When you say "no evidence", what sort of evidence do you expect? The reason we generally run trials for many years is to gather evidence. There was "no evidenc

When you say "no evidence", what sort of evidence do you expect? The reason we generally run trials for many years is to gather evidence. There was "no evidence" for the vaccines causing Myocarditis when they were rolled out. Now there's strong evidence and the concerns are growing. This trial reported Myocarditis rates at 1:1000 in a group with median age 33: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.13.21262182v... This is three times higher than what the FDA estimated for the highest risk group (males aged 16-17), based on VAERS data: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-08-30/03-COVID-Su-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-... As for neurodegeneration, there is a concern that Codon-optimization[2] used for mRNA vaccines[3] can trigger it. It's simply not possible to gather evidence of that in the current approval timeframe, we just assume that the risk outweighs the benefit, come hell and high water. That may be a reasonable assumption for at-risk groups, but not for everyone. [2] https://blog.addgene.org/to-codon-optimize-or-not-that-is-the-question https://blog.addgene.org/to-codon-optimize-or-not-that-is-th... [3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34358150/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34358150/