Yoi’re right, letting them get infected with life-threatening diseases with as little protection as possible is much more responsible.
Only thing this is benefiting is big pharma, they don’t make money off of healthy people.
This has always been a stupid argument. Imagine two pharmaceutical companies, A and B. A develops a treatment that treats but doesn’t cure a patient. B develops a more expensive treatment, but it completely cures a patient.
Which company would you want to be a customer of? Obviously B, they can cure you. Pharmaceutical companies are financially incentivised to cure rather than treat.
Now imagine A also tries to develop a cure. The only was they can compete is by making the cure cheaper, safer or more effective.
Being the only one with a cure means you can also ask higher prices, as you’ve essentially monopolised a disease.
This is also self-evident from all the diseases that we’ve found cures for in the last few decades. Even cancer is becoming less and less of a death sentence.
Well then, you go right ahead and take RFK Jrs health advice.
Good luck.
Removed by mod
Your son got heart damage and you think RFK Jr is right? You’re a horrible parent.
Removed by mod
Im not going to bother with an antivaxxor moron, i wouldn’t be surprised if you think the earth is flat too.
I hope your child survives you.
Spoken like a true friend to polio
And a terrible parent.
Also, they think RFK is right about being antivax despite getting heart damage from COVID?
I’m thinking what we need to finally wake people up is a major polio outbreak.
As if it wouldn’t be explained away as either 1) a hoax or 2) a conspiracy brought on by one’s political rivals
That didn’t work on the anti-vaxxers and anti-maskers during the 1918 flu pandemic.
Yoi’re right, letting them get infected with life-threatening diseases with as little protection as possible is much more responsible.
This has always been a stupid argument. Imagine two pharmaceutical companies, A and B. A develops a treatment that treats but doesn’t cure a patient. B develops a more expensive treatment, but it completely cures a patient.
Which company would you want to be a customer of? Obviously B, they can cure you. Pharmaceutical companies are financially incentivised to cure rather than treat.
Now imagine A also tries to develop a cure. The only was they can compete is by making the cure cheaper, safer or more effective.
Being the only one with a cure means you can also ask higher prices, as you’ve essentially monopolised a disease.
This is also self-evident from all the diseases that we’ve found cures for in the last few decades. Even cancer is becoming less and less of a death sentence.
He’s wrong.