This is a false conclusion, a dangerous category mistake. Ethical permissibility of vaccine mandates is not and cannot be a question of risks vs benefits; the mandates would be just as unacceptable even if the vaccines were fully approved, fully prevented transmission and saved millions of lives. Scientific arguments against the mandates imply, falsely, that medical mandates would be acceptable under some empirical conditions. Any scientific argument disputing the balance of risks vs benefits of vaccines must not make the claim that the mandates are ‘therefore’ unacceptable (this would be an equivocation between utility and ethics, ultimately serving the utilitarian agenda). Https://michaelkowalik.substack.com/p/why-vaccine-mandates-are-unethical