Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

In this case, you are misrepresenting the argument I'm trying to convey by comparing it to something that is proven without a shadow of a doubt (the earth is round). You misrepresented the initial claim as being a statement on the "proven safety (or lack thereof) of covid mRNA vaccines" whereas it was merely about the "uncertainty of the safety of covid mRNA vaccines".

Also to address your other leaky arguments.

> However it makes no sense to me to say, of two vaccine types that have had the same amount of testing

One of the vaccine types (hint: adenovirus vectored) has an instance that has approval for use by EMA. Now if you want to raise questions about the rigor of the EMA compared to that of the FDA and as a result their relative safety compared to the other vaccine types, you are free to do so. Like I mentioned, even if you want to omit that specific type of vaccine, my point still stands. It makes 0 difference to the argument I'm making. If you don't understand this basic point and are unable to progress beyond a single technicality, there is no use having a discussion because you don't get the point that is being made.

> Indeed that was my point: flat earth is nuts. If your argument could be used to support a patently false position than there is almost certainly a mistake in your logic

What is this patently false position you speak of? The only patently false argument I can think of is your insistence that there is enough evidence to conclude that the covid vaccines are conclusively safe over the long term.

You do not need any additional evidence to prove that the earth is not flat. You absolutely do need more evidence to conclude with high probability that the covid vaccines are safe long-term for the obvious fact that there has not been sufficient time since a large group has been vaccinated to know. Not to mention the various variants which the vaccines don't seem to be effective against.

> Again that's very literally the opposite of what a straw man argument is. Wikipedia has an article on the topic if you are curious.

You should definitely go read up on what a strawman argument is. I am not surprised that you use such arguments given that your understanding of them is incomplete. To clarify, I'm referring to the fact that based on your previous responses, I can guess that you are prone to misunderstanding what I am saying as "covid vaccines are especially prone to having horrendous side effects" as opposed to "there is uncertainty about its long-term safety, for good reason".

> I'm claiming that you're evaluating its safety irrationally and inconsistently (or perhaps without researching the underlying topic)

I clearly just outlined several reasons to be skeptical of mRNA vaccines. I have many friends who are immunologists and pharmaceutical scientists who know about the history of mRNA vaccines and their associated risks. If you have no clue about this, you're the pot calling the kettle black and you should do more reading instead of wasting my time. Your deference to "experts" in the public eye clearly supersedes your ability for critical thinking, making sound logical arguments and reading primary literature.

> No, you want to live in society.

You don't know what I want.

> Being part of a society means, to some extent, accepting that many things which affect you every day are outside of your control and will be decided by someone else.

No it doesn't. You have shown zero proof to back up this statement. It is 100% completely possible to have a completely voluntary society. There is no reason force needs to be used to have a society. It even has a name: anarchy.

This is just the way your world view has been shaped by the status quo and where you grew up. Your mind is closed friend. Society doesn't require government.

> No, you want the benefits of society without being a contributor to it.

Again, you don't know me or what I want.

So for a more like-to-like comparison, let’s look at flu vaccine numbers, which gets administered to about 40% of American adults every year (including women of childbearing age). That would mean over the 20 years before 2021, about 250 million flu shots were administered to women of childbearing age, which is at least 5x more than the ~50 million doses of COVID vaccines given to women of child bearing age (my upper estimate based on your quoted vaccination rate for women of childbearing age times 6 months times 2 doses). However, anywhere between 40%-48% of spontaneous abortions over the last 20 years (depending on your exact query) are from this year. Which to me implies that the COVID vaccines are many times more harmful for reproduction than the flu vaccines, and the harm multiplier only gets bigger considering that there are other vaccines that women of childbearing might get that aren’t just the flu vaccine that I’m not counting.

In any case, there is clearly some debate to be had here, that probably neither of us are really qualified to have. However it is worrying to me that attention doesn’t really get drawn to this and we don’t have many real experts weighing in on what this data means.

You have the freedom to misrepresent my words, but you don't have the freedom to actually change what I wrote, which remains published above.

> Society doesn't require government.

I never said society requires government. Only that it requires collective decision-making. You could require all collective decisions to require 100% agreement among all members, but then you'd achieve little to nothing.

There is no single "vaccine material" and pretending there is this single magic completely disappearing thing in all vaccines is disingenuous at best.

Also, just because something disappear from the body does not mean that it will have long lasting impacts (of course that is the point, where the gained immunity is a positive impact, but there could also be negative)