The claim is that Table13 of the report shows "Table 13. Unadjusted rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and death in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations".
If fact, they only show stats for 3+ jabbed and unjabbed. This table shows favourable efficacy at preventing hospitalizations and deaths while strongly negative efficacy a…
The claim is that Table13 of the report shows "Table 13. Unadjusted rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and death in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations".
If fact, they only show stats for 3+ jabbed and unjabbed. This table shows favourable efficacy at preventing hospitalizations and deaths while strongly negative efficacy at preventing infection/infectivity, where 3+ jabbed get sick at the rate of 150% to 450% of those unjabbed.
Sounds a whole bit impossible/incredible to pan out in real life: what kind of Pixie Dust works this way? Any explanation, or even hypothesis, as to how the magic jabs make you 424.4% more vulnerable at age 60-69 to the infection, yet prevent deaths at the rate of 243% within 60 days of illness? Any clinical studies? No? Any deeper look at the 60-69 populations of jabbed/unjabbed? Should we keep trusting this incredible data?
I presume the stats for 1x- and 2x-jabbed are so awful as not deserving to be seen by the public.
Could UK Health be including the 1x and 2x jabbed as "unvaccinated" in Table 13? If not, I had the same question - Where are they? Why exclude them in this Table 13?
The claim is that Table13 of the report shows "Table 13. Unadjusted rates of COVID-19 infection, hospitalisation and death in vaccinated and unvaccinated populations".
If fact, they only show stats for 3+ jabbed and unjabbed. This table shows favourable efficacy at preventing hospitalizations and deaths while strongly negative efficacy at preventing infection/infectivity, where 3+ jabbed get sick at the rate of 150% to 450% of those unjabbed.
Sounds a whole bit impossible/incredible to pan out in real life: what kind of Pixie Dust works this way? Any explanation, or even hypothesis, as to how the magic jabs make you 424.4% more vulnerable at age 60-69 to the infection, yet prevent deaths at the rate of 243% within 60 days of illness? Any clinical studies? No? Any deeper look at the 60-69 populations of jabbed/unjabbed? Should we keep trusting this incredible data?
I presume the stats for 1x- and 2x-jabbed are so awful as not deserving to be seen by the public.
Could UK Health be including the 1x and 2x jabbed as "unvaccinated" in Table 13? If not, I had the same question - Where are they? Why exclude them in this Table 13?