In which case….why care which order you did things in, by your logic? If the consequences are low the decision is academic.

(I don’t agree: I think there is risk of chronic damage that doesn’t appear as acute symptoms)

Why draw a deadly roulette ticket?

Because this:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adamandrzejewski/2021/11/04/fed...

despite this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lepqvdXoA2E&feature=youtu.be

Oops, you can't watch that. Senators holding an expert panel is "dangerous misinformation". Here you go:

https://rumble.com/vokrf7-sen.-johnson-expert-panel-on-feder...

Just so it is clear to you, the Forbes article you link is an opinion piece.

Just so it's clear to you, there are facts in opinion piece. Opinion pieces are often someone's opinion on existing facts.

Premised on the undisputed fact that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for adverse reactions, leaving the victim with no remedy.

Seems like the vaccine is the deadly roulette ticket: risk of fatal bloodclotting every time a new vaccine is administered while ironically being at a higher risk against new, potentially more dangerous, mutations compared to people who recovered from a Covid infection naturally. I guess it comes down how much you trust pharmaceutical companies having the payday of a lifetime and politicians on a power trip.

To be clear, there is no evidence for any of your claims.

Risk of blood clotting / thromosis (VIIT) with adenovirus vector and Peri / Myocarditis with mRNA based are known risks, even if extremely rare overall (but worrying for specific groups; <50 females and <30 males respectively)

You should compare with risk of clotting vs covid disease.