I do not think this is an example of the (real) problem you are highlighting. First, the ECDC is not a government. Second, their previous standpoint was not inc

I do not think this is an example of the (real) problem you are highlighting. First, the ECDC is not a government. Second, their previous standpoint was not inconsistent or wrong: in particular, there was no urgent need for boosters (for healthy youngsters) in September since the vaccines appeared to be working well. Did you read the ECDC guidance, in September and now? Can you point out the passage that exemplifies your point? Or do you have another example of a government saying that young people will never get boosters? Since naturally you did not write your comment based solely on the tone implied by the words 'major shift' in the headline of the Reuters article... There are certainly people, journalists, and government ministers guilty of what you say. But throwing a catchall accusation around is a bit cheap, in my opinion.