> Death is not the only bad outcome to be avoided.
And this is yet another illustration of the point I was making about fear, uncertainty and doubt: the Nature article didn't say that there is proof that children will have "long Covid"...it says that these particular studies didn't address the question.
By this standard, anyone can make up any speculation of something that might happen to children someday, and we'll use that speculation to demand fearful responses, indefinitely. There is no end to this logic.
Fortunately, the well-controlled evidence is increasingly pointing to the conclusion that "long Covid" is not a serious risk to children -- and that, more generally, Covid appears to be similar to other viral infections in terms of long-term symptoms:
https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1421415741706981376
Again, lots of hysterical speculation in this area, not much good data. But the better the data gets, the less legitimate the early, speculative claims appear.
> There are ~48 million kids under 12 in the US. Assuming they are evenly split between male and female, that would mean 1,824 cases of myocarditis and pericarditis if 100% of them were vaccinated.
The myocarditis issue disproportionately affects young boys. Your calculation is incorrect.
> Given that nowhere near 100% of children have been exposed to COVID and yet 340 have died, I don't see clear evidence here that the vaccine is more risky than not being vaccinated.
Be that as it may, the UK and about half of the EU countries disagree with your assessment, including a number of experts here in the US, as well:
https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/second-opinions/93340