I have never posted on here, but I have to on this. What about the people that work at the IRS they’re being towed vaccinate or you’re fired. They do not have a choice
They do, of course, have a choice - they are not being forced.
Yes, they will lose their job if they do not meet the terms of employment conferred by their employer. But that happens all the time: if my employer adds a requirement that I take a Microsoft Word course, and I refuse, does my employer not have the right to fire me?
More Americans have died of Covid that all American soldiers in every war since the Civil War. If you disregard Covid why not forget about memorizing every American soldier since the Civil War?
If the technology has never been used in a vaccine it is new technology. It may have been in development for decades but it is not used tested technology and therefore new.
It is absurd to suggest a technology, such as mRNA, is new just because it has not been tested in a vaccine - the technology could be very advanced and it could have been tested in all sorts of other contexts than in a vaccine.
But even if the mRNA has not been tested at all, it is beyond obvious that this does not mean the technology is new. All it means is that it has not been tested - big difference. If I spend decades designing a rocket engine and only test it 20 years down the line, I am not testing new technology.
I am, of course, testing technology that has been under development for 20 years.
Simple question: If your employer says you must wear a hardhat on a construction site, and fires you if you refuse, has the employer done anything wrong and, if so, what?
If your employer grinds your hardhat to dust and demands your put it in a soda and drink it, has the employer done anything wrong?
The difference is something you wear, proven to offer some safety, and something you put into your body that reasonable people believe needs more information before they take it.
Hardhats are proven to offer protection at very low risk.
Vaccines are proven to offer protection at very low risk (despite all the lying and distortion about this).
You don’t get to determine when the discussion ends. The discussion will end when all the facts are known, the virus is no longer politicized, and people stop lying to the public.
If you can’t see the difference between wearing a hardhat and being injected with a vaccine that is literally still being evaluated, you really should “end” your part of this discussion.
You are playing word games. No one has denied that using mRNA in a vaccine is new. But the fundamental underlying science is not new
The science behind the new COVID-19 vaccines has not been rushed. In fact, these vaccines are building on decades of scientific research.
The story involves hundreds of people all over the world and highlights the importance of fundamental and applied research. Advancements in our understanding of messenger RNA (mRNA) and its potential for use in medicines, along with the creation of new technologies over the last 30 years, made these vaccines possible. Recent research on coronaviruses, in particular, made these vaccines effective.
Come on man, this is obviously not a valid line of argument. I know people who have smoked heavily for decades and never got lung cancer or any other lung problem.
Does this mean that smoking is not bad for you?
Anecdotes do not count. At least in a serious discussion.