[petertodd]

> I get Jonestown vibes from the public health establishment, since the policy position is absolute conformity. No exceptions!

Same. It's novel too: I've been vaccinated against Yellow Fever, and doctors here simply won't give you it without confirming that you will be travelling because the vaccine has a very real risk of harming you. It's safer than the risk of Yellow Fever if you're travelling to areas with it. But it absolutely is a risk/benefit trade-off.

> Doesn't infection from the virus confer immunity to other proteins not found in the vaccine

Certainly. Real infections also generate immunity in more parts of the body, eg mucus membranes, as well as stronger t-cell responses.

Though note that it's rare for diseases to evolve resistance to vaccines, because they work by stimulating an immune response rather than directly targeting something. The more highly engineered vaccines are at a higher risk of this happening than the lower tech ones based on the disease agent, weakened or inactivated. But this isn't like antibiotics where resistance almost always evolves eventually.

[xxxxxyy1]

My position at the moment is that I'll get vaccinated when they stop demanding it & it's finished the normal FDA approval process.

I've seen way too many 180deg reversals from the people that typically treat "profit-based" healthcare with a complete critical attitude.

Combine that with the extreme theater and propaganda efforts for complete conformity, i.e. forcing everyone to wear masks even people that can reasonably be considered extremely low risks like those that were previously infected or vaccinated. It just doesn't make sense, since they demand maximum evidence from their detractors and minimum evidence for when they put forward various threats, risks and fears.