Re: Easy choice Elon
"This is proving to be true, surely you can see that now?"
With the benefit of hindsight and time to mull over the historical evidence, anyone with a functioning brain can see what ought to have been done. To formulate a national Covid response, to pick last weeks lottery numbers, to decide to say yes when that girl you like asks you in for a coffee and you say no because you're young and naive enough to think they actually are just asking you in for a coffee and you aren't particularly thirsty...
Not *quite* so easy to get it right when you're staring down the barrel in realtime wondering WTF to do next, and definitely not at all easy to know at the time which experts had managed to predict the least worst course of action to take, so I don't think it's particularly fair or reasonable to castigate governments who opted for different courses of action, at least not in those early days.
Anyone who *continues* to adopt a policy which is clearly at odds with reality (yes, China, we're all looking at you right now) is entirely fair game for criticism, however...
"Regarding vaccine damage, I was told it was "safe and effective", and so I took two shots. Since then the AZ one I took has been withdrawn quietly because of the risk of blood clots. You don't think it's been withdrawn? Try getting an AZ shot now, you can't. So, it's not "safe". It's also not very effective, as it seems to wear off after a few months. I feel like I've been mis sold. I also know several people who suffered pretty nasty side effects in my immediate close family (wife, father-in-law) and friends, so it does feel like the effects are being down played. Why would they do that though? Because money. Lots and lots of money."
In contrast, no-one I know, including myself, suffered anything more than the expected side effects from our AZ shots, so it does feel like the effects are being reported entirely reasonably to me. And according to the NHS website, it remains approved for use in the UK, so how certain are you that it's actually been *withdrawn* (a quite specific action with certain negative connotations) as opposed to merely being no longer offered due to the availability of more effective alternatives that've come along since?
As for "safe and effective" in general when applied to drugs - when was the last time you read the patient information leaflet for *any* medicine you've taken? If you think the more damaging side-effects of the AZ vaccine (particularly given the rate at which they occurred) means that calling it "safe and effective" is misleading, then which drugs currently on the market *would* you apply that description to?
Biting the hand that feeds IT
