fisky wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
So, I assume you agree with this bit at the very end?:
"Even if we can't get rid of the virus entirely, the vaccines can help get rid of the "disease" in the form of worst outcomes. She says the math shows that the end game is vaccinate, vaccinate, vaccinate."
I agree with that!
Getting back to her point that the end game is vaccinations, I agree that it's the most realistic way to prevent COVID. However, that comes with the a priori assumption that the vaccine will have no long-term effects. That is simply an educated guess at this point. mRNA vaccines show great promise. Maybe they will have no long-term effects.
Ok, I am going to focus only on what I left of your tome:
1) I agree with your agreement, so good show.
2) Vaccines have a long history of showing adverse affects only within the first 6 weeks. It is not merely an assumption to predict that these vaccines (even the mRNA ones) will not have any negative long-term affects. The anti-vaxxers don't just mention the mRNA ones anyway. They could go take the J&J vector vaccine too, but they are against that one too and IMPROPERLY fearful of negative long-term affects.