4 ms·
How will 5G continue to fare in 2 years? Don't know? Sounds like mobile phone companies are Nazi war criminals.
by empthought 5y ago
How will 5G continue to fare in 2 years? Don't know? Sounds like mobile phone companies are Nazi war criminals.
- peteradio 5y agoThis doesn't sound likely a completely hinged argument. Can you flesh out the point you are making?
- empthought 5y agoHow would fleshing out the point continue to fare in two years? Don't know? Sounds like we are testing some sort of hypothesis with observation. The point is that the inability to predict the future does not necessarily imply that some action is "experimental," despite your insinuation that it does.
- peteradio 5y agoUntil we are learning only second order impacts about these vaccines then I'd argue we are still in the experimental phase. Perhaps you have seen enough yourself that the case is closed, but others take a much longer view on things.
- nojokes 5y agoThen every approved medicine is in experimental phase after approval continuously till everyone ever has taken it has died. Then we can compare final numbers and make final conclusion. Or we take data we already have and make the conclusion already today - vaccines we currently have save more people from severe illness and death than they possibly put into risk.
- peteradio 5y agoDepends on your definition of primary and secondary effects. I count future efficacy as a primary effect, wouldn't you? Do we know what vaccine efficacy will be in 2 years? Answer: No, exhibit: Omicron. Most drugs don't have to fight a moving target.
- nojokes 5y agoAntibiotics do, so do antivirals and antifungals.
- Loeffelmann 5y agoHuh? What about all other vaccine, antibiotics and antivirals? When would you say is the "experiment" concluded. I mean I could always say: yeah it fared well for 40 years but what about 50? Do you know? Ergo still an experiment according to you.
- peteradio 5y agoAre you claiming we don't know the primary impacts of those? Do we have good reason to believe they will change at year 50? My point is that we don't know primary impact even short distance out and we have reasonable evidence that the nature of our opponent is the problem, not the technology.