3 ms·
> It was take the shot or starve. There is no evidence based reason to not take it for nearly all people, it was well tested and very safe. If you are immune
by sqeaky 2y ago
> It was take the shot or starve.
There is no evidence based reason to not take it for nearly all people, it was well tested and very safe. If you are immune compromised to the point where the vaccine was risky a doctor visit would sort you out. For nearly everyone else the vaccine moved the chances of covid death from some single digit percentage to negligible and reduced severity of symptoms and very rare (far rarer than covid issues).
Per your own story it was not "take the shot or starve", you are simply lying.
- whatwhaaaaat 2y agoYou do not know what you are talking about with the vaccine but I’m guessing you’re not still getting boaters so that much is good at least. Just because I’ve been (so far) able to avoid negative repercussions does not mean that I should ignore attempts to unrightfully force medical therapy upon me and react accordingly. I’m frankly kinda shocked there are still people arguing for it honestly.
- sqeaky 2y agoYou are not operating with evidence. Cite sources, provide evidence, that it isn't safe and shouldn't be taken by nearly everyone. Every conspiracy theory against isn't hasn't happened. All the mass deaths that were foretold didn't happen, all the claimed heart attacks were just noise that fools tried to elevate as signal, etc... But the real thing that is still with us is a new endemic disease that is killing people. At best you are mistaken, more likely you are actively lying. You have, per your own story, been demonstrated as incorrect. No one should take you seriously.
- whatwhaaaaat 2y agoSince we’re just talking past each other: who is Ralph baric and why did his research get banned at chapel hill?
- sqeaky 2y agoHe is a red herring not related to the topic in any direct way. In this context he is disingenuous talking point that conspiracy theorists who are detached feom reality bring up.
- whatwhaaaaat 2y agoInteresting response sinse congress is grilling fauci right now on this very topic. Relevant because we’re supposed to trust the same industry that created the virus to save us.
- tracker1 2y agoTo start with: https://www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment https://www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment
- sqeaky 2y agoYoy produced a context free Link and ignore a ton of realities. The astrazeneca vaccine the one in the UK did have problems and was still safer than covid! Compare the payout rates to the amount of people vaccinated and try having some nuance. The existence of a solution to a problem doesn't mean the problem was the size conspiracy nutjobs say it was.
- tracker1 2y agoSafer for those under 40yo?
- tracker1 2y agoIf that was really the case, then why provide special immunity to the pharma companies, govt and companies requiring the shot?
- sqeaky 2y agoFor the same reason this happened exactly this easy in the past! This was nothing new! Conspiracy theorists just didn't have the nuance to know about it in the past. Making a cheap good for many people opens companies up to risk. Even frivolous lawsuits are expensive and if they are getting pennies per customer even a frivolous lawsuit can destroy the profits of millions of successes deployments. Vaccines like the last round had serious issues on the order of 1 in a million cases. Even that low rate is enough to crush profits with medical costs the way they are.
- tracker1 2y agoI'm not familiar with a time in US history where all govt contractors, the majority of employees, and the recommendation to companies and that they complied with requiring employees get a relatively new, not completely approved vaccine to keep their jobs. Could you please cite some references to this kind of thing in the US?