Posted on 07/12/2022 7:24:07 PM PDT by Hojczyk
To make much sense of this we need to know what percentage of the population those people represented.
Why do you get to post with clarity, but I have to know more?
How do we know that the population of unvaccinated wasn't the elderly with comorbidities and the double-vaxxed and boosted weren't all under 40?
Your rebuttal applies to you, too.
-PJ
My post quoted a rate of hospitalization within each demographic. It was already adjusted for relative population size.
I suggested that’s exactly what we need in order to address your question - a rate of infection in each group (unvaccinated, vaxed but not boosted, and fully vaxed), not an absolute number.
What the F** is wrong with this idiot! It doesn’t protect at all against INFECTION. That is why the jerks in the CDC changed the definition of “vaccine” to exclude immunity.
Now, it might protect against the results of an infection. But, side effects can kill yah.
In fact, if we borrow a page from official Spain study wherein they concluded that actual deaths FROM the Wuhan are ~10% of reported/alleged/guessed deaths, then I wonder if the side effects deaths exceed the actual Wuhan deaths.
Ah, but that doesn’t matter since the CDC immunized the Pharm companies against liability by approving all the of Vax by an emergency issuance.
Yes, nice how that ties together. Almost planned.
I'm going to use the same numbers as you did to stand by my assertion:
Unboosted vaccinated people are the largest cohort being hospitalized, regardless of how sick they ultimately get.
That suggests that they are also the largest cohort in the overall population, if we are to assume that this hospital's data is a statistically representative sample of the population. I am not aware of any reports that suggest that the degree of ability to pass on COVID-19 to others is related to their vaccination status -- vaccinated and unvaccinated affected people spread it equally.
The virus doesn't care who the host is, which is also suggested by the number of cruise ships where everyone is vaccinated and tested pre-boarding who still come down with it: it's the vaccinated spreading it to the other vaccinated.
If it is not a statistically relevant sample of the overall population, then no conclusions (yours or mine) can be generalized to the overall population from this hospital's data.
-PJ
Yes, this specific question you can’t prove.
The article doesn’t say that. That statistic if for infections, not hospitalizations.:
”Out of 422,966 COVID-19 cases among those aged 18 years and older, 33.6% occurred in unvaccinated people, 13.3% in people who were vaccinated with a booster dose, and 53.2% in those who were vaccinated but did not receive a booster dose.”
…if we are to assume that this hospital's data is a statistically representative sample of the population.
The whole point of the article is to show that it’s not a representative sample. The hospitalized population is heavily skewed towards the unvaccinated.
…If it is not a statistically relevant sample of the overall population, then no conclusions (yours or mine) can be generalized to the overall population from this hospital's data.
Exactly, but you’re the one trying to generalize to the total population, not me (nor the article).
I’m pointing out that within the population of people being infected with Covid those who are unvaccinated are much more likely to be hospitalized.
Your point is about the number of cases among the vaxed-but-not-boosted but we don’t have the data to say whether they’re disproportionate or not because we don’t know what percentage of the total population they represent.
The whole point of the article is to show that it’s not a representative sample... you’re the one trying to generalize to the total population
No, you're the one who said this in your original post linking the study:
There are dozens and dozens of studies showing the same thing.
You're going to try to convince me that you weren't generalizing there, implying that your linked article represented "dozens and dozens" of others?
How can you initially say that this article represented "dozens and dozens of studies showing the same thing," and now say that "The whole point of the article is to show that it’s not a representative sample?"
You're talking out of both sides of your mouth on this one...
-PJ
I wasn’t implying anything. I clearly stated that there are dozens of studies showing the vaccines are effective against severe disease.
Seriously, it’s July 2022. If you don’t know this you’re not paying attention. It’s trivially easy to find them.
Here the first to come up in a simple search. Are you seriously doubting there are many, many more?
Do you have a single source disputing the vaccines’ effectiveness against severe disease?
So which was it, the same thing or not a representative sample?
If it's the same thing as dozens of other studies, then I can use the data in your linked study as a representative sample of the dozens of others that showed the same thing.
And that means that I can use your provided data to conclude that the unboosted vaccinated population with COVID-19 is 58% greater than the unvaccinated population with COVID-19, because all the other conclusions from your article are derived from the same sample population.
Personally, I think the data is not a representative sample, but you posted it as representative of dozens just like it, not me.
I don't know why I waste my time with you.
-PJ
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.