vaccinated, these levels rapidly diminish. There is also some question about how cultivatable—or viable—this virus retrieved from vaccinated people actually is. " [1] "Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people. Physical distancing measures remain critical to reduce SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant transmission." [2] [1] https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/new-data-on-covid-19-transmission-by-vaccinated-individuals https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/new-data-on-covid-19-trans... [2] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897733 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897733

paganel 5y ago

Vaccine is the only thing that can (and does) make this pandemic manageable. I write this comment from Bucharest, where vaccine hesitancy (among other factors) have made it so that only about 30% of the adult population is vaccinated. We have ambulance queues in front of most of the Covid hospitals, patients are "deposited" (for lack of a better word) on hospital hallways, the luckier ones on make-shift beds, the more recent ones on chairs, hanging on to an oxygen tube between their legs. Almost all the other European countries have higher vaccination rates than us, they do not have our current problems.

shock 5y ago
> Vaccine is the only thing that can (and does) make this pandemic manageable. This is false. There are treatments available, like monoclonal antibodies, they just have not been publicized as much. Somebody, somewhere made a choice to push the vaccines and not the monoclonal antibodies. As an interesting fact, before the pandemic the knowledge to produce the nanolipid capsule existed in only 2 small companies worldwide. Big scale facilities for producing the nanolipid particles necessary for the mRNA vaccines were non-existent, they had to be built. Just as well, facilities for producing monoclonal antibodies en-masse could have been built, but were not.
- cedilla 5y ago
  Nobody made that choice. Treatment and prevention are not the same thing.
- koboll 5y ago
  Monoclonal antibodies cost thousands of dollars per transfusion. A vaccine costs a couple bucks. We are not going to make the pandemic manageable with monoclonal antibodies. The reason governments made the choice to push vaccines over them is because vaccines are actually in the range of economic possibility.
  - shock 5y ago
    The vaccines cost in the tens of dollars, depending on the negociating power of the country/bloc. Their cost, as well as the cost of monoclonal antibodies, depends on the economies of scale. Monoclonal antibodies are easier to produce than mRNA vaccines, so at similar production scale should be cheaper.