3 ms·

And I think you're being too forgiving. They claimed there was not even a "theoretical basis." Of course there's a theoretical basis for a virus causing long-

And I think you're being too forgiving. They claimed there was not even a "theoretical basis." Of course there's a theoretical basis for a virus causing long-term effects. I suffered from Shingles, just as a for-instance. We'll probably never know how many have had HPV / Cervical Cancer. And at this point, I have friends who are suffering effects from Long Covid. At the time, it would have been far more accurate to say, "The evidence doesn't indicate any cause for alarm about long-term symptoms." Not, "there is no THEORETICAL BASIS for long-term consequences."

giantg2 5y ago
It depends on how you interpret it, especially "theoretical". I was interpreting it as there being no known theoretical mechanism (in the scope that you need a plausible mechanism of action). One could say there a theoretical basis for the vaccine causing long term harm. Until there's actually support via an identified mechanism, it doesn't really matter - it's just a guess. So if there wasn't a factually supported mechanism in July 2020, then there was no theoretical basis, simply a guess that it works similar to some (but not other) viruses.