Putting aside why the OP would get worked up about someone sharing a journal article on social media... I agree its important for public health organizations t

Putting aside why the OP would get worked up about someone sharing a journal article on social media... I agree its important for public health organizations to be consistent in their messaging. It creates a lot of confusion if they are sending mixed messages about the pros/cons of vaccines, especially if there is some urgency. Where I am, there is information provided about the type and relative frequency of reactions, but it's not the main message and that makes sense. For governments that are forcing people to be vaccinated (either directly or de-facto through restrictions on what you can otherwise do), it's purely a political thing. How could they admit that the thing they are forcing on you could cause reaction, even if it's rare. So they pretend that anyone who talks about it is a threat to society and whip up anger against them. People are regularly willing to voluntarily take medicine with higher risks (birth control, travel vaccines, etc) and generally would make the same choice faced with covid. But take the choice away and the government has to carefully control the message about it (plus the whole opportunity to create division and an out-group to improve their political footing)