> any sort of significant risk to otherwise healthy children He wasn't saying there was no danger (although he's implying it's small enough to be moot, which i

> any sort of significant risk to otherwise healthy children He wasn't saying there was no danger (although he's implying it's small enough to be moot, which is subjective). Fundamentally, I think the argument most people are having here is 'what is the acceptable level of risk and what is the actual benefit, before vaccines should be required?" This honestly seems to be the basis of a lot of hot-button issues (COVID, guns, voting, abortions), but somehow the conversations never play out that way. Risk is a continuum, and the benefits of different policies may or may not 'pay' enough out to any given individual. All that being said, what is the relative risk to a healthy 5, 10 or 15 year old?