Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a doomer, conspiratorial take without any evidence, especially when it's a vailed insinuation.
All evidence starts as anecdotal observation. Even the world’s most groundbreaking papers are, at their root, a collection of anecdotal observations others look into. Secondly, absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence. Just because there’s no evidence for something being harmful, doesn’t mean there’s any evidence proving the something isn’t harmful. So look, I’m not an antivaxxer, but I say, “prove it.” Instea…
And the burden of proof generally is on the person making a claim. If someone says or implies that a vaccine causes cancer, then it’s on them to prove that, not on the vaccine maker to magically prove a negative.