My understanding of virus mutation is that the more virulent it is (the more easily it spreads) the more quickly it mutates. In other words, it seems likely to me that whether there is a vaccine or not, this virus is likely to mutate to adapt to antibodies quicker than your average virus. Whether those antibodies are produced by your body's immune system as a reaction to the virus itself or to the vaccine hardly matters. If this were a slow spreading virus that we were mass vaccinating for, then I would see vaccine induced ADE as a bigger drawback. The likelihood of never having COVID is about as likely as never having the flu or the common cold (even less likely as it spreads more easily). So why would a vaccine cause quicker/worse mutations? I would think an increase in likelihood of that would be a worry for viruses that aren't already likely to spread to everybody anyway. Besides, that ship has already sailed. The die is cast so to speak. We already have mass vaccinated. The question now isn't whether mass vaccination triggers more/worse mutations in the virus but whether or not given that we are mass vaccinating, are you better off with or without it? And as a counterpoint to the vaccine induced ADE argument, we've been mass vaccinating for various viruses for years and that has not seemed to be a huge problem thus far. Why suddenly this worry for COVID?

Vaccines for viruses frequently require boosters (the Flu vaccine is supposed to be annual after all) so that is really not a surprise. This vaccine was rushed and they could not have told you how long immunity would last up front because nobody wanted to wait a year (or unknown amount of time) to find out. I doubt vaccine research has ceased and it is possible a better one will come along in the future. But the possible need for future boosters was talked about very early on it's just nobody needed them at that point because the vaccine was so new.

As far as being experimental, the Pfizer vaccine has been fully approved by the FDA. The possible negative side effects of all of them are pretty well understood at this point. No vaccine is 100% safe and neither is this one. However, it is very, very unlikely for it to kill you are cause you permanent harm ("very, very unlikely" being some percentage slightly greater than 0).

Glancing through the articles linked above, it's very clear that only articles and data showing the vaccine is "not good" are considered and others are ignored. They even frequently contradict one another. One says there is little or no correlation between vaccination and COVID deaths and another talks about a sharp jump in deaths after vaccination. One talks about VAERS being inaccurate and another talks about how it shows risk of death is higher from the vaccine than from COVID. I mean come on...you can't have it both ways. And this goes back to why I put the strongest consideration on my personal observations despite being anecdotal vs. the absurd multitude of often agenda driven data spewed out (on both sides of the argument) about COVID.

I strongly support an individual's right to choose whether or not they get vaccinated. I just don't buy into the theory that the vaccine is a tool for depopulation or even that it does more harm than good. I haven't seen anything in my own personal observations to support that.

If you want to read some fiction with some terrifying and eerie parallels, check out The Stand by Stephen King if you have never read it. It's sort of a worst case scenario of rapidly mutating, rapidly spreading, and almost always deadly flu-like virus.