Yeah, this. They don’t want to know facts. They are actively resisting reality. Doesn’t matter that ~40 people per million per two doses had adverse effects to the vaccine and most likely recovered just fine while hundreds of thousands got sick and died from the disease and who knows how many survived because they were vaccinated.
An estimated 7 million deaths since 2020. About 250 deaths a week in the US on an ongoing basis. And that is just deaths, not serious sickness or long term consequences after being sick.
who knows how many survived because they were vaccinated.
There is nothing “Concrete” at all in your claim. In fact, the study makes sure to point out the value of vaccination. If we actually interpret what the data says we should note that the largest increases in risk is after the second dose, and points out that timing of the vaccination is probably a factor. In no way does it say that younger men should not be vaccinated. If anything, waiting longer after a covid infection or not giving the second dose would more closely align any adverse effects with the general population.
Yeah, this. They don’t want to know facts. They are actively resisting reality. Doesn’t matter that ~40 people per million per two doses had adverse effects to the vaccine and most likely recovered just fine while hundreds of thousands got sick and died from the disease and who knows how many survived because they were vaccinated.
An estimated 7 million deaths since 2020. About 250 deaths a week in the US on an ongoing basis. And that is just deaths, not serious sickness or long term consequences after being sick.
We dont know, but we can estimate. COVID-19 vaccinations averted between 1.4 to 4 million deaths during 2020-2024.
There is concrete evidence that young men should not have been boosted if they had already been infected.
Show the concrete evidence.
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.122.059970
And
Sweden, Denmark pause Moderna COVID-19 vaccine for younger age groups | Reuters
There is nothing “Concrete” at all in your claim. In fact, the study makes sure to point out the value of vaccination. If we actually interpret what the data says we should note that the largest increases in risk is after the second dose, and points out that timing of the vaccination is probably a factor. In no way does it say that younger men should not be vaccinated. If anything, waiting longer after a covid infection or not giving the second dose would more closely align any adverse effects with the general population.
I did not mention the value of vaccination
And in no way did I say that. I said young men should not be boosted, I.e. second dose.
No, you said there was “concrete evidence” that “young men should not have been boosted”.
That is opinion, and the study makes no corroborating claim to not vaccinate or boost.
Ironically you are having a failure of comprehension in a thread about failure of comprehension.
I suggest you carefully reread the claim made and the evidence provided.