Earlier today I was reading an article in the Wired Magazine and found one that was quite misleading. It was an article written by Adam Rogers where he asserted as if to make a final conclusion that “Vaccine Mandates Work—but Only If They’re Done Right Requiring people to get their shots can stop Covid-19, but those rules have to be doable and equitable.”
That’s a lie. First of all, the vaccines do not stop the spread of the covid-19 virus, it only minimizes the severity of the effects of the symptoms and may provide some layer of protection, but we have seen fully vaccinated persons contracting the virus so please do not mislead the American public @wired magazine. And people with certain immunity also have a layer of protection.
Secondly, DO NOT WORK IN REVERSE. The vaccines are not approved and that calls into question any mandate requiring Americans to get vaccinated. So, what have the FDA and the politicians done, rush to approve the covid-19 vaccines so that now they can justify implementing mandates requiring vaccinations without augmenting the vaccine or making them more effective.
Further and to add insult to injury, only two vaccines are approved for use: Pfizer and Biotech. Question: if only those two vaccines are approved, why is that so? And what will the mandate for vaccination look like? For if you only approve #Pfizer and Biotech then we can only mandate the use of those two vaccines and that becomes an issue of competition and fairness. For if you say that the vaccines are now approved for use which makes it easier for mandates, how do require people to be vaccinated when only two vaccines are approved. Then you will force or mandate individuals to get those vaccines that are approved and then this leaves us with an issue of choice and competition and further what about those who used the Moderna and other non-approved vaccines?