Thanks for explaining your thinking. I like your theme and think it's worth discussing, but honestly this paper is only tangentially relevant. It would be relevant if ADE were a thing, but basically this is input to a highly technical discussion, and the fact that this discussion is happening (the vaccines are getting serious scrutiny) is good news.

I've been thinking about how to improve the quality of discourse on HN a bit, and I think the philosophy of Wikipedia might be relevant. They discourage linking primary sources (like this paper), but encourage quality secondary sources. A review of ADE in the Covid vaccines, citing this paper, might be a much better choice, as it would provide context and a framework for evaluating the more fine-grained issues.