Yeahp, that’s the problem, too. I know at least 3 people (who admitted it) that while they’re not “antivaxxers”, all the news about new strains happily mutating along, they do have serious concerns about “heightened immune response”, “ADE (antibody-dependent enhanced) immune response”, etc. Ie, what protects you fine from strain 1, 2, and 3, might make it worse for you when strain 9 hits, vs being unvaccinated at all, ie, the whole “trojan horse” dealy about how the bugs get into your cells.
Worse, when studies that were studying that were abruptly ended, it was as if it’s better to not answer the question at all vs get an unexpected (and unwanted) answer.
Even if studies could show that you’d be more likely to get hit by lightning in your basement on a dry sunny day, by simply dismissing any questions about it, or worse, make anyone who dares ask the question get labeled as an “antivaxxer”, it’s just further dividing the people, making people talk at each other vs talk with each other. So of course they’ll get answers from whatever source they find.
Hell, when I heard about that, I ended up looking for more info, and didn’t find much from mainstream sites other than “nah, don’t worry about it”. Okay, but what about the new more virulent strains popping up? Anyone study antivirals like adamantine?
Dunno, but I was a pain in the ass even back in grammar school, when the housewife “teaching” science (ie, reciting from the textbook) couldn’t answer my questions and just dismissed me with a “Now, don’t you worry your fuzzy little head over that”, like I actually could. If I have a question, I want it answered, and not a pat on the head, or worse, a label as a troublemaker.
I don’t like when either side cherrypicks data to bolster its decision, but that, like you said, seems to be the norm on both sides.