You got that right. They never promised the vaccines would prevent infection or the spread of infection. They just said it would reduce risk of severe infection, hospitalization or death.
But they don't make clear is whether it is an absolute reduction in risk, or a reduction in relative risk. Clearly a very large number of people infected never get any symptoms at all, or symptoms so mild they don't even bother to get tested. Of the 330 million or so people in America, only 100 million tests have been administered (don't hold me to that number, I could be wrong). I count for at least 4 of them, maybe 5. So what is the real infection rate vs the published data? I'd just stab in the dark that the real infection/recovery rate is well more than 2x the official number.
They really don't want open and free and honest dialogue about any of this. Too bad. Just breeds more distrust.
“…You got that right. They never promised the vaccines would prevent infection or the spread of infection. They just said it would reduce risk of severe infection, hospitalization or death….”
****************************************************
Well, in this population of 31 fully vaccinated assisted living residents who were exposed to the virus and then tested positive, the vaccines apparently 100% delivered on the promise. It appears the only thing that happened to the 31 was that the virus exposure merely further STRENGTHENED THEIR EXISTING IMMUNITY.
If that were factual then there would be no reason for “vaccine” coercion to prevent an epidemic.
Well, except for the initial hysterical panic over not having enough hospital beds — but they mitigated that risk in NY by just putting the COVID-infected seniors back in their nursing homes — problem solved.