An 80% efficacy may be good enough for you to take the vaccine. But for someone they might be looking for 95% efficacy to make it worthwhile for them.
But in no circumstance, I should be able to dictate that my threshold of efficacy should be good enough for you, and thus you should take it as well, so that my riskier choice will provide better ROI for me...
Honestly, what are you talking about? I was responding to this original quote:
> They are putting themselves at risk surely, but the risk doesn't really spread to people who have been vaccinated.
This is false because no vaccine provides 100% protection. You even here have agreed we me. Your point that people should complain to vaccine manufacturers about efficacy is both irrelevant and misguided.
An 80% efficacy may be good enough for you to take the vaccine. But for someone they might be looking for 95% efficacy to make it worthwhile for them.
But in no circumstance, I should be able to dictate that my threshold of efficacy should be good enough for you, and thus you should take it as well, so that my riskier choice will provide better ROI for me...