3 ms·
Also, its "protection" or "effective against", it's not about preventing from what I can see, it's about "preventing hospitalization". I'd really like to see th
by version_five 5y ago
Also, its "protection" or "effective against", it's not about preventing from what I can see, it's about "preventing hospitalization". I'd really like to see the calculation, to be clear on what is actually claimed in the 90%. If it actually prevented 90% of people from getting covid, we should have been able to move on long ago.
- chiefalchemist 5y agoYes, more or less my point. All things being unequal, the only way to assign numbers is to know X of Group 2 Jabs were exposed to and contracted vs Y of Group 3 Jab were exposed to and contracted... As it is, it's less odds and more "on average." Sadly, we're still getting bad data and bad interpretation of that data two years into this. At this point, sad to say, it feels intentional. Two years is quite a bit of negligence.