4 ms·
Very true, but if you can delay the inevitable long enough to get a substantial part of the population vaccinated, then there is value in that. However, that s
by sharken 5y ago
Very true, but if you can delay the inevitable long enough to get a substantial part of the population vaccinated, then there is value in that.
However, that strategy fails when you don't have access to the vaccine.
- tinus_hn 5y agoIf you consider the few months of protection granted against severe disease, and not against infection, good enough and believe it’s possible and wise to keep giving people more and more ‘boosters’, and believe the risks of vaccines and an infinite list of boosters remain smaller than the risk of the disease itself and, should one choose to implement a mandate, the cost of losing the right to decide for yourself if you want the vaccine/boosters or not.
- sharken 5y agoI was only addressing the situation where nobody is vaccinated and the vaccine is being distributed. With booster shots it should never be an option to shut down society.