If there’s actual evidence of clotting happening (e.g. J&J), then it’s absolutely worth considering. 100% on board with that. It’s worth studying, finding the frequency, whether it differs from background frequency, and under what conditions it occurs so you can begin to understand the causal mechanism. That will be useful for understanding who is at risk and how to change the medicine in question to avoid that risk if possible. When the clotting reports with the J&J vaccine began to exceed background rates, that absolutely deserved a full investigation. And it got one. When incidence of myocarditis among young males exceeded background rates with the mRNA vaccines, that absolutely deserved an investigation, and it got one there as well.
But when someone is claiming crazy doomsday scenarios without a shred of evidence (and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; not LESS evidence), then get the man a sandwich board and put him out in Times Square with the rest of the doomsday kooks.
But when someone is claiming crazy doomsday scenarios without a shred of evidence (and extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; not LESS evidence), then get the man a sandwich board and put him out in Times Square with the rest of the doomsday kooks.
Say kooks, nut jobs and flat earthers a few more times in your post, so you will sound more believable.