4 ms·
It's certainly an interesting question. If someone explained they were going to do something you thought they should do, but they were doing it with mistaken m
by peteradio 5y ago
It's certainly an interesting question. If someone explained they were going to do something you thought they should do, but they were doing it with mistaken motivation (i.e. protecting their child), is it ethical to just say nothing? I guess some would say this is an unquestionably good thing, I'm a bit more skeptical of that.
- nojokes 5y agoSo if a child infects their parent and parent dies but it was avoidable by child vaccination then was vaccinating the child an act of protection or not?
- peteradio 5y ago"Hey kid nobodies gonna be able to protect you if your germs kill your mom!" You want to go in that direction be my guest I suppose, but on its face to me its a direct threat. The marketing departments of these companies are probably pissing their collective pants at what they are getting away with with the governments backing of course.
- nojokes 5y agoI do not know how you managed to come to this conclusion. COVID-19 vaccines are directly beneficial to children because they help them to avoid serious disease. But we can't discount indirect benefits. Drugs are for individuals, vaccines are for societies.
- peteradio 5y agoFortunately the trials for the pfizer child vaccines had no serious disease in sample/control. But that means its misinformation to state that the vaccine is known to prevent serious disease in children.