I, actually, agree on this. It was hard balancing act of protecting the population (quite successfully I will note) vs lack of perfect certainty about safety. I've read there've been clinical trials of other mRNA vaccines in mid 2010s so there've been some research data available.
Now, on other hand, we have a lot of data to dig into and seemingly to prove safety of the vaccines.
> Moreover, at one point they wanted to force [2] them on the population.
Yeah, I think this wasn't a good idea. Especially after it was clear we're not getting full protection and covid turning to be endemic.
> If the vaccine really is safe and effective, why was the waiver necessary?
Balancing act mentioned above protecting suppliers, won't be surprised if it was part of negotiations between government and vaccine manufacturers.
I think we can see mRNA vaccine are mostly safe (and we'll get even better certainty about it as time passes) which is given how cool the technology is opens up a lot of opportunities.
Personally, I feel safer taking mRNA vaccines. (And definitely an apples-to-apples novel mRNA vs traditional vaccine!)
Simpler and consumed, so fewer chances for things to go wrong via adverse immune system reactions.
My experience actually looking at these groups is they did understand it better than most. The various studies people are pulling up in this thread today, showing more research is needed? They were sharing and talking about similar studies in 2021 and 2022 during the period everyone else was blindly repeating the "safe and effective" mantra.
Quick edit for an example of one of these earlier studies they were sharing: https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73
Very few people who I talked to outside of HN could give me a coherent definition of a randomized controlled trial.
I'm all for people being curious, but the catch in modern society is that people also need to be honest about their own ignorance.
Because faux curiosity being used to mask discomfort in ignorance is a recipe for bad outcomes.
Then COVID hit, and suddenly we decided to rush MRNA [1] vaccines into mass production without those protocols. Moreover, at one point they wanted to force [2] them on the population.
The thing that bothered me most is the government passed a law to prevent people from suing for damages if they're hurt by COVID vaccines [3]. If the vaccine really is safe and effective, why was the waiver necessary?
[1] If the made the COVID vaccine the same way they've been making them since polio, I'd be less uneasy -- if you made 25 vaccines with the process and they all worked okay, saying "it should be fine" for the 26th one is backed by some evidence.
But given MRNA vaccines were brand-new with the COVID ones, until then they'd made 0 vaccines with the process; saying "it should be fine" for the 1st one seems to be rather irresponsible.
[2] In my opinion, "you're being forced to do X" is a fair description of the situation if you have to show proof you did X if you want to get a job, get an education, or get on an airplane. Around the time of the first vaccines getting rolled out, these policies were being discussed very seriously.
[3] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-c...