>>13864987It actually has not been tested long term, only short term, and that is not my opinion, that's simply objectively true. I have brought this point up with many pro-mandators, both IRL and online, and they refuse to acknowledge the point, which just demonstrates that this is a partisan ideological issue for these people.
It's doesn't matter how big the sample size is, because the issue isn't how big is your sample, but rather do you have any long term data on safety and efficacy. The vaccine has not been subject to long term testing, and these are the first mRNA vaccines to be subject to widespread clinical use, so we have literally no long term data on COVID vaccines, like we would normally get with literally any other pharmaceutical. I know SJW authoritarians will sperg out at me for saying this, but literally everything I have said is objectively true. Now if you aren't bothered by that, or you think that the threat of COVID justifies a departure from standard testing procedures so we can speed things, that's fine, and that is a perfectly valid position to have. However, it's simply a fact that COVID vaccines have not been subject to long term testing requirements that are standard for literally every other major pharmaceutical product. That's not my opinion, that's simply objectively true, and nothing will change that. The vaccine has not been subject to long term testing. Having a large sample size does not solve that problem, because all of those data points are literally <18 months old.
