[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by irv

Well, that's all very well, Peter, but, and just a suggestion, I also think it might be a good idea to broaden your horizons a little with regards to the information you gather.

You know, just like in your article where Steven states "the benefits outweigh the risks", why is it not for us to decide that?
I can legally vote, legally drive, legally drink and do all sorts of other legal things as an adult but yet, based on the above statement, I can't choose what is injected into my body without punishment?
I think of my wife and son who both had no choice if they wanted to retain their job and finish college based on "the benefits outweigh the risks". Who are they to to decide that for them?
I honestly think if these vaccines weren't pushed so hard on people, more people would have likely gotten them?
Numerous people I know said the same thing and numerous double vaxxed people I know, once they seen the number of fully vaxxed still getting covid, said to hell with the boosters.

If the vaccines worked, nearly all populations worldwide would have gotten them and there would have been no need to force/coerce/lure/trick people into getting them. They would have sold themselves.

You can disrespect Dr. Novella all you want by patronizingly referring to him by his first name but the fact remains he is a very eminent physician and scientist. Not infallible but worthy of reading. I've read dozens of pieces by him on a wide variety of subjects how many have you read that entitles you to be so condescending? In any event, where did he say vaccines should be mandatory or that you or anyone else shouldn't have a choice? He recognizes people have a choice, he is suggesting they follow the data. You really seem to have a comprehension issue.

Again, read the study, and let's discuss specifics, instead of your usual evasions.