It is difficult to believe you are serious.
How is it not patently obvious that your argument is false? The fact that some people who get vaccinated will get infected does not - and this is smash-my-head-on-my-keyboard-obvious - mean that there is not a benefit to getting the vaccine.
Again, it is beyond obvious that those who are spared from infection by the vaccine will not be infecting others!
And even if the vaccine does not prevent infection at all, the argument for getting the vaccine can be understood by a 7 year old: the vaccine reduces the risk of severe disease and death (apart from whether it has an effect on transmission).
Receiving the vaccine is only a benefit if the likelihood of dying from COVID is greater than the likelihood of dying from or suffering adverse effects from the vaccine. Not everyone is at the same risk of death from a COVID infection, so it follows that the decision on whether to accept the vaccine can only be taken on an individual basis. For the vast majority of seven year olds, the vaccine is a greater risk than a COVID infection.
So? They paused AstroZeneca too for a while. Now it appears that the benefit of the vaccination vastly outweighs the risk except for a cohort of very young women.
Specific issues with specific vaccines aside, there is no credible argument against getting vaccinated (except for very rare exceptions)
Last time I checked, no fewer than 18 countries had suspended use of the Astra Zeneca vaccine. And today I learned that one country (Denmark) has permanently banned the Astra Zenaca vaccine. It's hard to see how that supports your view that the vaccine is safe for most people.
If you are not simply guessing and have solid, defensible reasons for believing that, on balance, the focus on Covid has made things worse overall, then, please, present it.
Many diseases and conditions that cause death are progressive. To put it another way, they do not kill over a period of days or weeks, but slowly spread or become more severe until death is the only outcome. In the UK, it is already known that cancer diagnosis has radically dropped due to the focus on COVID, so it's not unreasonable to expect that over the next few years cancer deaths may increase. There is also the poverty and mental health issues caused by lockdown and associated loss of jobs, both of which would ultimately be expected to shorten lives.
Again, you need to actually defend this rather shocking assertion. Let me concede that the focus on Covid likely has reduced quality of care in other areas.
You guys always deploy the same strategy - you focus on one aspect of what is really a very complex problem. Sure, young cancer sufferers almost certainly are getting worse care than if we did nothing about Covid.
But what if we actually did nothing starting last March. I am told that the more transmissions there are, the more variants there will be. And, as we are seeing right now, some of these variants are more transmissible and more dangerous. So if we let Covid run rampant, who knows what an awful situation we might be in now.
I am not advocating 'letting COVID run rampant', so that's a straw man argument. Vaccination should be a personal choice, and those who are elderly or vulnerable for medical reasons would be well advised to take it. For everyone else, vaccination is probably more risky than letting their own immune system deal with it.
....and there we have it, the smoking gun.
Jesus healed the sick! You are effectively saying "that's nice, but that is not an example I choose to follow".
That's not what I'm saying at all. But I've already addressed misunderstandings
elsewhere.
Interesting framing. And, of course, misleading.
Do you think a grocery store or an airline is being unreasonable to deny service to people who insist on shouting at the top of their lungs while in the grocery store, or on the plane?
I suggest that it is entirely reasonable for service providers to deny service to those who refuse to comply with "public interest" regulations, when it is easy for people to abide by such regulations.
Is is "coercion" if I am required to not scream at the top of my lungs on an airplane?
Another strawman argument. I'm not saying that people should be able to shout at others.
Who said they were a conspiracy theory? Post number, please.
Maybe you haven't noticed, but some COVID threads have been locked, and at least one has been totally erased.
Your claim is not plausible. If it really were the case that there was a real debate about the wisdom of getting vaccinated, it would be in the news.
But it's not - there is near unanimity that all adults should get vaccinated.
There is only 'near unanimity that all adults should get vaccinated' amongst the experts that are allowed to have a platform. Many highly qualified experts disagree with COVID management strategies, but they do not benefit from the same platform and prominence. The fact that you think that there is unanimity shows that you are unaware that you have been manipulated by the government and MSM propaganda, who deliberately only present one side, and don't allow any kind of meaningful debate.
I assume you mean "who is going to argue that this is not scary"?
Well, I will. The odds (so far) of getting the blood clot are 1 in 1,000,000.
You are more likely to drown in your bathtub (1 in 840,000).
Do I really need to show that your risk of dying from Covid (if you do not take the vaccine) are much higher?
The one in a million risk is almost certainly statistically fraudulent.
I've already explained it elsewhere.
If you really want to understand what is going on, there is plenty of information out there, but it takes effort to find it and understand it, which explains why so many people have been duped by government and MSM propaganda. Oh, almost forgot, you need an open mind and critical analysis skills too.