Spare the self righteousness. Most of my loved ones are vaccinated and I would advise any elderly or people of a certain age (late 20s onward) who work with lots of people, live in cities etc...
What is catastrophic though is the utter unwillingness to admit ANY major fault. And to subject young children to needless risk! And to mandate them for university students. Too little data and too little global agreement on the protocols. Some countries advise one dose, no dose for those who have antibodies from prior infection, etc...
And it’s also worth looking into whether certain vaccine platforms do more harm to one gender over another. (Johnson and Johnson clotting risk in women. Same risk with AstraZeneca overseas.)
I have sIr many times on this platform i am not in favor of vaccinating kids and men under 30 need to weigh the risk benefits carefully. But it’s much easier to read ur words pit in someone else’s mouth than what they actually say
That all seems to make sense given the current state of information, and I’d even suggest that it’s long past time to pause vaccinations for younger people to allow a careful review of the risk/benefit ratios in different populations.
What gets missed in a lot of these threads is a level of nuance. If one posts one’s support for therapeutics and chemo prophylaxis (basically ivermectin at this point, though the statistical case for Hydroxy remains strong), there will be shrieks accusing one of being “anti-vax”. (This actually happened to me, which is ironic.)
On the other hand, if one takes issue with some of the more out-there claims of, let’s call them vaccine skeptical (ie, magnetism, 5G etc.) one becomes a Fearper (or whatever the current moniker is).
Sadly, this is one of the few forums on the internet where there’s no institutional suppression of different viewpoints, yet all of the posturing (and I’ve been guilty of this myself) makes it hard to have an adult conversation.
So thank you for addressing the issues in a coherent way.
“too little global agreement on the protocols.”
Circumstances differ greatly globally.
Most obvious: a nation with abundant vaccines will make different decisions than one lacking them.
Interesting to me...
A prev infected subject is safe from serious re-infection, but if re-infected how does his transmissitivity compare to one who is also vaccinated?
Assuming the “also vaccinated” are less transmisitive would mean there would be a benefit from that vaccination.
No good data yet, of course.