Posted on 01/25/2022 10:14:01 AM PST by RideForever
The Public Health Scotland data from the past four weeks showed a rate of infection of 866 per 100,000 people for the double vaccinated and 481 per 100,000 for the boosted, or triple vaccinated.
The unvaccinated had a rate of infection of 413 per 100,000.
I don’t think you can use the per 100,000 of the total population because the unvaxxed are only 10% of the total pop.
BTW, my original reply here states, “I’d LIKE to believe it….”
The graphs and tables on following pages seem to indicate that the vax without the booster seems to have a net negative impact
Inside an ICU, a depleted staff struggles to keep going...
About 70% of patients admitted to the hospital are unvaccinated, as are more than 90% of those who die there.
https://news.yahoo.com/inside-icu-depleted-staff-struggles-195028673.html
That's not a bug. That's a feature. As for how they could do just that, a link...
Nasal vaccination against SARS-CoV-2: Synergistic or alternative to intramuscular vaccines?
From the link...
It is striking that all marketed SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are developed for intramuscular administration designed to produce humoral and cell mediated immune responses, preventing viremia and the COVID-19 syndrome. They have a high degree of efficacy in humans (70–95%) depending on the type of vaccine. However, little protection is provided against viral replication and shedding in the upper airways due to the lack of a local sIgA immune response, indicating a risk of transmission of virus from vaccinated individuals.
Striking is not the word I'd use...
ping
I’m not into wild conspiracies for this vax, nor much else.
As a trained engineer, I am skeptical of the cost-benefit. Merely.
What is the benefit? Help reduce problems from a disease that maybe kills 1% of the whole pop.
We should be questioning the whole COVID hysteria. Why so afraid of this disease? I don’t see the worth in getting a vax at all for this, like flu vaxes.
The cost? Ok, as my nutty brother says, it’s the “most tested vaxes ever”. Tested for immediate effects. But NOT for long-term.
I do not wish to take an untested rushed vax (biology doesn’t operate that fast) for a minor disease that we know doesn’t really threaten many people. Those it does threaten should be more careful.
But for me, its benefit most certainly doesn’t outweigh the cost, which is still unknown.
NJ keeps pretty good data on vaccinated versus unvaccinated. Right now if you are unvaccinated you have about a five time greater chance of getting COVID and you are about ten times likelier to die. These of course are raw numbers and there are many other factors that come into play. We should be careful of any number set that just presents some statistics. Without having control groups of fairly identical people (age, race, comorbidity) with the same levels of potential exposure, it is really hard to draw any conclusions. Bottom line, just do what you think is best for yourself and family.
OH NOOOOEZ !!!
How can that be ???
Paging Dr F !!!
What we’ve known ping.
If you go to the table on page 38 of the link above you will see the numbers clearly laid out.
who sold their souls to the Devil for accepting as 'unvaccinated' CoVID victims who become infected or adverse affected within 14 days of being 'jabbed'. They turned their backs on the science of natural immunity, and only a fool would trust them with his life.
Well, you can't tell that to the woman whose brain was turned into unrecognizable mush following the 'jab', now, can you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.