Honest question: why do you say the risk of COVID is known, while the risks of the vaccines are not? Both have been around and exceptionally well studied for more than a year. We have pretty thorough data on the risks of both, don't we?
Not OP, but I guess some anti-vaxxers are wary that what if the vaccination has some "time-bomb" where bad things happen say 5 years after you take it.
But if they're worried about that, they should also be worried about stuff the virus might do in the long term.
I have to disagree here. I have diabetes and have the two shots already. My wife is pregnant and we decided not to risk it with the shots. Impact on pregnant women and babies is still not known. Some trials have started, but you can't just say it's been exceptionally well studied.
Astrazeneca did cause blood clot in some people who ended up dead. Yes, it's a very tiny fraction but this goes against what people are claiming to be the perfect cure.
I personally believe people should have the choice to take the shot.
My wife got the vaccine while pregnant at the advice of her doctors due to the comorbidities associated with contracting COVID while pregnant. Added bonus is that our baby (recently gave birth) has antibodies as well.
I do understand that it ought to be a choice, and it still is, even with these companies. It looks like they are carving out polices for exceptions because there are folks that are unable to get vaccinated. I would hope that being in a class of people who haven’t been rigorously tested (pregnant women) would qualify.
Beyond that, they aren’t requiring all employees to be vaccinated, but anyone who will be working from an office where they may put other employees at risk. The choice still belongs with the individual.
