CV and mad panic behaviour

[LP]

3.  Vaccinations are absolutely going to look like a worse outcome in the short term, because its clear to see that any side effects we are having are going to outweigh the infections, and hospitalisation (at least in the short term) as a result of covid, simply because of a numbers game.  The only way that relationship flips, is if we let it rip.

4.  Vaccination is going to protect you better than not being protected (unless it hurts you).

The problem I have with this #3 perspective is that it is basically stated in ignorance of the flip side of the actions of any vaccine, that is keeping hospitalisation numbers low by reducing / preventing severe disease.

It's a weird sort of an argument, like claiming you can use a gun to stop the enemy killing you, like the cause and event is unidirectional.

It's an argument that you virtually contradict in point #4, but that also is asymmetrical because #4 without explicitly stating it implies the risk from the vaccine and Sars-CoV-2 is equal or proportional, but it isn't.

I think as Mav, Baggers or DJC pointed out before, the correct way to look at this what would be the outcome of 6 Million COVID cases versus 6 Million vaccinations. It's a fair question and a very fair comparison to make, because without vaccination we will eventually get to 6 Million COVID cases based on current Sars-CoV-2 virality, it would only be a matter of time. Should we do that math based on global averages?

Actually, I've heard the #3 argument before, .............. it's a dressed up something like the NRA claiming more guns will mean less crime, where they completely ignore the criminal effects of having more guns available?