[tarere]

I will address the elephant in the room on this one.

168 comments so far, I did a research for word "vaccine" in the page, not a single result. So I assume this has not been discussed despite the current situation we are living right now.

I've just read 2 articles about Moderna in general and Bancel in particular : https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-07-14/moderna-m... And Vanity Fair, unfortunatly in french https://www.vanityfair.fr/pouvoir/business/story/stephane-ba...

This is a frightenning read as we people in France are being literraly forced by our gouvernement to be vaccinated (Moderna, Pfizer) or be socially terminated.

I did not know, I'm pretty sure 99,99% of people also don't, that Moderna did not release a single product before 2020 and it "all in" bet in the Covid Vaccine with up to 1 billion funding from operation warp speed. Moderna was sometimes refered as the next Theranos. His leader fits clearly in the sociopath territory of Silicon Valley tranhsumanist billionnaires. "risk very big, win very big" is his mantra, this man wants to vaccinate billions of people annualy (read article please).

More, if you read those two articles, you could change Vaccine by any software product and you would have a typical business article about a Silicon Valley startup. This is frightening to death to think that this technology "software vaccine" is to be used on the whole population with only a few month of study and, worse, with "forced consentment" on populations.

Guess what happens when money conflict with health.

[nabla9]

No results because vaccines are not accepted based on publications and peer review on scientific papers.

They go trough completely different and extremely rigorous testing process where everything is documented carefully, documents are examined and double checked.

It's great to see 168 comments before first anti-vaxxer comment.

[sharot4]

It's not great to go about name-calling like a schoolchild if someone brings up misgivings about a topic you seem to have decided has no room for discussion.

[logicalmonster]

> They go trough completely different and extremely rigorous testing process where everything is documented carefully, documents are examined and double checked.

Rigorous testing is all well and good, but we do know how many errors crop up in scientific papers, right? A lot.

The gold standard of testing is double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled studies and this is only done sometimes for vaccines, as far as I aware.

I believe there are certain circumstances such as no safe and effective already existing vaccine, or where there's a certain kind of benefit to the injected population, where vaccines are generally allowed to go through this double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled studies (the gold standard of testing) and certain circumstances where they do not go through such rigorous testing.

I believe this ethic stems from Jonas Salk's decision during the development of the Polio vaccine where the ethical call was made to not do double-blind, placebo controlled testing due to the desire to prevent damage to human lives that could be prevented by not using a placebo.

I invite fact-checking on everything stated.

[tarere]

I was speaking of the HN page discussion, but it seems my search on Firefox is completely broken, so I withdraw my mention of no vaccine reference, but I stand to be commented on the subject.