Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Lime
I would have liked to discuss in some depth the composition of the vaccines themselves. The changes that are being made to the delivery seem to be based on two things, cost and reaction to deaths and injury. I realize that this is not an uncommon practice in drug development, but this is a set of products that are nearly universally given and generally required at a very young and vulnerable age.
The militant reaction of support for vaccines are giving companies a pressure free ride in terms of composition, where this should be one of our most heavily scrutinized products. Can one be pro-vaccine, but safely have this viewpoint?
(Also, I've been sending some citation nazis over here to get it out of their system, so that one is on me. Sorry. I think of this thread as a kind of therapy, so that citations in other threads are for people who want to actually learn more about a subject. It's like the House of Commons in here, sometimes.)
|
Harry, I agree with that these products should be heavily scrutinized.
Are they currently not?
If the "formula" for want of a better term is changed, is that just given a free pass?
What gets me and I guess I shouldn't point it all at AcGold (but he is currently driving the bus in this thread) is the people that say let's have a discussion. Ok, let's read what you are basing you thoughts/opinions on and then chat about them.
We then get crickets and tumbleweeds.
I am willing to read objective articles on this topic.