2 ms·
>The numbers seem to speak for themselves, thousands of samples and you can see any region with higher vaccination rates have lower infection and death rates (w
by twofornone 5y ago
>The numbers seem to speak for themselves, thousands of samples and you can see any region with higher vaccination rates have lower infection and death rates (well, I guess until the efficacy wears down and boosters are needed...)
This is inconsistent with record case numbers in highly vaccinated countries across the globe.
>On the topic of long term effects, I'm going to trust this scientist (of course at the end of the day, that's what it ends with isn't it, what statements do each of us trust):
Publishing literature critical of vaccines is social and career suicide. The science is effectively poisoned, one sided because of social shaming. But Pfizer et al. aren't complaining given that they are raking in the cash explicitly free of liability. Not like that's a huge conflict of interest or anything, we should continue to trust their safety and efficacy data unquestionably. Surely big pharma has a spotless ethical and safety record.
- bellyfullofbac 5y ago> This is inconsistent with record case numbers in highly vaccinated countries across the globe. Let's see your data then. > Publishing literature critical of vaccines is social and career suicide. Ah yeah, of course, when you don't like the statement, the messenger is part of a giant lying conspiracy. Where's the science to prove otherwise? (Hidden by the money and power, I guess?) The studies that Jenny McCarthy and her doctor Andrew Wakefield[1] made up about vaccines = autism have been debunked. But I guess that's all because the powers that be have decided they need to be made pariahs, right? Sigh, I'm glad I live in reality. But hey, maybe I'm the one who's been brainwashed, and you're the clear thinking one, right? [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136032/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136032/