use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
subreddit:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~3 users here now
What is happening in this world
submitted 2 years ago * by magnora7 from self.whatever
view the rest of the comments →
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (6 children)
do you think it would be ok to take away their immunity, since the vaccine is so safe?
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (5 children)
Immunity from prosecution is not the main problem. It was merely to allow for a quick turn-around of the vaccines and tests, without the worry of litigation, particularly in the US, where anyone could have challeged the process, shutting it down, only for political reasons. Oxford U. did not have to worry about this. Big Pharma is however not immune from serious challenges, if especially there are any serious side effects. For example, Oxford's AstraZenica was pulled form some of the markets. Propaganda websites focus on this immunity issue, but it's not what anyone worries about in the present case. If there are serious side effects, the value of the research, development and manufacturing investments will drop exponentially. But that's not happened in the US. There is a much bigger legal explanation about the importance of the initial immunity from prosecution clause, but it would take too long to write here. It's essentially a nothing burger. There are controls in place - in the market - to stop a vaccine distribution if there are serious side effects.
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (4 children)
is that a no
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (3 children)
it's a no, until next year or the year after, while research is in process.
[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (2 children)
maybe people should wait till then to get the vaccine
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (1 child)
I explained that the market keeps Big Pharma's vaccines in check. If there are problems, the vaccine is pulled, as has happend in some countries for AstraZeneca. The immunity clause merely helps them avoid frivolous lawsuits.
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (0 children)
Question.... do you have stock in these vax companies? I notice that a lot of degenerates promotign these vaccines always are shareholders.
view the rest of the comments →
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (6 children)
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (5 children)
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (3 children)
[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun - (1 child)
[–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (0 children)