>This is where ya'll are disingenuous as shit. Ya'll CARE
>about ppl dying but if they die from a vaxx they are just
>liars. There are VAERS equivalents in UK, EU, etc and theres
>thousands dead there too...

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong about this- and it shows that you're the one being disingenuous. The issue that is consistently echoed about VAERS is that those are unverified reports.

In fact, the VAERS website makes this crystal clear:

https://vaers.hhs.gov/data/dataguide.html

They go as far as saying, "Reports vary in quality and completeness. They often lack details and sometimes can have information that contains errors."

And they go into a fair amount of detail about this. Hell, this is the opening statement on their own site:

"When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established."

So no, nobody is saying that if they die from being vaccinated, they're just liars. It's that the data source that is, as far as I can tell, the most often cited for this, is by it's own admission wrought with serious limitations, which makes this particular data point questionable.

So the issue, yet again, is sourcing. And you're being egregiously disingenuous by saying that people are saying that anyone who dies from a vaccine is just a liar. That's not happening.

If you want a better response to that data, provide a better source.

>More vaccine deaths in 6 months than the last 30 years
>combined....ya its definitely a more risky vaxx than previous
>ones, that shouldnt even be debatable.

Do you have a better data source than VAERS?

>I undestand that 0.02% chance of dying is LOW AF.

Do you think death is the only issue here?

Because it's not.

Further, that's pretty high in the context of a full blown, global pandemic.

>Or maybe I have multiple fam members with blood clot / heart
>conditions and they CANT TAKE THE VACCINE

If that's the case, then why are you so angry with the mandate?

Because vaccines are an integral element of developing heard immunity. The data shows that unvaccinated people are quite clearly at a significantly higher rate of infection, severity of infection, and death.

Which means the loved ones you speak of are precisely why herd immunity is vital. You yell CANT TAKE THE VACCINE as though ANYBODY who is pro vaxx and passionately anti-anti vax thinking are also saying that those who cannot get vaccinated should get it too.

You have this point exactly backward.

or are scared
>shitless of it? I dont really do anecdotes though but since
>you wanna push that horseshit ...

You're talking about people who are scared shitless, and your big data point is from a source that very clearly and meticulously explains, on their own website, that there are significant limits to what their data can objectively convey- up to and including causality.

Your entire argument rests on anecdotes.

>Yall are the ones tauting the mRNA tech and how they been
>working on it and perfecting it long before COVID. Maybe they
>actually perfect it down the line and are able to address some
>of its shortcomings or side effects? Is that really too much
>to ask for?

YES., YES IT IS, given the incredibly bad reasons you've cited.

In fact... at least one is already FDA approved.

>My problem with all this reasoning is simple....The virus has
>a 0.02% death rate (per you), which is apparently enough to
>shut down the world and mandate masks/vaccines/etc....
>
>But as soon as somebody dies from the vaccines ya'll be like
>"o they old, they obese, thats a lie"

NO, as addressed above. Not only is your data badly sourced, you're grossly misrepresenting the reason most people dispute the vaccinated death reports- which is the badly sourced data you're using.