The Reuters article contains two links to an abstract from a preprint about 301 13-18 year olds in Thailand. All the quotes I supplied are from that abstract or from the full PDF of the study, which is available from that page. https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202208.0151/v1
The study says that of the 301 students 88 had some sort of reaction, with " with all cases fully recovering within 14 days."
Yes. Not sure why you’re assuming that i would disagree. Maybe it’s because the heuristics going on in your brain are so basic that you can only group people according to your own basic stereotypes.
Every link I supplied comes through OP's post.
The tweet he supplies does not mention 11-18 year olds. It is about "A study of 301 teens in Thailand..." https://mobile.twitter.com/ReutersFacts/status/1560276653133049857
The tweet links to a Reuters piece about "A study of 301 teens in Thailand..." https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-heart-teens-vaccine/fact-check-study-of-thai-teenagers-did-not-find-one-third-experienced-heart-effects-after-covid-vaccination-idUSL1N2ZT2B5
The Reuters article contains two links to an abstract from a preprint about 301 13-18 year olds in Thailand. All the quotes I supplied are from that abstract or from the full PDF of the study, which is available from that page. https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202208.0151/v1
The study says that of the 301 students 88 had some sort of reaction, with " with all cases fully recovering within 14 days."
And your supported arguments are all macro. You can’t support your fantasies, otherwise.
I'm going to suggest that peer-reviewed studies are on balance more reliable than most of the theories offered here.
Yes. Not sure why you’re assuming that i would disagree. Maybe it’s because the heuristics going on in your brain are so basic that you can only group people according to your own basic stereotypes.