I suggest the RaDVaC article, as evidence of what experts think about vaccine safety when they’re focused on protecting themselves.
You might follow that up with this suggestion about why the FDA might mislead us: if people notice that some vaccines are safer than the alternative by really big margins, they’ll start asking why we don’t just bypass FDA review in some cases. That will bias the FDA to suggest that most vaccines are tough choices, which need the FDA’s expertise to evaluate. But given big variations in how harmful diseases are, this will lead the FDA to be too cautious about the worst diseases.
Also, it can’t hurt to mention evidence of asymmetric blame that motivates the FDA to overstate the risks of all medical treatments.
I suggest the RaDVaC article, as evidence of what experts think about vaccine safety when they’re focused on protecting themselves.
You might follow that up with this suggestion about why the FDA might mislead us: if people notice that some vaccines are safer than the alternative by really big margins, they’ll start asking why we don’t just bypass FDA review in some cases. That will bias the FDA to suggest that most vaccines are tough choices, which need the FDA’s expertise to evaluate. But given big variations in how harmful diseases are, this will lead the FDA to be too cautious about the worst diseases.
Also, it can’t hurt to mention evidence of asymmetric blame that motivates the FDA to overstate the risks of all medical treatments.