|
|
|
|
|
by wizofaus
1439 days ago
|
|
Ok so one country has chosen, for whatever reason, not to administer Moderna to men under 30, presumably on the basis that they feel other alternatives are safer (with an explicit note that the guideline is a temporary precautionary measure).
That's hardly proof that vaccines are harmful. All medical treatment carries risk. But the risk of refusing it vastly outweighs that. PS. I still don't see anything on the NHS site indicating there's any concern that AZ is harmful to those under 40. |
|
FALSE. 20+ countries.
You apparently simply refuse to follow the science from credible authorities.
>But the risk of refusing it vastly outweighs that.
FALSE. Again, why are you refusing to follow the science?
UK's JCVI which is the official scientific body advising the UK govt, and staffed by internationally renowned immunologists and infectious disease specialists, recommended against universal vaccination to 12-15 year olds.
It was specifically due to the risk-benefit consideration, because the benefit is marginal and risks of infection in that age category are very low. [1]
This is the list of the prominent scientists who made those calls.
>I still don't see anything on the NHS site indicating there's any concern that AZ is harmful to those under 40.on the NHS website I linked: "if you're pregnant or under 40 you'll usually be offered appointments for the Pfizer/BioNTech or Moderna vaccines"
Notice how AZ is NOT offered first to those under 40. Did you expect something like: "WARNING. AZ WILL KILL YOU"?
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/joint-committee-on-vacc...