The corporate press does everything possible to make it seem to the common person that vaccines are the very single medical technology that has zero side-effects and zero long-term safety issues, but that couldn't be further from the truth.
(Wiley is not some crazy conspiracy theory crap, they make legitimate textbooks for colleges everywhere.)
Not to mention, the question itself is biased. You should really ask, Is there any example of an entirely new medical technology (really, three, if you consider the LNP) which post-deployment caused long-term safety issues?
And that would be a resounding yes.
And, please again note, even knowing all I do about all those things and the dangers of vaccines, I still am more vaccinated than you, having taken, e.g., rabies vaccine, even knowing the not-insignificant risks involved.
However, there was a risk I'd catch and be injured by rabies.
There's almost zero risk I'll be injured by covid, lol.
I mean, as well, look at the injuries being caused by the vaccines: They happen to people like me, young and healthy. Covid only hurts the fat people my age. Why would I take the side of the risk that hurts people like me?
Have some spare change?
A textbook on vaccines and autoimmunity.
> Aluminium is, of course, a powerful immunogen, being the preferred adjuvant in vaccination and immunotherapy. This activity as an adjuvant, and concomitantly as an antigen, at injection sites in skin or muscle must also be considered for focal accumulations of aluminium within the CNS and such reactivity may underlie aluminium’s suggested roles in autoimmunity [3–5]
You should’ve seen the Merck gardasil trials (Before they’re approved) adverse reactions and the % of girls who developed lasting autoimmunity disorders. The 1 vaccine trial that used a placebo.
Here is a book on Vaccines and Auto-Immunity written by highly credentialed immunologists.
Would you call them anti-science?