[chimprich]

> "Significant testing" is 20,000 people. We're preparing to roll it out to billions. That's not "significant testing". If there was a 1 in 500,000 side effect, you'd never see it in the trials.

That is significant testing. It is correct that you might not see a 1 in 500,000 side-effect in testing, but a 1 in 500,000 adverse effect is probably a risk factor that most people could accept.

> And yes, these vaccines are doing something "magical". We've never had an mRNA vaccine rolled out to the general public before.

Our cells regularly process strands of mRNA by the billion. I don't believe the vaccine is doing anything particularly "magical". It's completely right that we should test that, but I don't think there's any reason to be more concerned than any other new type of treatment.

[refurb]

Statins were tested in tens of thousands and the treated population is probably 100x to 1000x.

With the Covid vaccine we’re talking 10,000x expansion of patient population.

And your body also uses neurotransmitters all the time but we don’t wave our hands and say antidepressants are ok because they just modify neurotransmitters. New technology means new "unknown unknowns".

But with that said, I'm not saying don't get the vaccine. I'm just saying, don't be so confident that there is no risk.

[monkeynotes]

This whole pandemic has fued with our critical thinking. If you rewound to 2019 and had a story about a flu vaccine that had been rushed through we'd all be asking questions.

Just because there is a huge necessity to rush approval and dispersement doesn't mean the risks of unknown side effects are diminished. Lengthy approval processes and clinical trials are in place for a reason. And when you administer this vaccine to billions of people you are almost certain to see side effects. That's just simple science.