People on the internet tell you all kinds of things. I advise you use your own judgment.
...I can see how people could get the impression that you are on the other side.
Defending blatantly misleading stuff like this Berenson piece is in no way conservative. Neither is advocating for the government to strip private property rights.
A point of view isn't necessarily conservative or on the right just because it's yours.
I do not know if it is all that misleading. I've read your explanation that because this age group got vaccinated first, and because this age group is more likely to die anyway, then the increase is a consequence of this age group's tendency to die at a higher rate than average, which you say is creating the illusion that the vaccines are causing this.
My first thought is that this is certainly true to some extent, but is it true to the extent that it covers all this extra death? There i'm not so sure.
One would expect this delay in vaccination between the age groups would average out over time, especially now that d@mn near everyone has been fully vaccinate for quite some time.
Your claim might be true, but if this increase in vaccinated people in that age group persists, then your claim will clearly not be true, and Berenson may turn out to have actually exposed something.
Neither is advocating for the government to strip private property rights.
There is no such thing as "private property rights" when you are carrying millions of public communications. This very idea needs to be stabbed through the heart.
The phone company does not have the right to censor public communications simply because they own the infrastructure, and all these corporations are modified versions of a phone company and they need to be treated as such.
A nation cannot *allow* anyone to control public communications. Anyone wishing to do so should be denied the ability to do so by the force of law.