I agree with your point about epistemological hubris, but this isn’t about mandates, it’s about clear-eyed risk assessment. Without a specific hypothesis, it’s

I agree with your point about epistemological hubris, but this isn’t about mandates, it’s about clear-eyed risk assessment. Without a specific hypothesis, it’s all a big game of “what if”. The scenarios you mention aren’t physically impossible or anything, but there’s just as much reason to speculate that the virus itself could have those kinds of emergent long term effects. For example it’s well known that HPV infection increases the risk of certain cancers. Anyway I can appreciate your point of view, but I don’t think it has much bearing on the people asserting that the vaccine is definitely worse than the virus