I'm trying to understand why there is no re-evaluation of strategy in light of this data.

Given leaders looking at this data and realizing that in frightened haste they made an error by pushing vaccination beyond high risk groups, might this explain why they're now doubling down and pushing for 100% vaccination, even in low risk groups?

Surely you don’t believe this is a natural phenomenon? If it was, we’d have intervened only in high risk subjects. We’d never have gone near young people or pregnant women. It’s not a mistake I. The wheel I realised I thug

The government claims that is acting altruistically for the sake of public health. The main stream narrative is that covid is an exceptionally deadly infection (with 99.7 survival rate), that no one is immune (natural immunity proven better than vaccine immunity and even SARS Covi-1 survivors have some immunity), that it can be spread asymptomatically (asymptomatic people have a much lower viral load and are less likely to spread), that vaccines are safe (VAERS adverse events over 2 million an…

"Comirnaty has FDA approval, but isn't yet mandated for children so it currently has liability in case of disability or death. Pfizer isn't distributing Comirnaty." Not true i think. they ALL have liability waivers

I'm not sure. The FDA authorization for Comirnaty stated that the Pfizer current vaccines and Comirnaty have the same ingredients and are basically the same vaccine. However, "the products are legally distinct with certain differences that do not impact safety or effectiveness." This is a quote from the FDA authorization. There is a huge real-world difference between products approved under EUA compared with those the FDA has fully licensed. Comirnaty is available in Europe, but not in U.S. …