| > One thing that I think is getting lost in all of these discussions What's really being lost in all of these discussions is science. Looking at your case: 1. You decided to lie to get a booster even though it has apparently not been approved for your use. 2. The vaccines do not provide sterilizing immunity and it is possible to become infected even when vaccinated. While the data does suggest that vaccination reduces transmission, it also indicates that infected vaccinated individuals are still capable of spreading the virus. 3. Despite the fact that you have no idea how much additional protection your booster will give you, and for how long, or if and how much it might reduce your ability to transmit the virus to others, you're choosing to be "very bad about masking and social distancing right now" which will increase your potential exposure, especially if you live in an area with a higher positivity rate. More exposure, even while vaccinated, increases your risk of infection. 4. You say you're doing this to protect the children you are in close contact with, but according to the CDC, only 542 children under the age of 18 have died in the US during the entire pandemic. > At the other end of the spectrum, I think it's totally okay for anyone who is vaccine-skeptical, for whatever reason, to take a wait and see approach. But there eventually comes a point when a majority of the public has actually gone ahead and been guinea pigs for you, and you're just needlessly endangering people. How long before the definition of "vaccine skeptical" changes? Will someone eventually be labeled "vaccine skeptical" because they refuse to get their 10th booster? |