Hacker News Reader

Comment by headsoup | Hacker News Reader

While it could be presented better, I think this point is fair. We seem to mostly be happy to write-off the downsides because 'but the alternative is worse.'

Sure, but let's not stop applying a critical eye and measured caution with things that are still in trial phase with inconclusive evidence for long term success.

View on HN

If he wrote instead of “does it prevents death? Perhaps.” actual estimated numbers, I think the question would be clearer: “is 300000 bigger than 6000? Perhaps.”

But that “Perhaps” seems to be doing a lot of work there, which would normally be done by words such as “So far quite well”

Has any of their claims ever happened before? Random internet dude would benefit from offering some links to past examples, or his questions sound like he hasn’t done any honest attempt at research, but just made them up like a fairy tale villain.

I think misrepresenting data that explicitly states it can not be used to make this conclusion, to come to this conclusion is not a fair point and works to propagate vaccine conspiracy theories. See my other reponse with details from VAERS about not using this data to directly determine vaccine cause of adverse effects.

sssh!, we cannot speak about "adverse" deadly reaction to experimental rna treatments :P Blood clots does non exist! And if healthy people dies, these are "collateral deaths, very rare". Until you are one of the very rare death, who in 95% of case get covid whith-out any symptoms...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com