Re: Pfizer or Oxford?
Ghost, I see what you're driving at, with at least a few of your points. I don't agree, but I'm not here to demonize you.
A few rebuttals though.
You say that humans have more potential than rats.
I guess this is subjective. If you mean that humans have more potential to advance human interests, then sure. But if you mean that humans are doing more for the world at large, think again. The earth would be far, far better off without us here. Stop and really think about that for a second.
Also, you're dealing with leaky ethics again. Rats have families, personalities and complex social structures. Why is it okay to snuff them out - to raise them from birth fully with the intention of killing them - but it's not okay to even speed up medical trials in a pandemic? I think you've got a bit to think about. Do me a favour though; please don't answer me this question, but rather answer it for yourself.
You say that we have to pay people to do clinical trials.
Why? Where is it written in any hard science that financial compensation must be provided for a potentially life-altering risk? I am not saying we flat-out -can't pay people, but that's coercion, and gets into more shaky ethics.
In addition, the fact that submitting yourself to a Covid-19 trial might affect your offspring? Welcome to 2021, stay awhile. Most big choices you make will have an impact on that, including the choice to have children in the first place. The trick here would be to make absolutely certain that we have told participants as much as we possibly can about the risks, side effects and complications. Truth is, you never know 100% of what you think you do, so you're always taking risks to some degree. That's life. But we would need to remove all reasonable doubt if we wanted to do these challenge trials. No one's going to force anyone to engage in them if they don't want to - that's just nasty - but for those who want to? I say let them try, provided all those safeguards I mentioned are in place.
You say we should have done better with medical research and the allocation of funds.
Yup, agreed. But we didn't. Wish in one hand, spit in the other; see which one fills up first. It would have been lovely if we hadn't been idiots about this. We were, and now we're reaping the whirlwind. Hopefully this puts our future medical decisions into some sort of perspective. Our whole pharmaceutical industry - worldwide, even - is pretty bloated and broken, and it needs serious overhaul. In fact, a ton of things need serious overhaul. But that's not a good argument as to why we shouldn't use the tools we have at our disposal right now to help people be safer. There is no scenario that has us risking zero human lives to perform accurate human trials; that just can't happen under these circumstances. I suggest your make your peace with that reality.
So, short answer.
Q: If I don't have any related complications, which vaccine should I take, Fizer or Oxford?
A: Yes.
-- Audiogames-reflector mailing list Audiogames-reflector@sabahattin-gucukoglu.com https://sabahattin-gucukoglu.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/audiogames-reflector
