Really interesting approach, but I must agree with the critics that this needs much better testing. The bureaucracy may be annoying, but we do rigorous testing for a reason. The harm that could be done by unsafe, untested vaccines is not just problematic because of the people that it could harm directly, but because of the already growing number of people who are unwilling to vaccinate themselves and their children out of (unfounded) concerns over safety.
While often true, they still end up making life better for millions of people often enough to be worth it.
Just because we can’t see it doesn’t mean we can’t observe it and characterize it. This line of thinking is so limited because it only considers our senses in how they’re applied directly.
Is reality actually what we experience? Who knows. Does it matter? Not really, I’d argue. There are provable facts underlying the reality we experience which are true regardless of an individual or even a collective’s perception of them. Gamma rays exist without you perceiving them. But they are provably true. Their effects can be measured. They can be observed. If they couldn’t, then we would never know they exist and thus they’d in essence not exist for us. But would that matter?
Our tool use and application of our intelligence is still quite unique. Special is a loaded term, but humans are very different from all other life forms on this planet - and of course, in many ways, still very much the same.