You are guilty of a rhetorical trick. It goes like this. Some expert in ___ holds this position because he knows all about ___ wherein the person is am expert and does indeed hold the belief. The implication is that he holds the belief which is absolutely true but leaves out the fact that the belief is not only a minority position amongst the general population but even more so amongst experts meaning expertise leads one to reject the position.
The flu vaccine very very rarely causes vasculitis and almost all cases resolve favorably. One meta study of the literature identified 65 cases ever.
Meanwhile it's not unusual to see 20-60k annual deaths in the United States.
Statistically not getting a flu vaccination for fear of vasculitis is like not wearing a seat belt in case one wants to escape the car quickly in case one happens to get out quick in case you decide to drive into a lake today.
You have misunderstood the figures on flu vaccinations. It's commonly 30-60% effective at preventing infection. If this was just true about the under 65 it would still mean fewer under 65 able to spread it to 65+ but fortunately it isn't true.
The flu vaccine very very rarely causes vasculitis and almost all cases resolve favorably. One meta study of the literature identified 65 cases ever.
Meanwhile it's not unusual to see 20-60k annual deaths in the United States.
Statistically not getting a flu vaccination for fear of vasculitis is like not wearing a seat belt in case one wants to escape the car quickly in case one happens to get out quick in case you decide to drive into a lake today.
You have misunderstood the figures on flu vaccinations. It's commonly 30-60% effective at preventing infection. If this was just true about the under 65 it would still mean fewer under 65 able to spread it to 65+ but fortunately it isn't true.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/prevent/vaccine-benefits.htm
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...