Quote:
Originally Posted by loochy
Why? That's pretty easy to count...
Btw, I get that everyone wants to downplay the number of cases involving side effects/death/etc, but we have no clue about longterm effects. Or even current underlying problems that aren't detected or reported. It's kind of like beginning a study on AIDS and then concluding after 12 months that it's no big deal.
I'm not arguing that people should get vaccinated, but it does baffle me that so many are willing to blindly dismiss evidence that vaccines might be beneficial. Why would a novel virus not be taken seriously? This is a brand new virus! All it has done is spread quickly and easily, caused many to become very ill, and has cause a great number of people worldwide to die. Now we have a way to potentially stop this with good effectivity and few side effects, and people immediately dismiss it because of paranoia?
See how that works? It's probably best to not dismiss either side, but take in the whole of the evidence and proceed with caution, not jumping to either side with wreckless abandon.
|
That's who I'm criticizing. Those who shame everyone who isn't eager to be first in line. There just as many reasons not to do it as there are to do it.
It's ridiculous how politicized everything becomes. The same people who would rail against Big Pharma corruption in any other argument are lining up without hesitation. If they're facing constant lawsuits due to damages caused by other products, what makes you confident that a rushed product with zero liability is going to be safe?
Again, one can downplay the numbers, but the CDC held an emergency meeting for a reason.