I might be reading it wrong but I think it says the risk of a clot following covid is 10,500 in 1.4 million.
The risk from a clot post vaccine is 1 in 100,000
I'm not being funny here but this isn't difficult maths and your level of understanding on risk and how risk works is equally poor and I think this means you are getting overly worked up.
I've not read the article and I have no intention of doing so, based on your numbers above its simple.
For every 100000 people vaccinated there is one person who gets a clot
And for every 1.4million people who get COVID 10500 get a clot. That's 1.4million divided by 10500 or 133.3 to 1.
But it's also not that simple. You have to think about WHO is getting ill in that. Are some people more at risk of getting COVID even after vaccination. The answer to this is yes - vaccinations are less effective the older you are and there is the issue of the self selecting nature of who hasn't had vaccinations. This tends to be socio-economic or age related. In other words are people more are risk less likely to get a vaccination? This kinda matters. Are these people more at risk of clots than the rest of the population anyway? What is your base rate WITHOUT COVID or vaccines for this self selected group? Can you do a good control group for people who distrust healthcare? (Are they are less likely to engage with other health issues - and this be in poorer health but this isn't recorded on paper because they haven't seen a doctor?) How big are these clots and how much were we looking for clots pre COVID? If we weren't looking for clots in such a large population level before COVID how reliable is our control data? Is it possible it was typical to have clots that don't affect us / or weren't spotted / there were conditions that were attributed to something else because no one thought to look for clots before?
Understanding risk data is about asking what the data shows - and what it doesn't show. If you just look at the numbers it's value is a lot more limited than you might realise. You have to consider the limitations of the data and ask questions about it's integrity and the breadth of what it measures and what it can't account for.
This is the real issue with single studies. You need multiple different ones over a period of time to consider these different types of angle at length and eliminate other factors.
It's too easy to jump to incorrect assumptions...