Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is not the same as 61 unrelated to the vaccine. You do understand it also does not mean they are related to the vaccine, right? I mean, putting aside the grasping as straws aspect of this claim, let's look at your original claim: in a country where there are already 20 million person's who already were administered the vaccine, and given that by your own account you can only put together two dozen cases among those…
Well you don't know the long term effects. So you can't say the trade off is worth it. It's just blind optimism on your part, not even shared by the vaccine manufacturers, that put in their government contracts clauses that they will not guarantee that it works or take liability for any side effects. Despite making billions on these drugs.
To put it accurately, there is absolutely no indication that any vaccine has any long-term effect whatsoever.
Doesn't this mean you are trying to analyze tradeoffs of a problem that does not exist in the plane of reality?