With properly designed studies, you can more directly determine what is the result of the virus versus the vaccine. In any case, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) showed that the mRNA C19 "vaccines" were quite dangerous and therefore it is questionable if groups who were at minimal risk (most people under 40 who weren't obese and don't have diabetes) should have taken it.
This is especially the case for children. The FDA issued a myocarditis warning on the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaxes, and the studies I've seen suggest this could be directly attributed to the vax in people who had no evidence of C19 infection. In any case, since the vax doesn't prevent C19 infection, the relevant question is whether the risk of damage from the vax was offset by reduced risk from infection in the relevant groups. Most parents are wisely refusing to get their children boosted given the known risks and lack of quality data showing benefit.
It is good that we have a new administration which may provide higher quality data with respect to the vaxes, given that Biden and Fauci were caught compulsively lying about the benefits and risks. If you recall, top safety officials at the FDA resigned (due to lack of evidence of benefit) rather than approve the shots for children as Biden was pressuring them to do.