Shouldn't individuals have known that their fertility was impaired for several months? And couples trying to get pregnant spending thousands on IVF may be affected by boosters which are not presented in the study.
How can this be forced as a condition of employment when we are still learning about new side effects that lasted for several months? I understand your intentions may be pure Tuchodi, but much is still unknown. Where there is unknown, there is risk. Where there is risk, there should be a choice.
I understand long term prognosis remains good, but if it didn't remain good? 'Safe and effective' was presented as scientific dogma but we have new studies going on still that challenge that conclusion.
Your unwillingness to allow others to have a different opinion on medical choice is disturbing.
Shouldn't individuals have known that their fertility was impaired for several months? And couples trying to get pregnant spending thousands on IVF may be affected by boosters which are not presented in the study.
How can this be forced as a condition of employment when we are still learning about new side effects that lasted for several months? I understand your intentions may be pure Tuchodi, but much is still unknown. Where there is unknown, there is risk. Where there is risk, there should be a choice.
I understand long term prognosis remains good, but if it didn't remain good? 'Safe and effective' was presented as scientific dogma but we have new studies going on still that challenge that conclusion.
Your unwillingness to allow others to have a different opinion on medical choice is disturbing.