Re the first paper mentioned, it would be best to wait for the peer review. Re the second paper, behind a paywall, the abstract alone is insufficient to convince anyone that your statement, "...despite conclusive proof that [covid boosters are], statistically, far more dangerous than said children contracting Covid" is true. It defies logic that any booster for which the claim, "far more dangerous", is statistically true would be approved by any regulatory body. Sometimes in life we have only our common sense to fall back on.Over 40% of liberals believe that US cops killed >1,000 unarmed in black men during 2019 - the real figure was around 20. People believe in 'long Covid' despite a variety of studies showing that it doesn't exist (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.06.07.22276108v1.full.pdf). Millions of people are giving booster after Covid booster to their young children despite conclusive proof that doing so is, statistically, far more dangerous than said children contracting Covid (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4206070).
And of course, only one of these groups has an iron grip of control over all US institutions.

