I didn't read the paper yet. But it looks very different from how an "opinion piece" typically looks. I also didn't look at the bios of the authors, so you may

I didn't read the paper yet. But it looks very different from how an "opinion piece" typically looks. I also didn't look at the bios of the authors, so you may yet be right. On the other hand, we see opinions (both deliberately scary, as well as some more balanced) from the "pro-vaxx" side of argument, so seems like a fair game. There's no particular reason to prefer more medication over less, so long as we are always keeping both individual and societal health in mind. The articles you link are interesting, but they both miss the mark (at least for me). The AVN one works, but only if you are open to concern about the COVID vaccine being a subset of the wider anti-vaxx narrative. I'm sure there's an overlap, but COVID vaccine scepticism and avoidance is increasingly being seen as quite a balanced and reasonable position. Generalising the opinion as anti-vaxx is more likely to reinforce it. The AAP piece simply talks past the figures that the broad-mandate-opposing "side" would cite. (Which is fine, because their target is quite obviously those that might waver, but still take a pro-vaxx position. But it won't settle informed debates.)