> Im social distancing, wearing a mask doing all the things necessary

Those things are emergency measures, that are important, but not anywhere near as effective as vaccines are. They stop things from rapidly spiraling out of control so instead they just slowly spiral. Its a holding action, one with a pretty high cost, not a solution.

> that has been rushed through trials

They've had the same amount of safety testing as other vaccines. With the rollout, they've probably had more real world testing than many vaccines.

> So please dont call me horrible and selfish

You're taking an action that threatens the lives of other people based on fears about personal safety that don't seem based in reality (at least for the pfizer vaccine. If you want to argue that the blood clots for AZ are scary regardless of their rarity, fine by all means).

Most people use the term selfish to describe someone who puts their own well being ahead of the group even when their concerns for personal safety are valid. If their concerns are largely made up, i can't help but think the adjective fits.

Thank you for being better at words than me.

I got the vaccine for solely practical reasons(it's becoming a requirement for international travel). Im not a hero, I didnt do it to save anybody. It has nothing to do with denying science and more to do with the fact that we can look at the same statistic and what you consider an existential threat and what I consider an existential threat are different. I still dont think accusing someone of selfishness is the proper way to go about it.

> what you consider an existential threat and what I consider an existential threat are different

You're argument that not taking the vaccine is not being selfish is that the risk you are taking by forgoing the vaccine is only a threat to other people not a threat to yourself??

> Im not a hero

Obviously not. Nobody here is a hero. We're talking about an injection with extremely low risk of serious side effects, not storming the beaches of Normandy.

They're choosing to become immune naturally instead of pumping an experimental drug into his body.

If they're under 55 and healthy they're actually doing a good thing by letting people who actually need the vaccine get it.

It's arguable that actually getting the vaccine if you're healthy and young is selfish by stopping someone who needs it from getting it.

Think if all the people in India and Brazil had the vaccines the young and healthy are taking in America.

Do you think India has time now for “natural immunity”?

Think if all of the young people in Western countries didn't get vaccinated and we distributed those vaccines to the grandmother's in India who need them.

> legitimate concerns

FWIW, I didn't see any legitimate concerns. I would love to hear a legitimate concern.

All I see is "but I don't know... I'm not sure...". And I just don't get it. facepalm I fully admit this could be due to a lack of imagination on my part. I often suffer from that, especially when it comes to empathy.

> Thank you everyone for having this frank discussion and not canceling or censoring it(even though it has cost me quite a bit of karma it has given me more perspective and I appreciate that)

Bravo, solidly agree. Things will only be broken more when we can't even talk with each other. Glad we can still do that. Whew. And I'll upvote your comments, should you care about the points. :)

You can't really test these things for long term side-effects/damage. Pretty legitimate concern in my book.

Short term side-effects and effectivenes and such are pretty well known by this point

A legitimate concern? Is not knowing or not understanding NOT a legitimate reason for concern? Would blind trust be better? I started my comments on this thread because I found much of the information I have been seeking is a direct result of an almost dogma being thrust upon society on what is OK to say and what is not regarding Vaccines, and when someone does say something wrong they are silenced by bans or deleted/moderated posts.

Cutting out a persons tongue doesn't make them wrong or prove You right, unless the argument is over who has a longer tongue.

> Is not knowing or not understanding NOT a legitimate reason for concern?

No. Because trustworthy information is easy to find and because "I don't understand X" can be used to argue against doing literally everything, including completely ridiculous things like insisting that wifi towers be taken down due to "wifi allergies". Making a decision that harms other people because of your own personal ignorance is not free from criticism.

> and when someone does say something wrong they are silenced by bans or deleted/moderated posts

You've got dozens of posts in this thread that are not deleted and have dozens of people trying to provide you with accurate information to help. There is no conspiracy here. You aren't being silenced.