> The alternative was panic and worse. Either panic or (false) advertising an experimental vaccine. This does look like a false dichotomy. You might instead ed

> The alternative was panic and worse. Either panic or (false) advertising an experimental vaccine. This does look like a false dichotomy. You might instead educate people about the potential risks and clarify the limits, so they may decide. In the defence of vaccine producers I want to say that they at least did point out early on that they did not develop it with the goal of stopping transmission. Which maybe led some to believe "there is a chance", but it's the code for "it does not do it". This was known even before the fourth phase of the study (approval of the vaccine). > There were already MILLIONS of people worldwide thinking the vaccines were a ONU/bill gates pedophile-satanic conspiracy, etc. A lot of people not only didn't want to understand the science, but was attacking ALL SCIENCE. Even democracy got at risk. The system had to reorganize somehow, or the bases of civilization would be at risk. Either you believe in the vaccine or in an absurd (and very specific) conspiracy. These are both extreme view points and gov/media did themselves a disservice by sticking with one of them.