They might know the word. Understanding what it means in context is a different matter.

You see this all the time where people will pick up niche jargon and misapply it.

Antivaxers surpisingly know quite a lot of lingo. What they lack is an understanding of experimental methods.

I'm fine with vaccines, i just dont want my kids to particpate in the experiemnt for a disease that they have 0% chance of dying from.

The case fatality ratio for measles infected children in high-income countries is also low. Nonetheless, we vaccinate children for this infectious disease because morbidity is also bad.

Which disease is that? I'm not aware of any disease that's commonly vaccinated against that has a 0% death rate in children.

The Covid deaths were measured in thousands before they could find a single individual under 18 yrs old who died from it. The only reason to vaccinate kids was to try to prevent them from spreading it to adults. Right from the beginning (eg. With the cruise ship that was infected), it was extremely obvious that the main factor in survivability was age. The younger you were, the safer it was. Weight was also very important but we learned that later

Considering there have been over 7 million deaths directly from covid, saying "covid deaths measured in the thousands before X" is another way of saying "X happened right at the beginning of covid".

Plus, there's a big difference between "young people tend to have less risk of death" and "young people have a 0% chance of death" like the person I replied to claimed.

No, we also vaccinate children to prevent non-fatal illness, which is a reasonable choice to make if adverse effects of the vaccine are very small (they are). People get flu shots annually for this same reason.

Edit: I would also add that parents regularly make choices for their children that involve larger amounts of risk.

Sovcits similarly use lots of complicated legal terms.

They just don't use them correctly and/or appropriately.