[criticaltinker]

So I say "The threat of vaccine resistance is real and acknowledged by many experts" and provide citations to support this claim - then you reply:

> This isn't a point against the vaccine [...] and doesn't support the anti vax argument

You're attacking a straw man with an overly simplistic reductionist interpretation. I'm not "against the vaccine", but clearly your bias here is to defend vaccination and disregard any nuanced criticisms from experts at top institutions as "anti-vax".

I won't continue to discuss this with you because it's obvious you don't intend to cultivate an informed discussion.