Just out of curiosity and not wanting to start an argument: would you have been against the small-pox vaccine?.
Not sure, I would have to do due diligence to come up with an informed answer to the question.
On this thread, I’m just critiquing the abysmal quality of the arguments being made, and feel confident that the immediate resort to gutter-level shit-throwing is a clear sign that the pro-vaccine arguments being made on this thread are not well-founded.
Just out of curiosity and not wanting to start an argument: would you have been against the small-pox vaccine?.
(Raising my hand, jumping in my seat like I have to pee) “Ask me, ask me!”
The smallpox vaccine in the 1950s was top science with great motivations for public health and profit. Excellence which our country could use more of today.
But science (learning, testing, proving) has moved on. Today we know that our bacterial biomes, different for every person, determine our health and our reactions to invasions into our bodies. Clearly a vaccine meant to help a person’s health, to add to his immunity rather than to tax it and possibly kill or injure him, needs to be formulated to do just that.
The 1950s vaccines are too primitive but since they are protected by the government for financial reasons, there is no incentive to create new.
It’s really just another way our government lies to us.