Something a reasonable person would ask, in pursuit of knowledge and understanding
OK, allow me to ask some reasonable questions in the pursuit of some knowledge and understanding:
1) What is the all-cause hospitalization and all-cause mortality rate of people who are "fully vaccinated" compare to people who aren't, broken down by matched cohorts (age, co-morbidities, etc)? While I have little doubt that vaccination will reduce the incidence of severe Covid (at least for period of time likely measured in months rather than years), the adverse effects are very real, and some of them are deadly serious. E.g: Within the last week or so, several northern European countries have ceased using one of the MRNA vaccines in younger people because they believe the risk exceeds the benefit in those cohorts. I don't think that reducing the incidence of severe cases of Covid alone is valid endpoint when discussing either public or individual health, because that reduction comes at a cost. Does the benefit actually outweigh the cost? Even more to the point, just showing that the shots produce an antibody response in children without even attempting to show that they reduce the (already extremely rare) incidence of severe cases in them can possibly be considered a valid endpoint, and should not me the basis for approval, much less any mandate, yet we have at least one governor who wants to mandate this. The only valid endpoints are all-cause hospitalization rates and all-cause mortality rates, which take the the adverse effects into account.
2) Given the nature of the adverse effects that have been reported, where are the before-and-after shot bloodwork studies of at least 1000 people? Studies that look at things like D-Dimer, CRP, and immune markers immediately before the first shot, then five days after, and again immediately before the second shot, and five days after. Doctors who've done such tests on a few patients here and there have reported downright shocking results, but of course those are anecdotes, and anecdotes are not data. We've known a good bit about the nature of the adverse effects since early this year, yet nobody seems to be willing to do any substantive studies. Instead, all the blood clots, strokes, heart attacks, and various auto-immune disorders among the vaccinated have been dismissed as "coincidental". "
Nothing to see here, move along!" You wanna convince the "hesitant"? Do the studies and prove that there really is nothing to see; it wouldn't be that difficult or expensive (pocket change in the overall scheme of things). In fact, I can't believe that the FDA didn't demand this before granting "full approval" to the BioNTech product.
I could go on, but it's late, and I'll stop here for tonight. If you believe these questions are unreasonable, please explain why.
correctiv.org
