Replying to @⁨Polar@lemmy.ca⁩

Don’t DERAIL this conversation about a completely different vaccine.

I was replying to a question. Please follow the context thread, or go away.

Here’s what you said, context wise …

Unpopular opinion: Anyone who refused the COVID vaccine should be banned from getting this.

You weren’t responding to a question, you were just offering your own opinion, an opinion that was different from the topic and the context of the conversation being discussed, and hence my reply to you, calling you out for it.

You’re being intellectually dishonest.

Replying to @⁨wantd2B1ofthestrokes@discuss.tchncs.de⁩

Science isn’t a religion. It’s a process. Just because it’s called a vaccine doesn’t mean its safe. You can be anti-this-particular-vaccine without being anti-all-vaccines.

(Edit - I misremembered what was hinky. For posterity, I’m restructuring my comment and preserving the bad take struck out below.)

In the case of the covid vaccines, that process was intentionally minimized as to bring the vaccine to market faster.

The vaccine did have benefits. It also had complications

that instead of being found out in trials were found out after release.

Replying to @⁨AA5B@lemmy.world⁩

I didn’t refuse the vaccine. Get the fuck out of here.

E: And all evidence didn’t show it was safe. There were risks. In the case of the vaccine itself, iirc, the risks of serious side effect were less than the risk of serious complication from covid. The primary 2-stage vaccine is a good call.

I did refuse a particular booster because the available data on it showed for my demographic the risks outweighed the potential gains; it was more likely to harm me than help me.