>if it was so clear cut and widespread, these vaccines would be pulled from the market yesterday
That argument is empirically false, as there have been multiple medications and vaccinations which did widespread harm.
Granted, nearly all of them occurred 30+ years ago. However I don't think we should ever claim we've advanced to the point where we _know_ that there are _no_ medications or vaccinations that are causing problems we aren't aware of yet, especially given how long it might take for those problems to manifest themselves.
Not an argument against vaccination at all, just an argument for intellectual humility.
Once a vaccine has shown to be just remotely as dangerous as the illness it is trying to prevent, it becomes pointless and is no longer available. The respective regulative bodies in either country are rather strict about which vaccine is allowed to circulate.
Those vaccines were pulled _eventually_. We cannot know if we're in the period where harm is being done but before it's realized and the vaccine then pulled.
That argument is empirically false, as there have been multiple medications and vaccinations which did widespread harm.
Granted, nearly all of them occurred 30+ years ago. However I don't think we should ever claim we've advanced to the point where we _know_ that there are _no_ medications or vaccinations that are causing problems we aren't aware of yet, especially given how long it might take for those problems to manifest themselves.
Not an argument against vaccination at all, just an argument for intellectual humility.