So if you have typically 99.97% recovery rate, and the "vaccine" has a 95% (in theory, in practice ~60%, check Israel) efficacy, then after needle you would have a 99.9985% ((1-.9997)*(1-0.95)=0.000015, 1-0.000015=0.999985) recovery rate. So we're talking about a <0.03% difference. Why would anybody do anything remotely controversial for a 0.03% benefit? Why would anybody expect to see differences in the population from a 0.03% benefit? And that is just strictly talking about the benefits in regard to COVID without regard to any negative consequences.
Math is fun!
This number is your chance of survival (and not dying) if you "get Covid." This assumes that the CDC's numbers regarding "died FROM Covid" is accurate, which it is not.
In reality, people (even the oldest) have 99.99% (maybe even 100% if real numbers are used) chance of not dying if they "get Covid."
This is not accurate. It is Pfizer's claim, but they lied via statistical manipulation. Pfizer claimed that their drug was "95% effective" against getting a SYMPTOM (not getting or spreading Covid). But their claim is not true. Here is the math on that:
https://greatawakening.win/p/12jJPv3MkS/
The reality is that their drug is less than 1% effective against getting a SYMPTOM, and they DID NOT EVEN CONSIDER whether or not their drug did anything to protect people from (a) getting it, (b) spreading it, or (c) dying from it.
ALL of the stats on Covid are FAKE. ALL of them.
Your basic idea, that it is all bullshit, is correct. But the bullshit is far deeper than even you stated.