No results because vaccines are not accepted based on publications and peer review on scientific papers.
They go trough completely different and extremely rigorous testing process where everything is documented carefully, documents are examined and double checked.
It's great to see 168 comments before first anti-vaxxer comment.
It's not great to go about name-calling like a schoolchild if someone brings up misgivings about a topic you seem to have decided has no room for discussion.
> They go trough completely different and extremely rigorous testing process where everything is documented carefully, documents are examined and double checked.
Rigorous testing is all well and good, but we do know how many errors crop up in scientific papers, right? A lot.
The gold standard of testing is double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled studies and this is only done sometimes for vaccines, as far as I aware.
I believe there are certain circumstances such as no safe and effective already existing vaccine, or where there's a certain kind of benefit to the injected population, where vaccines are generally allowed to go through this double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled studies (the gold standard of testing) and certain circumstances where they do not go through such rigorous testing.
I believe this ethic stems from Jonas Salk's decision during the development of the Polio vaccine where the ethical call was made to not do double-blind, placebo controlled testing due to the desire to prevent damage to human lives that could be prevented by not using a placebo.
Covid vaccines did go trough double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled studies with population size that normal scientific studies can only dream of.
As I said, vaccine testing is is exteremely rigorous.
Moreover the mRNA vaccines arrived at their statistical targets far ahead of schedule and when more data came in, the hypothesis was only strengthened. The documents are all public btw, on Moderna and Pfizer's websites.
Yes sure, you can test all that you want, even on billions on people and write thousands of studies. That's what they are doing right now. But you can't buy time for your studies, do you understand that ?
If the average period for studying long term effect is 5 to 10 years for a vaccine, how do you do that with a 6 month old vaccine ?
People are losing their mind, even rational educated people are throwing away any critical thinking to embrace the rainbow rhetoric, this is a collective hysteria crisis.
I was speaking of the HN page discussion, but it seems my search on Firefox is completely broken, so I withdraw my mention of no vaccine reference, but I stand to be commented on the subject.
They go trough completely different and extremely rigorous testing process where everything is documented carefully, documents are examined and double checked.
It's great to see 168 comments before first anti-vaxxer comment.