Not at all - I have always had a neutral stance on vaccinations on the whole. A person can (and should) be skeptical of getting a new vaccine, and not be an anti-vaxxer. To me, an anti-vaxxer is someone who claims to evidence or science that repudiates the efficacy of vaccines, or make claims that it is part of a larger coordinated conspiracy.
My point, which alot of people seem to be missing, is that the vast majority of people do not understand where to seek out credible information, how to interpret numbers, the difference between evidence and anecdotes, how studies are designed etc. (I sound like a broken record). This includes both proponents of the vaccine and those that oppose it. With that being said, there are people far smarter than you or I who have dedicated their lives to researching this topic, and for the most part, they are saying vaccines help prevent the spread or severity of COVID. I think it would be more prudent to trust their opinions, that that of people peddling conspiracies on facebook, or anyone who says that they know the "real truth". The points raised in the previous article that attempts to debunk the safety of the vaccine by pointing to historical examples of malfeasance by pharmaceutical companies is an ad-hominem attack - if we show how evil pharma companies are, then why should we trust them with respect to the vaccine? Unfortunately, this isn't a valid argument - it's a distraction from the fact that there is a paucity of data showing vaccines are harmful or ineffectual.
Unless there is a conspiracy being perpetrated at a global level involving all levels of government, academia, the medical community etc., scientists are doing the best they can to develop a vaccine, develop safety protocols etc. to address a very fluid situation. People will often claim that Dr. Faucci changed his opinion on masks and social distancing, therefore he is not credible. What they are missing is that this is something that we haven't dealt with in our lifetime - we are learning as we go, what works and what doesn't. It is inevitable that guidance will change in response to the more we know about the situation.
While I am no medical expert, I am a trained statistician. The numbers are very black and white - while yes vaccinated people can still contract COVID, the severity of the illness is greatly reduced. Areas with stronger enforcement surrounding social distancing and mask mandates have lower reported incidences of COVID. Based on all available data to date, it would appear that vaccines and social distancing are the most effective measures for mitigating the spread of COVID. That isn't to say that it is perfect, nor is it to say that future circumstances won't change, but ceterus paribus, getting vaccinated is safer than not being vaccinated (once again, this is based on the data that we have).
I would be willing to bet that the same people who are claiming that vaccines are changing our DNA and implanting microchips could not understand an academic, peer reviewed paper. The fact that people think they can read some articles on the internet/watch youtube and think that they have an informed opinion on the subject is both laughable and insulting to actual experts.
