|
|
|
|
|
|
by poopypoopington
1744 days ago
|
|
|
But those numbers don't account for severe disease, hospitalization, and death which are the whole point of the vaccines. You're latching onto this dramatic exchange because of some stupid idea that vaccines are this magic shield against any infection, and while they do reduce risk of infection they are mostly meant to prevent severe disease, hospitalization, and death. Also you don't account for possible explanations for the UK data. For example, maybe unvaccinated people in the UK are more likely to have previously contracted COVID. More likely I think, the vaccinated are taking much more risk than the unvaccinated, leading to their higher case counts. Many unvaccinated are immunocompromised (or know that they are at higher risk for severe complications from COVID because they are unvaccinated) so I assume many of them are taking higher precautions than the vaccinated, i.e. wearing N-95's, not leaving their houses while many vaccinated people I know in the UK are going to 50k person festivals. |
|
|
• The vaccine trials didn't use "severe disease" or hospitalizations/deaths as their target metric. They used PCR positives.
• The original protocols don't include boosters.
• The pre-2021 definition of vaccine is something that makes you immune.
What's happening now is grotesque: dictionaries are actually changing their definition of vaccine to try and cover up that the COVID vaccines have failed on their own terms. Compare Merriam-Webster before [1] and after [2]. The definition at the start of 2021 is short and to the point, a vaccine is administered to "produce or artificially increase immunity". The definition today is that a vaccine merely has to "stimulate the body's immune response". No actual immunity needs to be created under the new definition, which has been rewritten because the COVID vaccines fail to meet the normal definition of vaccine. We already have a word for what the COVID "vaccines" are doing, the word is prophylactic. And there's nothing wrong with those! They're just different to vaccines.
"some stupid idea that vaccines are this magic shield against any infection"
This idea is not stupid. It is the conventional expectation for vaccines up until this point. Vaccinations against diseases like smallpox, measles, mumps and so on do provide you a magic shield, which is why vaccines were taken so seriously and seen as so important previously. That's also why pre-2021 discussion of vaccines were dominated by discussions of herd immunity thresholds and whether vaccination could achieve zero COVID, a topic that's now vanished. Once again, this new narrative is made up in the last few months as it becomes clear the COVID vaccines aren't working properly.
"Also you don't account for possible explanations for the UK data. For example, maybe unvaccinated people in the UK are more likely to have previously contracted COVID"
I provided a possible explanation in the final paragraph. The one you're proposing is literally the exact same alternative explanation I posted in reply to nradov. I think this is quite possible.
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210108224740/https://www.merri...
[2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine