I have seen very few antivax arguments made in the spirit of science. Those that were got repeated lacking the original comment’s nuance.
Keep in mind that the spirit of science was developed with the gates of wealth, literacy and education in mind. Remove those, add in anonymity, or even pseudonymity, and the system veers towards chaos. We are far more open, today, than the Enlightenment-era West was. That requires new tools and guardrails. (What this discussion, broadly, is about.)
I don't know how many people have gotten banned over this (though I'd guess nonzero) but it shows just how easy it is to fall under the new draconian speech policies enacted by the majority of social media.
> The Scottish and UK data (which they'll now stop publishing) show that the effectiveness against hospitalization and death of those with only two shots is now negative.
You don't know how to read statistics.
Meanwhile my post fades into grey soon to be invisible and then the next person like you can claim that they just don't see those science-minded vaccine skepticism comments / posts.
> You've shifted your argument from your doubts have been proven true
No, that's not what I did. I showed that there is actually evidence for each of the points you brought up.
Edit: But I do recall the COVID origin discussion being quite a censorship trainwreck.