I use Google, but there are alternatives. OP is obviously using very round numbers, but given that is not wrong.

Those numbers are wildly optimistic. I would like to see which studies you are quoting so I can review them.

For the Pfizer mRNA vaccine here are the results from studies in Israel.

https://pharmaceutical-journal.com/article/feature/everythin...

It gives a lot of data on chances of symptoms and illness at various periods after the first and second doses from various studies, however the bottom line is that long term the national level studies show that:

“The vaccine also provided 97.2% protection against hospitalisation overall and 97.5% protection against severe and critical hospitalisation.”

These are outstanding results, among the best of any vaccine ever developed, and from studies of large a large and diverse population.

It was 100% effective is a study of 2,000 12-15 year olds. This is important because in countries like Brazil where the death rate is incredibly high, even the small fraction of victims that are children adds up to many hundreds, or even thousands of deaths.

Not hypothetical. This is actively being discussed in several countries. Relevant because vaccine passports make even less sense if the vaccines don't work.

There's a good chance that the AZ and Sinopharm vaccines don't work as well.

I think that's a false dichotomy. You're saying the success of vaccine A implies success of vaccine B? That because some people wrongly argued against vaccine A, I can't argue against vaccine B (even at such an early point)?

This is exactly the point. We have decades of evidence for most vaccines and you only need them infrequently. That's a world away from a 6m old vaccine that hasn't been through the normal approval process.

The infection rates for Covid and flu are in the same ballpark so the infection rate is basically irrelevant. So Covid to flu comparison is more like apples to apples. https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m3883/rr

So the earth is 4.5 billion years old and the BBC think 135 years is a suitable sample size?

Handed down. The austerity has been a condition of the bailouts from the ECB & IMF. The Greeks even voted against the terms in a referendum which was immediately overturned. In Italy the EU even went to the lengths of appointing their own man to oversee the terms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mario_Monti#Prime_Minister_of_...

Fair point but I think the problem is that the brain drain is exacerbating the other structural problems in the eurozone.