This is simply more unfounded assumption on your part. You have shown no sign of being receptive to anything that you do not already believe. You have not presented any argument worth refutation. Baseless arguments do not even rise to the level of consideration. FUD indoctrination is all I see. The closest you came was with the 'herd immunity', which is also part of the indoctrination. Learn the physics of the chemistry of the process and the better methods become apparent. So maybe, spend more than five minutes 'googling that up', and verse yourself in the best tools to which you'll ever have access.
It appears that you may want to start at the beginning, the Trivium is a place to start. Grammar, logic, and rhetoric. If you can fit it in, the Quadrivium is second to none when understanding the math. Without these, genuine attempts at communication are usually fruitless.
What's more likely: that you have information (which by the way, scientists, doctors, journals, and the media never mention) which either disproves the efficacy of vaccines or shows a better alternative to them yet you refuse to show it to someone genuinely asking, or that it doesn't exist? Occam's Razor.
P.S. Didn't realize the steem comment depth went this far now. Good job devs!
You are still not genuinely asking. The more likely thing, ipso facto, is the appeal to probability masquerading as an argument that I see in line one of your comment, followed by the appeal from authority, appeal to popularity, and genetic fallacy in parenthesis.
Occam's razor is not a law, but only a general guideline.
Here's a question. What if I do have a better alternative that you could benefit from, but you continue to dump the catalogue of fallacies on the comments to ridicule something that you haven't even seen?
So that's all you've got?