I provided a CLEAR example of the nonsensical approach of classifying people into two distinct "risk" groups based on jab status. Why are you off on some tangent about something unrelated? Why can't you address or refute the clear point I have made?
It is clear why - you have no reasonable basis from which to do so.
Tell us exactly why my 20 vs 80 yr old example is flawed. Tell us exactly why I should be "perfectly comfortable" around the 80 yr old but "sh!t scared" of and "attack" the 20 yr old.
