> But your attitude here is exactly why public health authorities have damaged their credibility and that of science itself in the past two years. They have repeatedly misrepresented their educated guesses as scientific fact - and then turned out to be wrong.
Where has that happened for this? Every study that has shown disease severity correlated with vaccine usage has shown the same results, over and over, for each variant: vaccination correlates with symptomatic disease severity which correlates linearly with long-term effects, in every observed metric.
This has appeared again and again and again in dozens of studies, to the point where it is the null hypothesis; you'd need to make a real case with novel, contradictory evidence to show that this is not the case.
In every domain of medicine there is some degree of guessing and basing off of historical data for a cohort; you can't test every patient for every possible thing that could ever affect them. Instead you pick and choose the most significant factors and use that as your guidelines. Research efforts for COVID are very large, but also limited; there is no evidence to contradict this and it's not worth researching.
If you actually kept up with domain experts during the pandemic, you'll see that there were many open questions over which they kept interest, and many open questions where they did not care much. The reason for that has to do with the acquired knowledge of having studied hundreds of other diseases and similar cases; they tell you how to explore the domain, seeing where things are likely to be different, and where they are not.
Where has that happened for this? Every study that has shown disease severity correlated with vaccine usage has shown the same results, over and over, for each variant: vaccination correlates with symptomatic disease severity which correlates linearly with long-term effects, in every observed metric.
This has appeared again and again and again in dozens of studies, to the point where it is the null hypothesis; you'd need to make a real case with novel, contradictory evidence to show that this is not the case.
In every domain of medicine there is some degree of guessing and basing off of historical data for a cohort; you can't test every patient for every possible thing that could ever affect them. Instead you pick and choose the most significant factors and use that as your guidelines. Research efforts for COVID are very large, but also limited; there is no evidence to contradict this and it's not worth researching.
If you actually kept up with domain experts during the pandemic, you'll see that there were many open questions over which they kept interest, and many open questions where they did not care much. The reason for that has to do with the acquired knowledge of having studied hundreds of other diseases and similar cases; they tell you how to explore the domain, seeing where things are likely to be different, and where they are not.