no rational way to "debate" you and there comes a point that it just isnt worth the time.

Just a flavor -- why is the underlying metric for analysis "lifetime protection"? At the turn of the 20th century when the first case about mandatory vaccines went to the Supreme Court, they didn't know with any certainty about lifetime protection from the smallpox vaccine in question nor did they have "years" of post vaccine data. How do you view that case? What about non-MMR vaccines for kids?

We know plenty about the safety of the approved vaccines as well as their overall effectiveness -- IF one cares to look -- and the notion that everything you read on this is nothing more than "big pharma" data spun ensure a certain conclusion -- absolutely incorrect.

And trying to logically link how you feel masks and hydro and Ivermectin have been discussed by the media and in your eyes "unfairly treated" with vaccine efficacy data and publicy policy analysis -- extremely misguided. Not only do you constantly misrepresent things (such as actual hydro and ongoing Ivermectin studies), but then you cling to the notion that all such studies that dont back your thesis are nothing more than part of the conspiracy to keep "cheap and effective" treatment out of our hands -- presumably to enrich pharma and government authority. It is why most conspiracy theories exist -- they are almost impossible to "disprove" for those so far down the rabbit holes and believing in the evils of virtually any "big group" and the supposed control and power they are trying to implement on us stupid sheep.