Recent reports indicate that the reason it's getting FDA approval so soon is not because of any specific scientific evidence or the standard FDA process, but instead it's being approved early as a deliberate political tactic to undermine this argument used by people who don't trust the vaccines: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/04/fda-approval-pfizer...

I don't think it's the "anti-vax camp" who's behind the major shifting of the goalposts here.

> Recent reports indicate that the reason it's getting FDA approval so soon is not because of any specific scientific evidence or the standard FDA process, but instead it's being approved early as a deliberate political tactic to undermine this argument used by people who don't trust the vaccines:

> https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/04/fda-approval-pfizer...

That is not information, explicit or implicit, that is in that article.

> Requiring people to consume a medical product just to live their normal lives is morally wrong.

> So your hang up is the FDA giving full approval?

Perhaps they will but could you save the strawman arguments for then as well.

It’s not a strawman. We already require a variety of vaccinations so the “requiring people to consume a medical product is wrong” argument is bunk. The only differentiation is that this vaccine has yet to receive full approval. I’m simply focusing on the only relevant part of the argument that is being made here, and pointing out that in 6 weeks it won’t hold any water anymore.