velcii

How did you ended up with 8x figure?

>mutations created in the unvax population benefit from resistance to vaccines.

I cannot see how this is correct. Because it should be the mutations created in the vaccinated that will help the virus to survive in similar vaccinated hosts..because first of all, the mutated virus need to survive in the vaccinated host, and become the dominant one in that host and thus giving it a better chance to jump to another host...

So this mutations must be happening in Vaccinated hosts. In unvaccinated as you said, any mutations that gives the virus immune escape capability does not give it an advantage over the other mutations in the same host, simply because there is no vaccine generated antibodies to kill the other mutations, for it to gain dominance.

We don't really know because the even the phase 2 trials for these vaccines have not been done..

>it's given the power of the press back to the people

You are mistaken. Social media and things like youtube, just like elections, provide the appearance of power and choice, but just safely let people to let out pent up emotions. Then they safely contain it without it being spilled to the real world to a certain extent, at the same time give the people who participate in them a certain feeling of "doing something", a fallacy that even I am committing right now while I write this comment down..

As Noam Chomsky said "The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum".

We already know that youtube and other media like reddit even HN "strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion", and as you said, they also allow very lively debate withing the rest of the spectrum..

>Let the human do all the driving and have the robot jump in whenever the human makes a mistake.

I really don't think that would give many data points, because all of the instances would be when a human fell asleep or wasn't paying attention.

>Nothing wrong with fessing up and saying “we made a mistake, here’s the correction”

Sadly if you do retractions, you are not qualified for the name "fact checker". Because "facts" are not retractable.

And fact-checkers are just the tip of the iceberg, and if you care to look, there are many things that are peddled as being "fact" when there is not enough credible evidence to say so..

For example the statement "Vaccines don't cause autism". Any one with two brain cells will know that this NOT a fact, simply because it does not say "Which vaccines".

But that does not prevent people from saying that as a FACT.

So it is not only them. It is you as well.

>I was referring specifically to the incidence of blood clots, not necessarily any AEFI.

Most people are concerned about having any sort of serious AEFI, and not just blood-clots.

So comparing rate of incidence of blood clots to car accidents to imply vaccine safety is a bit misleading in my opinion.