|
|
|
|
|
by galaxyLogic
1338 days ago
|
|
> You are begging the question: did the benefits outweigh the cost? Certainly a retrospective is needed, I assume somebody is doing it. But even if it turned out that benefits did not outweigh the cost, that was unknowable at the beginning of the pandemic. Therefore it was prudent and wise to err on the side of caution. Hindsight is 20-20. We know and knew that vaccines work. Vaccines save lives. That fact has not changed because of Covid has it? In the US > 1 million people died because of Covid. Most of them unvaccinated. Without vaccines it could have been millions more deaths. And with less anti-vaccine propaganda, and better pro-vaccine propaganda, it would probably been many fewer deaths. So rather than simply pondering (and suggesting) the question of whether "benefits outweighed the cost" we need to also consider the alternative-cost. How many more would have, or could have, died without the vaccines? |
|
Agreed. But you are not actually speaking to my point. My point is that you cannot assert the vaccines were net-positive at this time.