The risk of getting infected by viruses is and was part of life on this planet since the beginning of time. What is worse: A: directly, willingly, without consent, infecting another being by jabbing them with a lucrative product that neither you nor them fully understand, nor it's consequence B: the low chance of indirectly, unknowingly, unwillingly infecting someone with something that has been part of our lifes since the creation of life itself Maybe the missing part in your logic, is that the virus is an infection, but the jab isn't. In reality both are. Now if it comes to evaluating the risk behind both, what it truly comes down to is if you trust in god, life and nature, or in the state, corporations and politicians. This is not a question about health, this is a question about believe.