Right, the problem is one I flag in another comment - there doesn't seem to be any actual systematic way to compare the impact of vaccines vs viral infections.

Right, the problem is one I flag in another comment - there doesn't seem to be any actual systematic way to compare the impact of vaccines vs viral infections. You can't even get data into comparable units, let alone then study the reliability of those measurements or transformations. If you read the underlying papers it seems to be just assumed that one is much less than the other because that's how vaccines normally work, and it'd be insane if it were not the case. But this is new technology, and these vaccines aren't acting like vaccines are meant to e.g. they don't seem to stop you catching it and getting sick, their effectiveness seems to last months rather than decades, and their side effects are much worse. I have become quite suspicious about this over time because I keep encountering people who say the vaccine made them sick, and the symptoms align very closely with COVID symptoms. Recovery appears to be a little faster but perhaps not by much - the only person in my immediate social circle who actually definitely got COVID was only in bed for a day, and then it took several days to shake off the remnants of the cough. The vaccines don't give people a cough but "It laid me low for a day or two, felt so sick I had to stay in bed all day" is a very common side effect. This is what you'd expect if the vaccine was doing the same stuff as the virus itself but without filling the lungs with crap. And that's in turn what you'd expect given the way the mRNA vaccines actually work: they cause cells to act infected and the immune system then detects them as such. Whether vaccines cause more or less damage than a viral infection very much depends on the relative areas under the curves and the relative value of different kinds of cells that are exposed and destroyed, but, again, no way to actually get data into that form. But then you weight it by incidence. Governments seem to have a bloody minded fanatical determination to make vaccine incidence 100% by any means possible. On the other hand, where I live, after a year and a half of this stuff, only ~10% of the population has tested positive. When the person I live with got sick, I was forced to self-isolate with them, and I never got sick even though delta is supposedly super infectious. The incidence of the virus is far less than the incidence of vaccines, so even if their impact is within a similar order of magnitude (i.e. much less but still comparable), it seems quite plausible that the vaccines end up making more people sick than the virus (for some value of "the virus" given that it mutates and "the vaccine" given the apparent need for repetitive boosters).