I have a question for you. What should be done if it does turn out that there are serious, long term health issues with the vaccinations?
Tweak the next batch of vaccines. Which still sucks for those vaccinated with the first one. This question, however, ignores a lots of context:
- The vaccines used first had to go through approval. Not everyone of them was accepted. The Russian and Chinese ones aren't accepted by both the EMA and the FDA, for example (the FDA has the list of vaccines authorised "for emergency use" on their front page; the EMA calls this list "safe vaccines"). What does "approval" means? What are the procedures? I do know them. I wonder how many others do.
-
Maybe the vaccines will sux. The alternative is COVID (I sometimes wonder why the anti-Vaxxers who consider vaccines more dangerous that "this trivial flu" don't just get a shot of COVID and shut up).
- Seldom, in the tirades against the vaccines, I see "And now let's see what is the alternative - the risk of getting COVID - before making a choice." When this is done, COVID is usually trivialized. I use the work "usually" because this is not the case in Northern Italy. After Bergamo, no one trivializes COVID over here.
- Having COVID out there like wildfire helps the appearance of variants. When that imbecile of Governor DeSantis opened up Florida while the pandemic was on afterburner he didn't simply create a superspreader event: some of the first variants were seen there. It is the variants, Delta
in primis, that are causing the current scare, not the original COVID.
- Re: "The Danmask Study",
of course many grabbed it as the Lost Tablets from Moses - without looking further for independent analysis.
https://rebelem.com/the-danmask-19-trial-masks-not-effective-to-prevent-covid-19-not-so-fast/"Clinical Take Home Point: This trial does not answer the question of “do masks reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 infection.” While this is what the researchers sought to study, what they actually studied is the compliance rate with a recommendation to wear masks which was low in this cohort. In a population that predominantly does not wear masks, this trial does not give us information on masks effects with more widespread mask wearing in the community. Additionally, with no clarity on how other public health measures were upheld and whether masks were worn correctly, there are too many confounders that limit the results of this trial. Until better evidence is available, wearing a mask is simple, has minimal harm, and should be recommended at this time.This is one example. Other independent analysis reached the same conclusion. "Research" should never end once you find someone that agrees with you.
- Last but not least, we have the usual, very basic factoid: These "Kung-flu" guys come from "the bestest country in the World in everythingest!!!!11", they still managed to have 25% of the World deaths with only 4% of the population, and they are still
lecturing?? America, right now, is The Shining City On A Hill About What Not To Do During A Pandemic. Climb down from your high horse, fix your country, exercise some self-criticism and leave alone countries who did better than you.