"I don't know, I feel like we actually should generally dismiss the idea of things as harmful when there are no studies that demonstrate harm but there are stud

"I don't know, I feel like we actually should generally dismiss the idea of things as harmful when there are no studies that demonstrate harm but there are studies showing a lack of harm" So if company X creates compound Y and they get some studies published showing that Y is safe, then everyone else should assume it's safe and no one should look further at it? There have been many cases of drugs being created, with studies showing safety, then later shown to be dangerous after killing people - let alone causing mild or subtle harm, and banned. I don't think we should ban aluminum now. I also think the question of possible harm from aluminum is not settled and we shouldn't ban discussion of it. And I hope that because aluminum is a neurotoxin and can persist in the body, that research continues to be done to hopefully one day find ways to make vaccines not need aluminum, similar to how vaccines have been moving away from using mercury as the adjuvant. Meanwhile, the argument is made that the benefit of aluminum adjuvant outweighs any potential cost and that's fine. I also would like it if they did a placebo controlled study of vaccines with aluminum vs no vaccine. I don't think the Danish study in this article should be retracted. I'd also appreciate if they revised it to address the flaws that have been pointed out.