[dragonwriter]

> There´s one scientist that predicted this development perfectly, Geert Vanden Bosschen. He´s the only one so far that has made correct predictions in this pandemic. He said that mass-vaccinating during ongoing pandemic will result in rising numbers of cases among fully vaccinated people a couple of months after vaccination,

No, its not one scientist who got that right; this was widely flagged that as a likely outcome if the deployment was not so rapid and universal as to essentially curtail significant community spread before that occurred, which is why there was so much imperative from experts for rapid and universal deployment and so much criticism of the slow speed and uneveness of the actual deployment.

> He also warns strongly against vaccinating children.

Given the reason for the other risk (which isn’t “vaccination” but “incomplete vaccination which leaves an large unvaccinated population in contact with the vaccinated population”) that seems.

> But he praises the new vaccine technology, so he´s not antivaxx.

Supporting vaccination in the abstract but arguing that we shouldn’t actually vaccinate people with the actual real vaccines that exist in the actual real circumstances that exist is…not an uncommon antivax position, so, while the conclusion of this argument might still be true, the premise offered is not sufficient to justify the conclusion.

[raxxorrax]

> not an uncommon antivax position

Then this term has no meaning at all