It gives enough information. Forty-two people have died from the Pajeet Pertussis in the UK. That's fewer total deaths than a weekend in Chicago, and, rightfully, no one gives a fuck about that.
"it’s exactly what’s expected from an effective but imperfect jab"
they could say that the vaxxed people are the weakest category and this variant is more aggressive... nvm media are so confused about covid narratives at this point they can't even lie properly.
Well, honestly, this would make sense. A huge swath of the country is already vaccinated, and the virus will adapt to the vaccines, and not all the vaccines prevent different strands of the virus, so it would make sense that people with the vaccine would still be dying.
You can't have huge swathes of unvaccinated dying, when there's very few unvaccinated people anyway.
Say there's a disease, call it the pangolin flu. It's infectious enough that everyone's going to be exposed. If you catch it, there's a 50% chance you'll die. However, there's a vaccine. 90% of the people who take the vaccine won't be infected. Let's say that there are 10 unvaccinated people. 10 x 0.5 = 5 deaths. Say there 1,000 vaccinated people. 1,000 x 0.1 x 0.5 = 50. So, even though the rate of death is higher among the unvaccinated, there are so few of them that they are outnumbered by the vaccinated deaths.
Sure, but I'm just trying to show that there can be situations where the vaccine is effective and more of the people who die of the disease are vaccinated. Based on the comments, there seem to be some who haven't thought of what I just described.
It gives enough information. Forty-two people have died from the Pajeet Pertussis in the UK. That's fewer total deaths than a weekend in Chicago, and, rightfully, no one gives a fuck about that.
Poo Flu
Curry Coof
How stupid is their audience if they can still believe something is "effective", whilst it fails to do the one thing it was allegedly designed to do?
I don't know, there are still some people here who think the vaccines are supposed to help people.
I get a laugh every time an experimental treatment which doesn't prevent the disease, and doesn't stop you from transmitting it, is called a vaccine
...and worse yet, causes more mortality-related side effects than the actual virus.
It's EXPECTED!! We knew it was going to kill lots of people, that's the whole point. Duh.
Perfectly in line with Kameltoe's "it was a DEBATE!" What, you expected honesty? How naive.
As said before: "some of you will die. That is a risk we are willing to take."
Literally.
And yet normies will lap it up.
This just means we need more boosters obviously
they could say that the vaxxed people are the weakest category and this variant is more aggressive... nvm media are so confused about covid narratives at this point they can't even lie properly.
Well, honestly, this would make sense. A huge swath of the country is already vaccinated, and the virus will adapt to the vaccines, and not all the vaccines prevent different strands of the virus, so it would make sense that people with the vaccine would still be dying.
You can't have huge swathes of unvaccinated dying, when there's very few unvaccinated people anyway.
Yep we need the percentage of each before we can compare.
So looking less like a Marek's situation and like a repeat of the animal mRNA trials causing cytokine storms. Wonderful.
I get what they're saying.
Say there's a disease, call it the pangolin flu. It's infectious enough that everyone's going to be exposed. If you catch it, there's a 50% chance you'll die. However, there's a vaccine. 90% of the people who take the vaccine won't be infected. Let's say that there are 10 unvaccinated people. 10 x 0.5 = 5 deaths. Say there 1,000 vaccinated people. 1,000 x 0.1 x 0.5 = 50. So, even though the rate of death is higher among the unvaccinated, there are so few of them that they are outnumbered by the vaccinated deaths.
I mean sure, the math checks out if you make up numbers to make it work.
The problem with these stories is that they never provide enough numbers to make meaningful comparisons.
Sure, but I'm just trying to show that there can be situations where the vaccine is effective and more of the people who die of the disease are vaccinated. Based on the comments, there seem to be some who haven't thought of what I just described.
If it saves just one life who cares how many people have to die its science(tm)
So what they're day ng is the vax is operating as intended?