[trhway]

Your response is extremely typical mix of mis-information (see below), generally stated principles bordering in their generality on banality and absence of any data.

>nothing anywhere close to this has been shown in any other country.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/07/29/cdc-mask-gu...

"This echoes data seen from studies in other countries, including highly vaccinated Singapore, where 75 percent of new infections reportedly occur in people who are partially and fully vaccinated."

[skystarman]

>Your response is extremely typical - just generally stated principles bordering in their generality on banality and without any ounce of data.

Y'see in SCIENCE we have this generally stated principle that we don't draw empirical conclusions from a dataset of a few hundred observations.

How banal!

"This echoes data seen from studies in other countries, including highly vaccinated Singapore, where 75 percent of new infections reportedly occur in people who are partially and fully vaccinated."

This does absolutely nothing to back up your claim that vaccinated people are just as likely to spread the Delta variant.

But please ask for help next time you move those goalposts, I wouldn't want you hurting yourself.

[trhway]

>Y'see in SCIENCE we have this generally stated principle that we don't draw empirical conclusions from a dataset of a few hundred observations.

the statistics would disagree with you on how representative a random draw of several hundred would be in this situation. Anyway, just an example related to the situation - Moderna stage 2 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7871769/):

"Between 29 May and 8 July 2020, 600 participants were randomized, 300 per age cohort. [...]

Conclusions

Vaccination with mRNA-1273 resulted in significant immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 in participants 18 years and older, with an acceptable safety profile, confirming the safety and immunogenicity of 50 and 100 µg mRNA-1273 given as a 2 dose-regimen. "

>This does absolutely nothing to back up your claim that vaccinated people are just as likely to spread the Delta variant.

beside obvious statistical arithmetic clearly showing it (whihc i guess is pointless to discuss giving your statistics statements above), you probably missed the part about nasal viral content in vaccinated people being similar to that of unvaccinated and hint - this infection is airborne. This is why CDC introduced mask mandate for everybody.

And you can read this too https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...

"The higher the amount of coronavirus in the nose and throat, the more likely the patient will infect others. In one Wisconsin county, after Delta became predominant, researchers analyzed viral loads on nose-and-throat swab samples obtained when patients were first diagnosed. They found similar viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated patients, with levels often high enough to allow shedding of infectious virus. "

[skystarman]

"the statistics would disagree with you on how representative a random draw of several hundred would be in this situation"

The observations in your original citation were NOT NOT NOT a random sample.

Are you really this deeply ignorant of basic statistical methods or are you just being dishonest?