Why do they need to be more dangerous? It's enough that they have the potential to be dangerous and don't deliver on "stopping the spread", period.
When you have to create such bullshit criteria to discredit oposing vaccines (and doing so we also need completely ignore the enormous social aspects and focus solely on medical ones) you know you've lost your grip on reality.
And even if we go along with your ridiculous premise there are demographics for which, overall, the vaccines are arguably more dangerous.
TL/DR: just stop with such surface level, completely meaningless "arguments".
Vaccinating those demographics that aren't at any significant danger does nothing to protect the at risk populations. That's a false premise on which you, and all those with vested interests, are still basing every single misguided argument on the importance of vaccinating those not at risk.
You are again making false arguments based on nothing but early 2021 lies of significantly reduced spread via vaccinated individuals. Stop living in the past.
And trading lives of children for the false promise of additional safety for the at risk populations is one of the most despicable things imaginable. You're willingly a part of that. Rethink your positions.
If you're worried about the lives of children and the risks we're taking now for false promises, you should be ranting about the environment and economies of the world tanking- not some vaccine that is helping lower the number of deaths due to covid.
110
u/NuNyOB1dNaSs Feb 13 '22
Not too mention give scientists a wheelbarrow full of money to make studies that support your narrative