vaccination works and is a sensible thing to do.

that said: being suspicious of big pharma just pushing out something untested isn't anti-vaccination, it's the result of decades of big pharma fucking (pandemrix) and covering up (see thalidomide). if it would be more or less the nation who develops it, like with the cuban vaccine, there at least wouldn't be monetary incentives for hiding things. in effect just saying "welp, happens" e.g. for the swine flu vaccination causing narcolepsy isn't reassuring either.

the most unsettling thing is that the pro-side is unscientific in their communications. it's almost like teleshopping now, "haha, you won't grow another limb!". that's what people make them feel taken serious in their doubts about a rushed new technology vaccine.

@bonifartius Suspicion of blockbuster drugs is warranted in many cases. It's much less so for things that don't tend to make companies money, like vaccines and generic drugs.
Indeed, I can't think of a bad vaccine since the one for swine flu in the 60's.

@mathlover swineflu vaccination was 2000s, thaliodomide was 60s. i think you'd want to have any medication checked as much as possible. especially things which are taken by healthy people like vaccinations or anti baby pills (the list of possible complications is long for those, too). they are perfectly fine in principle, but pharma has no reason to do more the bare minimum, and like car manufacturers will search for loopholes. there is no reason for them not to.

@bonifartius Sorry. I meant the Hong Kong flu vaccine. The one that caused cases of Guillain Barre syndrome.
In the US, the requirements of FDA approval are pretty damn strict. We didn't even have approval for thalidomide here.