[jasonlaramburu]

>"The goal posts will always move" ... you're right about that! I think I remember, two weeks to stop the spread

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented event in our lifetime. Is it better to have a leader who modifies her approach as new information becomes available, or one who stubbornly sticks to the same plan when it has clearly failed?

[hunterb123]

ah yes, adaptation to science when I do it, goal post moving when others do it.

maybe those other people adapted to new facts coming in such as side effects of the vaccine and already contracting covid and decided not to get it.

[jasonlaramburu]

>ah yes, adaptation to science when I do it, goal post moving when others do it.

Parent mentioned moving goal posts, not I.

>maybe those other people adapted to new facts coming in such as side effects of the vaccine and already contracting covid and decided not to get it.

The facts show that vaccine side effects are generally mild, vaccination reduces transmission by 5X or more and that natural immunity offers inferior protection to vaccination. If you have convincing evidence showing otherwise, I encourage you to present it.

[hunterb123]

natural immunity offers greater protection than the vaccine, you're thinking of combined vaccine + natural immunity.

vaccine side effects range from mild to death. https://openvaers.com/covid-data

[SideburnsOfDoom]

OpenVaers is a public reporting tool - anyone can type data into there. Unfiltered, it is basically junk, and claiming it as data against the COVID-19 vaccines is dishonest scaremongering.

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/03/scicheck-viral-posts-misus...

[hunterb123]

Hospitals directly report to VAERS as well. We've had this system in place for a reason, you need a way to track anecdotal reactions in individuals that suffer extreme reactions or death that were otherwise healthy.

There's countless instances of healthy people dying right after the shot, doesn't matter if you wish it away.

Yes it may be a small amount percentage wise, but the more you scale the more absolute deaths you get.

[SideburnsOfDoom]

> Hospitals directly report to VAERS as well. We've had this system in place for a reason

Correct, and this is not the reason. You are misusing it.

> There's countless instances of healthy people dying right after the shot,

Calling BS on that, it's not "Countless", far from it. And it needs to be compared to the - far worse - risks of COVID. This statement is dishonest scaremongering.

[jasonlaramburu]

>natural immunity offers greater protection than the vaccine, you're thinking of combined vaccine + natural immunity.

No. There is no consensus on the duration of natural immunity, nor do we know how effective it is against variants. We do have confidence in the duration of vaccine-derived immunity and its performance against existing variants (https://www.newsweek.com/natural-covid-immunity-delta-varian...).

>vaccine side effects range from mild to death

You've not provided convincing evidence of this.

From the VAERS website: VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness. The reports may contain information that is incomplete, inaccurate, coincidental, or unverifiable.

[hunterb123]

Maybe someone should investigate each of these reports :)

Can I ask you why you think we have the VAERS system?

[jasonlaramburu]

These reports are investigated. The number of deaths reported to VAERS is inconsistent with results of clinical trials for the major COVID vaccines.

VAERS was created as a provision of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA) of 1986. The NCVIA was enacted because manufacturers of childhood vaccines could not obtain robust liability insurance.