This is where their 'risk-benefit equation' becomes murkier. You could maybe argue the benefit for society overall about forcing kids to get vaccinated - i don't think it's sound, but you could possibly argue it - but you can't argue that the benefit outweighs the risk for the actual kids. Virtually zero risk of severe illness from Covid but significant risk from receiving successive 'generations' of vaccines.

Well put. I've been listening to the 2nd half of the Malone podcast, and there are some points made that are particularly relevant to administering these mRNA vaccines to children.

First, at around 2:22.00, they discuss that the novel lipids used in the vaccine (or the spike protein, can't remember which) quickly travel throughout the body (like they weren't supposed to) and lodge in different places at different rates.

The highest concentrations are in the ovaries. The second highest is in the bone marrow. Malone discussed the possibility that this could indeed lead to bone marrow disease (i.e., leukemia), but that probably wouldn't happen for a few years after vaccination. They talked about how this is an example of one reason why vaccines typically take many years to develop -- because it can take years for unknowns to become known.

The possibility of leukemia is of a particular concern for children, of course, because they'll be living long enough for any potentiality to manifest.

At around 2:28.00 or so they discuss this concentration in the ovaries with an eye towards what happened with thalidomide, which did actually have animal trials. Apparently, some of these reproductive problems can take a generation to manifest.

I assumed the second half of the interview would be less dramatic than the first, but it just keeps getting worse (or better, as a podcast, if you want to look at it that way.)

So, yes, giving this to children is criminal.