>>12910819>but the risk of getting thrown and/or breaking your neck is higher without oneAnd we have really long term data on that, questioning whether seatbelts actually make you safer would be completely logical if it were the 1930s.
>Herpesfamily viruses have been known to cause tau aggregation in the brain and it takes years of recurrence for them to have that effectOkay, I don't know how this refutes what I was saying.
>The argument that two discrete doses of mRNA will do it simply doesn't make sense.I never said it had to, all I'm saying is that there can be effects with mechanisms we don't understand and only long-term data will elucidate those mechanisms, if they exist.
>The FUS argument doesn't even have any credenceMaybe it doesn't, but once again my point is that we still don't have long-term data.
Like I said anon, I'm planning on getting one of the vaccines, because, as you say, they are most likely safe and I need a good word from my COVID-paranoid boss who would think I'm an incel Trump nazi etc. if I don't get it. All I'm saying is that biology is not like chemistry or physics where everything can be accurately predicted. It's extremely empirical and the theory usually comes after the discoveries. In all honesty, you're doing a good job of making me lean towards getting the Pfizer vaccine, which I have been offered, but your incredible arrogance still puts me off. For example:
> fallacious logicFucking where? You're backtracking and changing your opinions with each post.
>>12910669>no long term side effectsthen:
>>12910819>Yes, there's a risk that the vaccine might cause some side effect down the road we don't know aboutMake up your mind. The risk might be astronomically low but we just don't know for sure because there is no long-term data, or at least any I could find. I've found studies on previous cancer mRNA vaccines but I haven't found data on followups.
