If you dig into the sources of such claims, you find they're unfortunately based on circular logic. As is so often in the case in public health. Specifically, circular logic of the form "we can't prove beyond doubt a nasty thing that happened ~3 weeks later was due to the vaccine and we're not inclined to look, so it won't be reported as an AE, therefore there are no AEs after that point, therefore it's exceptional for vaccines to cause long term injuries, therefore we won't blame vaccines for anything happening after 3 weeks because it doesn't happen".
Except in the case of the COVID vaccines a few weeks became 7 days. Literally any event that happened after 7 days was considered not vaccine related in the trials. That's not very long especially given the nature of heart damage.
Also, you have to distinguish between side effects happening, and side effects being recognized by public health. It took five years for the system to accept that Pandemrix had maimed teenagers (to protect them from Swine Flu, a disease so mild everyone had forgotten about it by the time this fact was recognized). It also took lawsuits and a very slow moving process to even get the pharma firms to cough up the data showing they knew about the problem much earlier.
Finally, actually, no, we don't know that SARS-CoV-2 is much more dangerous. The data and science quality on this topic is so poor that almost nothing can be said for certain except at the extremes.
At a very young age, mortality from vaccine side effects (~200 to ~700 peri/myocarditis per 1M) is greater than mortality from covid itself (1 per 1M for a healthy young male no comorbidities 18 yo not obese), depending on comorbidities.
This violates do no harm.
Do you have a source for that number? All I have seen indicate that the cases are mild to intermediate, but no actual deaths directly linked to myocarditis.
The source for that is a number of studies I have read, and that is why I am using such a huge range. For example, the numbers in [1] are quite bleak from a % basis, more so than other studies.
On the other hand, myo/pericarditis are known side effects of vaccination in general. In general I don't think that dissuades us, because the rates are usually low. Not in this case though.
Fortunately, I believe some researchers have already identified a partial cause, that being intravenous injection of the vaccines rather than intramuscular [2], and related [3]
[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34341797/
I pulled out the text from your link which is the applicable text with most apropos italicized
Given what we know thus far I think it is consistent with the research to say that this is likewise, potentially caused by intravenous injection of the vaccine, rather than intramuscular as properly indicated. This is also partially caused by modern vaccine procedures which rarely involve aspiration, therefore, the medical provider has no clear indication of whether or not they are injecting into muscle or veins.
As someone that considers himself vaccine-hesistant, I consider this to be a big potential victory in addressing arguably one of the most concerning side effects with mRNA based vaccines, and reducing my concern level if I am required to get the vaccine.
I'm not even going to comment on your claims about mortality rates for vaccine in young people.
According to what? Studies where control groups were eliminated after a few weeks?
But anyway, of course you can't link any of this back to the vaccine. Especially without control group.
Unlikely outcome sure. So is getting autism from a traditional vaccine but the warning still appears on the MMR vaccine insert.