Talk:Planet Lockdown
Add topicLatest comment: 2 years ago by Hob Gadling in topic Testing, of the lack of?
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
Testing, of the lack of?
[edit]While there are clearly a number of wild media stories concerning the COVID-19 vaccines, is it not a fact that the time taken for safety testing was greatly reduced? Also, despite there being relatively little of evidence of people dropping dead, are there not worrying reports about side effects from taking this under-tested vaccine? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.166.240 (talk) 19:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
is it not a fact that the time taken for safety testing was greatly reduced
Yes, for Putin's Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine. For the others, not as far as I know.- There are always
worrying reports about side effects
because of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. Only innumerate people believe those. Still, one of the vaccines was pulled because of tiny amounts of such "side effects". - Also, this is not a forum. --Hob Gadling (talk) 07:08, 8 November 2023 (UTC)