3 ms·
>The simple math is that if you prepare a treatment and give it to 300 million people, 300 people with adverse reactions may make the entire endeavor unwise fin
by logicchains 5y ago
>The simple math is that if you prepare a treatment and give it to 300 million people, 300 people with adverse reactions may make the entire endeavor unwise financially.
Yet other medicines taken by the majority manage fine without liability immunity, like aspirin and paracetamol. Why do vaccine manufacturers deserve a license to kill without liability?
- skuhn 5y agoI believe that point is directly addressed by my quote from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, namely that we do not have a national incentive to ensure that aspirin usage is at herd immunity levels.
- mbg721 5y agoI think aspirin usage at herd immunity levels would create vast new markets for organ medicines. That stock keeps going up up up!
- thehappypm 5y agoVaccine manufacturers have saved millions of lives. I support them not getting financially ruined for one-in-a-million adverse effects.
- dekhn 5y ago"deserve a license to kill" is a crappy framing. Vaccines are different for a number of reasons; see the history of antivax (predating modern antivax). all medicines come with risks, vaccines probably have a higher risk than aspirin, but still represent a massively overall good thing, and the public is very sensitive to hearing about extremely small numbers of adverse events.