You can't live in a state of emergency forever. There comes a point where you have to learn to live with disease, at least until it can be prevented, or cured.
Luckily, COVID doesn't have a million causes, it is passed by transmission of a virus from one person to the next. There may not be a way to stop transmission occuring, but there is a way to attempt to limit transmission and to at very least reduce the severity of symptioms, so if your goal is to end the state of emergency, I'd think your most logical course of action would be to support the jab. There is very much a plan to help us learn to live with COVID. Nobody is talking about accepting a perpetual state of emergency, as much as it may feel like it.
If you want to advocate against certain products, services or lifestyle choices which increase cancer risk, go right ahead. But it is perfectly possible to be anti cancer and anti COVID at the same time. I think it is logical to take both an anti cancer and anti COVID stance. The only logical conclusion is that dragging cancer into the discussuin is just an exercise in deflection and what aboutery.
Nobody is trying to argue that COVID is more dangerous to an individual than cancer. the issue is that it is easily transmitted from one person to the next. The only way cancer can be passed from one person to the next is through our genes. COVID causes severe enough symptoms and even death in enough people that widespread, uncontained transmission of the virus in unvaccinated people causes huge problems for a society.
Geez Rod, you must be pretty bored to spend so much time and effort drawing such a jarring false equivalence....lol