[inter_netuser]

>I have repeatedly seen HNers argue that COVID is harmless to children (no qualifiers), and that the cure is worse than the disease.

HNers?

How about UK's JCVI (Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation), a government advisory panel?

"Covid-19: JCVI opts not to recommend universal vaccination of 12-15 year olds"

Source: https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2180?ijkey=350e95850073...

UK JCVI declined to recommend the vaccine on risk/benefit basis. That is a scientific fact that, in your own words, "the cure is worse than the disease" for some.

JCVI membership:

  Professor Andrew Pollard, Chair (University of Oxford)
  Professor Lim Wei Shen, Chair COVID-19 immunisation (Nottingham University Hospitals)
  Professor Anthony Harnden, Deputy Chair (University of Oxford)
  Dr Kevin Brown (Public Health England)
  Dr Rebecca Cordery (Public Health England)
  Dr Maggie Wearmouth (East Sussex Healthcare NHS Trust)
  Professor Matt Keeling (University of Warwick)
  Alison Lawrence (lay member)
  Professor Robert Read (Southampton General Hospital)
  Professor Anthony Scott (London School of Hygiene & Tropical   Medicine)
  Professor Adam Finn (University of Bristol)
  Dr Fiona van der Klis (National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Netherlands)
  Professor Maarten Postma (University of Groningen)
  Professor Simon Kroll (Imperial College London)
  Dr Martin Williams (University Hospitals Bristol)
  Professor Jeremy Brown (University College London Hospitals)

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/joint-committee-on-vacc...

Looking forward to your explanation on how these world-renowed immunologists are spouting tautologies and are morally and intellectually bankrupt.

[CorrectHorseBat]

I would say that "the health benefits are marginally greater than the potential known harms.” means not worth the price, but not "the cure is worse than the disease".