What frustrates me is how people are weighing and assigning the likelihood of potential adverse long term effects occurring from the vaccine (microscopic, if that) vs. the likelihood of negative effects from COVID (an absolutely certainty).
Throughout COVID the one thing that has astounded me above all others is many people’s complete inability to use basic analytical skills to compute relatively simple statistical problems.
It's a tribal information gathering fallacy. I argued with my 80 year old grandmother about this yesterday. She'll openly admit she is completely incapable of discerning information (not that it absolves her of the duty), so for her all knoweldge is trust. If one person tells her the vaccine is good, and another person tells her the vaccine is bad, it's down to 50:50. But, the person who told her it's bad told her it will kill her, and the person who told her it's good told her it lowers her odds of being affected by an invisible pathogen, so it's easy to see which way she's leaning. Granted, ultimately she will likely follow a broad Rabbinic edict, if there is one.
We have a similar problem when one side says Trump won the elections, and the other side says Biden won the elections. On it's face, it's 50:50...
Did you notice that I'm asking questions, not stating facts?
Positing something in the form of a question doesn't make it OK. 'Can anyone provide evidence Jews didn't blow up the WTC on 9/11' isn't a legitimate question.
Your 'questions' have been throughly debunked in this thread alone many times. They aren't questions.