Wouldn't that be heavily dependent on the cohort?
For instance, if we're talking about people aged 40+, it's pretty evident that the vaccine is safer than the virus without question.
For males 16-24, and given the current strains out there, would the virus be more dangerous than receiving numerous additional doses of mRNA vaccines?
An excellent question and not the easiest one to answer. When the vaccines were introduced (I'll stick to the mRNA vaccines), it was easy to answer: vaccination was safer for every age group than being infected. But now, if you're young, male, immune-competent, and have some immunity from either vaccination or infection (or both), what are the risks and benefits of boosting? I can't find any studies that directly address the question -- it's hard to study and interest in the subject has waned.
A couple of relevant facts. First, it's clear that the bulk of the risk of post-vaccination peri/myocarditis for young post-puberty males (who are the ones at high risk) came from the primary vaccinations with the Moderna vaccine. The risk after the 2nd dose was about 10 times as high for Moderna as for Pfizer; even the Moderna booster, which had half the dosage, still had ~2X the risk of a Pfizer booster. The risk of myocarditis from SARS-CoV-2 infection was about half that of the 2nd dose of Pfizer (obviously, there are other risks associated by infection).
Second, the evidence is pretty good that the risk of this kind of reaction, both from infection and from vaccination, decreases with prior immunity. That is, the risk from vaccination was about halved for those who had previously been infected, while the risk from infection was reduced by about a third. It's plausible, then, that as overall immunity to SARS-CoV-2 has increased, the risk from vaccination has decreased.
The benefit side of boosting is even harder to evaluate. No one is doing the kind of randomized control trials of boosting that would be needed to quantify the benefits, and observational studies aren't reliable because people who get boosted have systematically different risk and behavior profiles than those who don't. Boosting with a vaccine that better matches the current immunogenic profile of circulating virus very likely reduces risk of severe disease and probably also substantially reduces the risk of infection, but the latter effect wanes within a few months.
So on net, I don't really know. As I wrote earlier in the thread, if I were in that age bracket, I might not get boosted, but I also might.