There were many reasons people refused to take the jab.
I had my own which I am going to describe here. I've been thinking a long time about how to describe the folly of the jab. This is the best explanation I can come up with...
We can imagine that a human has some 3-4 billion base pairs in their DNA. (All of this is simply google AI estimates - the exact details don't matter.) These base pairs make up 23 chromosomes with 50 to 100 million base pairs each. Your DNA creates between 20,000 and 100,000 unique proteins. All of this data (half from each parent) is combined by your conception and from the moment your are conceived this data (and perhaps other factors see: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-021-004385#:~:text=Epigenetic%20change%20can%20arise%20in,arose%20is%20termed%20'intergenerational') governs your "assembly" - which is spatial, electrical, quantum (for consciousness), chemical, mechanical, and much more.
An "assembled you" consists of a 3D structure comprised of 30 to 100 trillion unique cells. A living organism that takes up .06 to .1 cubic meters (60 to 100 liters) of volume most of which is water which, as 3D machinery goes, doesn't do much. The "assembling" takes perhaps 12 to 18 or so years and leaves your with a brain with perhaps 100 trillion neuron connections.
If we multiply out all the possible "arrangements" of the things which make up a human at any given moment in time: physical structures like mitochondria, neuron signals, fluid dynamics, physical locations of everything we end up and an incalculably large number: perhaps 10^24 pieces of information (I don't really know, no one does, but its a guess that probably matters little - just a lot of work for the Star Trek transporter to sortout I suppose).
Of course this is the amount of data representing things at one moment and ignores the outside environment (heat, light, bacteria, viruses if you believe, noise, gravity, etc.). To simulate this human (and only the human) we must recalculate every what, 10ns, 100ns, 1ns, 1ps, again who knows. So add more digits to the exponent.
One might say "infinitely complex" (of course ignoring any quantum activity in the microtubules).
Enter the DNA of Covid-19 (see: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/1798174254). A measly 29,000 plus (or so) base pairs depending on the variant and time of day. (Some clever 3D modeling here: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/structure/?term=sars-cov-2.###).
To correctly characterize Covid-19 we have to understand that it is inserted into the larger human construct - it's not part of the human per se but instead "lives" in the 10^24 ever changing and evolving human structure (whatever "lives" means in this context).
It bounces around inside you "doing things" to your internals - whatever those things might actually be - but again, it really doesn't matter. More infinite complexity - and lots of it. Then add in millions or billions of the Covid-19 viruses (or viri if you prefer).
All this represents a staggering level of complexity. Far beyond what a human mind can grasp.
And how do we know this? Let's compare and imagine you are looking at the code of your google Chrome browser - all 32 million (or so) lines of it. Even if you could read it all you'd still have a hard time grasping the full context of this technology.
And a small javascript program, like Covid-19, might "live" inside the browser - causing subterfuge, bugs or other problems. Maybe it's a React program to calculate probabilities, or trajectories, or sexual genders. Who knows... But let's imagine it's about 29k bytes (or lines of code). The details don't matter.
So let's generously say the "computational" complexity of "Chrome" (including all the GPU, spy-ware, etc., source code, java programs) is on the order of 10^5 (for comparison to humans) just to make up the number.
Chrome represents linear computations - multiple threads of 1D linear computations. Not 2D drawings, and certainly not a 3D construct. Yes it does run on a "computer" but the computational model is linear and "simple". Yes it draws on a 2D screen. But it's not human.
If you want 2D then you also have to think about what Chrome draws and the data it draws upon from the outside world (maybe).
Certainly a significant technical achievement...
But now consider the concept of the "jab".
The "jab" is essentially a small "program" that is designed to intercede between the Covid-19 "things" and the humans. I am not sure even how to characterize the complexity involved.
Surely we "know" about a lot of biology, chemistry, physics and so on. But that's not the same thing as understanding the "complexity" involved. And certainly not the same as accounting for it correctly doing some complex "edit".
I can perhaps figure out a "zero day" chrome bug to exploit in JavaScript. But the jab isn't that. It's more like another JavaScript program that inserts itself into Chrome and mitigates what the original program does in some useful way. Of course, to really be similar one would have to not have access to the source of Chrome when writing this code.
As far as I know this is mostly beyond what technology can do today. And even if we could do it's only 1.5D and ten orders of magnitude less complex that what the jab is supposed to do.
(Yes I understand the notion that there are millions or billions of man years of study of human biology but still we cannot cure the "common cold" so...)
So from my perspective the metric here is given some amount of unknown information in a given system you have to estimate how close you are to knowing whether or not you have enough knowledge to correctly anticipate what a change will do when inserted into that system. This, of course, being much less than knowing what dynamic change might require in order to actually successfully do this.
I believe that this is simply modeled by the following: Given an arbitrary Turing machine (rules and tape, amount of data) how much of the rules, data and tape can remain unknown while still allowing you to make predictable changes to what you can see (the known part).
This is key.
If I have a simple Conway (Game of Life) blinker on a 10 x 10 grid and I can only see once cell how much can I figure out (correctly) about the effect of a blind change to the "code", i.e., can I somehow "read into" the code (say in this case the cells I can or cannot see) and make a change with predictable results.
Let's call this kind of a "Level 1^1" Complexity Matrix. So by "matrix" let's pretend we make some kind of mathematical n x m matrix of numbers that, when we apply some function f to the matrix accurately represents the evolution of the system in question. Mind you we don't know f nor do we know all the numeric cells in the matrix but we still have to do it anyway.
This is sort of the "puzzle fun" you get with brain teasers, etc.
This metric is how you think about this kind of complexity. What's the chance that I actually know enough about what I am doing to pull this off...
If we apply this to Chrome the function f and the matrix become unimaginably large. If I can debug Chrome than to some extent I can master the Chrome level (call it "Level 1^2") of complexity.
Again to make up numbers, I would say that all of the machines and computers on earth are typically represented in something like a "Level 1^5" Complexity Matrix and below.
So where does the complexity of a human fall? I'd say in the range of a "Level 10^24". Like the concept of infinity in mathematics there are different kinds of infinities and different kinds of complexities.
Injecting a "Covid-19" requires the "virus" to reliably and correctly and dynamically alter the matrix and f.
Recently I completed a complex autonomous flight project which worked correctly at the customer site on the first day we brought it there (there was some miscommunication and details that had to be sorted out first but it worked).
This was, I don't know, 25k plus lines of code, a drone, various hardware, assumptions, lidar, etc. Far different than Chrome/JavaScript work in the sense that it involves physical reality as well as multiple 1D program threads: accounting for 3D spatial activity, thrust, velocity, wind, batteries, motors, mechanical stuff, electronics, lidar noise, etc.
I would say this was more like a "Level 1^5" not because it's more code or more complicated than Chrome, but because it involves the "external physical world" which requires the code to account for physical reality - albeit Newtonian physics and not quantum physics like a protein molecule. Chrome doesn't have to account for random particles from space altering its structure while running.
All this said my view of the jab was simple: There was no fucking way in hell anyone or anything could hope to account for the level of understanding, complexity, etc. etc. etc. required to make the jab work by at least 19 or 20 orders of magnitude. Especially not the first time our of the box.
The jab only works if you don't understand complexity.
(Mind you triggering the bodies immune response is far more believable - if indeed it's actually doing what people imagine - than the concept of a piece of RNA clever enough to alter the effects of yet more RNA in an "infinitely complex" system.)
Sure we can do marvelous things. But do we really understand the true consequences?
How may people working on fixing a Chrome but get that fix right the first time? How long to get to the level of understanding to be able to do that?
These are the true "unanswered" questions about the jab.
We must create a notion of "Complexity" that parallels "Infinity" in mathematics. Just like the rationals and irrationals are different "levels" of infinity diddling up some random edit program for humans is the difference between the rationals and orders more infinite "Complexity" than the irrationals.
We are simply too arrogant to understand.
And finally it seems right to start asking why nobody saw this before?