I’ll be more than willing to get a vaccine for myself and my family once one is available.

That is only true for about 6 months and then the effectiveness wears off dwindling down to nothing. Which is why you will end up needing another booster shot. Plus it does not keep you from spreading the virus nor keep the virus from escaping. We really need a vaccine that has neutralizing antibodies to do that. Hexapro looks promising but itâ(TM)s still being tested.

Oh you know, the ones where the government mandates that companies mandate a product that makes the people mandating rich. Even though that product doesnâ(TM)t protect you from the virus and if something goes wrong with the product there is no liability.

Oh, except these products are not really vaccines that protect you or the public from the virus. Viral loads are the same. No neutralizing antibodies. Its just risk pushed to masses while the benefits are reaped by the few.

Your right he was a control freak, "passion for perfection" is a euphemism. But, as a consumer, I'm much happier with Apple products then any other companies. mostly because Im impressed with Apples design. I'm loyal to them because they are giving me what I want in a product. The closest analogy I can come up with is cars. Some people like cars they can tinker with and hotrod, and some people want a car that just works they way they like to drive.

beginning to wonder what happened to slashdot, used to be libertarian now liberal..sad

Even if climate change is true, it doesn't matter heres why. Because Humans can figure out how to adapt and survive in any environment. Thats right, human ingenuity is strong such that we can develop technologies to deal with storms, rising weather, extreme temperatures and altered environments in general. Think about in history at what we as a species have done so far as proof of own knowledge and ability to survive. Personally, I don't buy into the notion that the government needs to save us from ourselves. That's never how problems are solved as the governement only has one tool in its tool box which is to use force. Forcing people to pay more money won't solve anything.

US-centric problem. The problem in the US isn't the science. As science is the rational search for knowledge. Its the application of the knowledge where the disagreement starts. For example the knowledge of nuclear energy can create bombs or power plants. GMO technology can be applied to maximize profits or maximize consumers health. Here in the US it seems to be used to maximize profits. The application of science is entirely debatable by the public because in a free market consumers have a choice.
when a technology is being debated about its use in the US, it comes down to a risk to reward ratio. The promoters of such technology invest time and money trying to convince the public that the risk is zero (i.e. its safe) so that the appearance of the technology is all rewards. But in reality, we know that there are always tradeoffs with the use of any technology.

No its not harmless
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic_acid
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenoestrogen

you NEED to do more research before you post non-sense.

yea, the intellectual property is another facet of the argument I agree with you on. the labelling thing from what I understand is already factored in because organic means non-gmo to my understanding. so if you don't want gmo then buy organic. From a marketing standpoint, the type of people who buy GMO free food would also want it to be pesticide free as well. these people wouldn't buy one quality without the other included.