Yes, I agree there are potential side-effects. The empirical data so far that has tested the potential for these effects has estimated them to be very low.

I know you don't trust these studies or the people behind them, which means my evidence is useless to you. But you don't need my evidence if you have better evidence anyway that the vaccine injury rates are catastrophic.

But the VAERS data and this Pfizer report are mathematically incapable of providing you that evidence. The data here gives me absolutely no idea how bad the vaccine side effects actually are. I can't even determine WHAT the vaccine side-effects are, because I don't know which of these reports was actually caused by the vaccine.

Are you seeing the problem here? The data that many people here are using to prove vaccine injury can't actually tell you ANYTHING about vaccine injury.

Only the studies that actually go look at verified cases of vaccine injury in their specific contexts can offer that kind of data. And so far, I have seen very few studies even trying to make the claim that vaccine injuries are an unexpectedly serious problem, and of those, none that have even attempted to prove it.

So if you have such studies, I'm happy to look at them. But until then, I have to decide between using data that you don't like, or spitballing into the wind using unsupported mathematical assumptions.

And since I don't assume that literally every scientist on the planet studying this, from established giants in the field to lowly unknown grad students, is in on some conspiracy to hide "the real data", I will choose to stick with the data that I have.

When it stops accurately predicting reality, then we can talk.

But so far, I can't see any evidence that it has. Including observing that I, one of the earliest-vaccinated people in the country, one of the earliest-boosted people in the country, have suffered none of the theorized problems on none of the theorized timelines, nor have any of my coworkers. I have promised to let you know if that changes, but I made that promise a while ago and have not yet had to deliver.

Yes... there are a higher percentage of people who suffer vaccine injuries in the vaccinated population than in the unvaccinated population.

I'm... not sure why you stated that. But you did. So I guess we established that.

In other news, nobody who eats an entire pack of razor blades has ever died from cancer. Therefore, eating razor blades must prevent cancer.

Silly, right?

But you are making clear why this is confounding you. You believe that COVID is nothing, and therefore, the vaccine protects you from nothing. Which means side effects, even extremely rare ones, are not worth it.

Which means, of course, that this conversation will never go anywhere, because as long as you don't believe that the vaccine actually protects against a more significant threat, then there will never be a reason to take it.

And that's a conversation far outside of the purview of this.

IT doesn't excuse you for continually refusing to empirically prove the assertions that make up the foundation of your argument on the mathematical certainty that the vaccines are causing significant damage. But the context of the seriousness of COVID is always going to qualify what level of side effects are going to be considered acceptable.

But again, that goes nowhere, because you are someone who believes the mere existence of a data set in the mainstream media is enough justification to dismiss it completely as a fabrication. Which, honestly, isn't any better than the idiots you talk about who believe everything they see on television.

Lol, wtf do database keys have to do with this that you're so fixated on this? How does reference GUIDs, or database indexes have to do with any of the data the database actually contains? Database keys are nothing more than internal reference points between data objects within the database. Any sort of analysis of data held in a database wouldn't ever be affected by database keys.