ST Alpha - "It's not an anti-vax position at all, but I would consider myself appropriately skeptical of an approvals process that doesn't include proper safety testing -- (edited)" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 156

In response to "Wait which tribe is the anti-vaxxer now? I've lost track -- nm" by JackDawson

It's not an anti-vax position at all, but I would consider myself appropriately skeptical of an approvals process that doesn't include proper safety testing -- (edited)

Posted by znufrii, silly old man (aka znufrii) May 21 '20, 10:46

which, from what I've heard about vaccine development so far, takes 12 months in and of itself. It's entirely probable that I don't have all the information, and I'm open to being proved wrong, but I'd need more than our current administration's word, or that of an overzealous pharma exec hungry for a PR boost, for it. If that's "tribing" in your book so be it.

In the meantime, I probably wouldn't refuse it outright, but I'm not going to be at the front of the line.

Responses:

It's just funny to see vaccine skepticism make its way all around the political spectrum with EXACTLY the same arguments the anti-vaxxers make in disg - JackDawson May 21, 10:57 1
- Yeah. “I’d be happy to be proven wrong” is EXACTLY how anti-vaxxers sound. -- nm - znufrii May 21, 11:15

Post a message top

It's not an anti-vax position at all, but I would consider myself appropriately skeptical of an approvals process that doesn't include proper safety testing -- (edited)

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.