Yes it did. But that one was also a traditional vaccine, not an mRNA one that these idiots screamed conspiracy about.

They used that to throw doubt on all vaccines in general.

As far as I can tell, that vaccine wasn't pulled because it was unsafe, it was recommended against because there were other competing vaccines that were safer and more effective.

Its like how they don't sell cars without backup cameras anymore. Its not like the cars were unsafe without backup cameras (actually all cars are unsafe), but in that rare chance (basically 0.0001% if we're continuing the analogy), it can save a life by using a car with a camera.

I think people have a poor understanding of what the terms "fully studied" and "extremely rare side effects" mean. In colloquial speak, these vaccines were "fully studied". For every person who had a vaccine "accident", there were millions whose lives were saved by the vaccine.

People are willing to take huge risks for convenience (cars), but they're unwilling to trade away huge risk in return for a microscopic risk (vaccines).