From your earlier comment: > because there was never evidence these vaccinations prevented infection/transmission You are refusing to admit you were factually

From your earlier comment: > because there was never evidence these vaccinations prevented infection/transmission You are refusing to admit you were factually incorrect, it's very disappointing. Everyone knew that the trials did not specifically study transmission rates, I never disagreed with that. The fact is, as soon as the vaccinations went live we had massive data supporting it, and studies were done that completed in the next years that confirmed it. Societally, we knew the vaccines were effective at both preventing transmission (though not as effective as we'd like) and preventing infection (though for not as long as we'd like). I'm done engaging because you refuse to admit you were wrong regarding the efficacy of the vaccine and are now changing your argument to be about a specific timeline, which is asinine - the studies to confirm what we were seeing in realtime with the vaccine rollout would _of course_ take longer than the trials that started the rollout.