> For healthy kids and young people, it is absolutely counterproductive to inject them. It will cause more hospitalizations through side effects than they will prevent.
Wrong. There have been documented side effects of vaccines, notably myocarditis, and even a few deaths that are the direct result of vaccination. But there are thousands of covid deaths of people in their 20s, and hundreds of kids too, a sizable proportion of them healthy. Because we are talking about one-in-a-million chances, maybe vaccinating kids is not worth it, maybe we should put our time and money elsewhere, but the benefit-risk ratio is definitely on the side of vaccination.
> What's more, there is now mounting evidence that omicron favors people who have gotten jabbed.
It is true that when you look at some country data, you see that the incidence rate for people who are fully vaccinated but not boosted is much higher than those who are vaccinated. You can make the effect disappear by looking closely (Simpson's paradox) but it still merits proper study. But for now, there is no evidence that omicron favors people who have gotten jabbed. At worst, without a booster, some vaccines are ineffective against mild omicron, that one seems to be confirmed.
> it is now also clear that these shots could have never created herd immunity
10/10 hindsight
> because an intramuscular shot does not create an immune response in the mucus membranes
[Citation Needed] Almost all of our vaccines are an intramuscular shot, including ones that were successful at eradicating diseases. If it wasn't an effective route of administration, I think we would have known by now.
> All of this is easy to find if you just bother to actually look around.
Yes, it is super easy to find crackpot websites. "Proofs" that the earth is flat are easy to find too. So if you think you have better sources, please share. By "looking around" for the most reliable sources, things are clear: omicron is pretty good at escaping vaccine protection, but the benefit/risk ratio is still overwhelmingly in favor of vaccines.
> cover up the failed promises of shitty politicians, shitty scientists, and their hysterical fans
Politicians are politicians. But the shitty scientists here are the ones who promote treatments after many studies proved their ineffectiveness (hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin,...) instead of solutions that work (vaccines). Looking for alternative treatment, unorthodox solutions and challenging established practices is good, but disregarding further scientific evidence is not. And scientists don't promise things, they make studies base on current data, and draw conclusions, if the data change, their conclusions will too, it is not called failed promises, it is called doing proper science.
I keep hearing this statement, but I find it hard to reconcile it with hard data. For example, credible numbers from Europe https://euromomo.eu/graphs-and-maps show that the excess mortality in the 0-14 age range was actually negative in 2020, and in a normal range in 2021 (slightly higher than 2017 and 2018 but lower than in 2019). Certainly by looking at the weekly 0-14 chart it is impossible to say that there is anything nefarious going on.
The US CDC site was harder to navigate, but last time I looked, it painted a similar picture.
On global statistics, the deaths of hundreds of kids is almost negligible, so you are unlikely to see much difference in excess mortality. Significant differences are most likely the result of school closure and lockdowns, most likely traffic-related.
But deaths by vaccines are even more negligible than deaths by covid.
Wrong. There have been documented side effects of vaccines, notably myocarditis, and even a few deaths that are the direct result of vaccination. But there are thousands of covid deaths of people in their 20s, and hundreds of kids too, a sizable proportion of them healthy. Because we are talking about one-in-a-million chances, maybe vaccinating kids is not worth it, maybe we should put our time and money elsewhere, but the benefit-risk ratio is definitely on the side of vaccination.
> What's more, there is now mounting evidence that omicron favors people who have gotten jabbed.
It is true that when you look at some country data, you see that the incidence rate for people who are fully vaccinated but not boosted is much higher than those who are vaccinated. You can make the effect disappear by looking closely (Simpson's paradox) but it still merits proper study. But for now, there is no evidence that omicron favors people who have gotten jabbed. At worst, without a booster, some vaccines are ineffective against mild omicron, that one seems to be confirmed.
> it is now also clear that these shots could have never created herd immunity
10/10 hindsight
> because an intramuscular shot does not create an immune response in the mucus membranes
[Citation Needed] Almost all of our vaccines are an intramuscular shot, including ones that were successful at eradicating diseases. If it wasn't an effective route of administration, I think we would have known by now.
> All of this is easy to find if you just bother to actually look around.
Yes, it is super easy to find crackpot websites. "Proofs" that the earth is flat are easy to find too. So if you think you have better sources, please share. By "looking around" for the most reliable sources, things are clear: omicron is pretty good at escaping vaccine protection, but the benefit/risk ratio is still overwhelmingly in favor of vaccines.
> cover up the failed promises of shitty politicians, shitty scientists, and their hysterical fans
Politicians are politicians. But the shitty scientists here are the ones who promote treatments after many studies proved their ineffectiveness (hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin,...) instead of solutions that work (vaccines). Looking for alternative treatment, unorthodox solutions and challenging established practices is good, but disregarding further scientific evidence is not. And scientists don't promise things, they make studies base on current data, and draw conclusions, if the data change, their conclusions will too, it is not called failed promises, it is called doing proper science.