They seem to be the same site as https://hcqmeta.com/ https://hcqmeta.com/, and while their data collection and aggregation looks excellent, their use of meta-s

They seem to be the same site as https://hcqmeta.com/ https://hcqmeta.com/, and while their data collection and aggregation looks excellent, their use of meta-statistics seemed mathematically questionable to me in the past, potentially leading to confusing messaging: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26949919 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26949919. Also perhaps worth highlighting the note at the top of their pages saying they believe vaccination is better: "While many treatments have some level of efficacy, they do not replace vaccines and other measures to avoid infection." This seems mathematically defensible to me, since a vaccine that is 95% effective is a 33% risk reduction over a treatment that is 80% effective, per some of the estimated averages on that page (since going from 5% remaining risk to 15% risk is 3 times more cases).