We read history books. Thats us being told by a historian who looked into the matter personally.

but there will always be uninformed and lazy people on the *administrative side* of these issues too..... ppl in govt bureaucracy act in self-interested ways too.... thats the problem. they can be just as uninfomed and irrational too.. that is why forced vaccination is too dangerous (and morally wrong)

And of course, there is harm in being withheld info from "for your own protection"

Also thats why Vac is a hard question

Im all of the people have a right.

But we can also see the results of not enough people being vaccinated.

For me the solution is to ensure all people are properly informed of the results. But that wont work if there is no trust.

im all for innovations and improving vaccination science and practice to be less risky/hazardous than it is currently

What are the risks of vaccinations as of now?

We do get some allergic reactions I guess.

sorry i dont want to get into that.... there are dozens of potential complications from neurological disorders to auto-immune diseases, mental retardation (of infants in pregnant mothers)... and of course to death

potential?

Or are they saying, it could, but has it?

there just needs to be more long-term, impartial, third party, peer reviews, non-manufacturor funded studies

the jury is still out. so the science is not settled in the meantime

It will take some time unfortuanately.

so best not be enact wreckless forced vaccination policies

THe science behind vaccines mean that the ones most "knowledgable" about it are the ones behind it.

remember the vax producers are self-interested too

I mean the complexity of the science behind it.

Exactly.

And so are the antivac as well.

they have an incentive to potentially be dishonest with you because of excessive profits they get from government doing the dirty work of pushing it out to the public and forcing them to pay for it

Thats why I said, people need to be more result oriented.

Intent does not matter to me as long as it brings about the results.

Why does it being profit oritented mean that vaccines are bad in the first place?

And that people need to be thaught of the results first.

Results could be altered to make it seems better than it originally is, or even removing the harmful side effects

That is true.

THat depends entirely on the company to be honest. which for sure will not.

no i didnt mean that... bcuz its a good thing to be rewarded by safe and effected vaccinations if they work as intended ... i didnt mean profit per se.... just the PERVERSE incentives that develop bcuz of collusion w/ the govt by force ..... it screws up the whole incentive structure

that is in their self-interest to be honest too.... in a free market with cut-throat competition

Ah forgive me, I have the libertarian slant.

all good, me too 😉 plenty of room for variety of opinions among libertarians ::high five::

We got to always assume that pharma's are always profit oriented, and do not always put the public interest to heart

Assuming the same of all companies in general.

They do not operate for the best of the public.

So all you can do is to ensure that the interest of the public and their own align enough

We do need tighter regulation from the government, which could also be in the big pharma's pocket

they cannot have public interested if they dont have to be accountable to their customer base and be held responsible for their mistakes

Which is an issue, they are too big.