>>>>Thank you John, appreciate your input but please stop making noise in my chamber and ignore the precautionary principle, we must inject all the children because.
>>
>>When Galileo proposed that the earth rotates about the sun, he had the support of powerful Jesuit scientists and the Pope; so why was he so infuriated when some of the other ignorant authoritarians scoffed at his ideas and attempted to suppress?
>>
>>Galileo's angry reactions almost allowed the Karens of his age to get him burned as a heretic. Which confirms that it's possible to be very clever and very stupid at the same time: what Galileo should have done is to engage with the scientists and ignore the ad hominem sniping.
>>
>>Re injecting children: 2 papers this week about myocarditis in younger people. FWIW I have close personal knowledge of a teenager rushed to hospital after a C19 jab reaction. She's in a university town where the ED docs say they're seeing a lot of these reactions- but that's anecdote and my main point is that when it happens to you, the incidence is 100%. IMHO it's negligent to refuse to discuss downsides versus upsides in younger kids who some calculate to be more at risk from playground accidental death than C19. Yes it's possible that vaccinated Johnny is less likely to infect vulnerable grandma, but is that society's decision- to potentially put kids at risk to protect octogenarians? Does that also apply to flu? These discussions need to occur even if some are determined to prevent it.
>
>As usual I agree with what you say and respect your medical knowledge above my own layman's understanding.
>
>You edited your post but I wanted to agree with the sentiment that one should always be respectful and I do try to do so in all my interactions, on the web and face to face; there is nothing I write that I would not also say directly. I do try and stir the pot, so to speak, and try to make one think about alternative narratives than the one promoted in the mainstream. That requires some challenging to the established narrative, of course, and I like sarcasm as a tool.
>
>Currently I am quite furious that my fit and health conscious sons (and all the children in the same situation) are being forced into a choice between unemployment / exclusion in society or taking a forced medical treatment on the false claim that it will protect others (since it does not prevent infection nor onward transmission - CDC) and for a disease that has no real risk to them whilst the medical treatment itself is very clearly not risk-free (VAERS database) and has unknown and unknowable potential long-term adverse effects. Having said that, if there is anyone offended by what I ever say then I apologize.
>
>I'll leave you with this bit of noise I came across recently:
>
>GIBRALTAR DID EVERYTHING: Gibraltar has a population of 33,000 people. It is essentially a military base with very strong controls over residents. It is easy to isolate and lockdown. By March 2021 it had a 100% C19 vaccination rate. Booster doses started on October 1st and 76 % of the population is now “boosted”. Cases per Million: it is #4 on World Rankings (Total – 7,900). Deaths per Million: it is #11 on World Rankings (Total = 100). Tests per Million, it is #2 on World Rankings. In total Gibraltar has had 7,900 cases which is 24% of the population and 100 deaths attributed to C19 which is 0.3% of population. 24% DEATHS (attributed to C19) = 0.3% of Population
>
>THE DIAMOND PRINCESS DID NOTHING: The cruise ship was isolated in Japan while they just waited until viral collapse occurred. The Japanese were criticised for leaving the ship to its fate with effectively zero interventions. Total Cases = 712. Deaths = 13. Total on Board = 3,711 (incl. Passengers and Crew). 19% DEATHS (attributed to C19) = 0.35% of Population.
>
>So the Diamond Princess outcome, where mostly elderly people were trapped in a cruise ship, was almost EXACTLY the same as Gibraltar — a military base where there is great discipline and control of the population using maximum Public Health interventions. Draw your own conclusions.
>
>Data Source: WorldoMeters https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

Frankly, I find this argument so silly and immature it's hard to believe an adult would make it.

"What should I tell my sons (who are svelte Adonisses) when they are being forced into a choice between unemployment / exclusion in society or wearing pants? They live in a warm climate and have beautiful thighs. Why should they be made to wear pants? Because it makes others uncomfortable? Should they not be concerned about undue sweating, chafing, and ball squishing and other harmful effects that all too commonly come with wearing pants?"