extremely
There is no need for any site to answer that. The first 3 questions have the same answer. Question of threshold from which one estimates the acceptable risks compared to the constraints of the process.
And who decides on these thresholds? The manufacturer judges and parties, which is the most doubtful of all systems.
Less risk would be too many constraints, which could then no longer be followed, and more risks, it would be too much for the health consequences, in relation to our requirements and the size of the health system.
This is abstract and political discourse that reasons false in terms of numbers, no real humanism and all that based on experimental DIY!
The real world is not binary, the threshold is arbitrary, and not all parameters are mastered. We're in real life, not theory.
Precisely, when playing with fire, (the parameters are not mastered) we risk fires and victims of this game.
Question 4 is obvious: we are not going to spend the rest of our lives with a mask and overcrowded hospitals (because not everyone wears a mask. If you believe that since the covid the high school students / high school students do not kiss each other more when they meet, you've got it all wrong).
Always so null especially if, in spite of the vaccines, the epidemics set out again and it is not by re-vaccinating ad infinitum that it will put an end to it, quite the contrary.
Question 5 is also. Either we want the pharmaceutical industry to take its time before mass-producing a safe product for which it responds, and part of the population dies while the other suffocates under its mask, or we think that the pharmaceutical industry has a product that is certainly not sufficiently tested over the long term, but the benefits of which are now estimated to outweigh the risks, and so we ask it to produce.
This is the drama; it's like making bombs without knowing the risks that it will blow up in the mouths of those who designed them.
It's like asking a cabinetmaker to make a custom table in 24 hours. Do not expect the same finish as after a week of work. I would understand his reluctance to provide the same guarantee if he was no longer in control of his working time.
A true cabinetmaker aware of his role would refuse a shoddy job; his reputation being at stake, so without having to guarantee anything. Only margoulins unworthy of their profession would sell themselves for a fleeting glory, but the big labs don't give a fuck, especially with complete impunity, as long as the cash drawer fills up regularly.
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré