posted on Jun, 18 2021 @ 04:14 PM
So this is where I draw the line.
I'm content with applying this experiment to myself, since in the immediate moment, me being vaccinated helps me more than it does bad.
I foresee problems with travelling and maybe even working if not vaccinated once they have finished the first round and didn't get enough to join
in.
But I'm not ok with the kids.
See here's the thing; they are trying too hard now. It feels like that annoying person on mainstreet trying to push a mobile sub that is way to
expensive in the long run.
A few days ago they were venting that.. hm.. maybe we should suggest people vaccinating their 12-16 year olds? So they did...
The argument was by doing so, we would gain 3% of flock immunity.
Today, the health department just thought out loud, that you know, maybe 12-16 isn't enough. We should probably do the small kids as well.
Like I said, I'm ok being test subject, even if it might end bad in 20 or so years. But I cannot for the life of me, see the rational in vaccinating
my kids with this pre-approved phase 3 drug.
Besides, I think their argument is challenged by everything they have said themselves so far:
- Virus will keep mutating and we can't be sure this vaccine covers it continously
- Kids seem to do way better than adults when infected, even spreading less (confirmed by british study that showed that kids immunesystem and runny
noses actually had a positive effect on the severity of their infection)
- The reason for vaccinating was to prevent saturation of the health sector, and now those at risk have all been vaccinated, so.....
- Yesterday, the Danish equivalent of the CDC flat out said, that the Pfizer has shown to give good protection against even the Delta vaccine after
2nd jab, and well, that's what those at risk has gotten so...?
So, where is the argument for the kids? Not gonna allow this.
-