I'm becoming comfortable with the prospect that whatever tiny amount of trustworthy research on this shit has already been done and anything left simply isn't worth the pfizerbucks it's printed on. All the justifications for their continued use now boil down to 'reduction in severe outcomes', which is something they seem to pull out of their ass. According to the preprint in question 1.5% of unvaccinated who got infected with BA.5 went to hospital but almost all of those, 8 out of 9 people, died - which is either evidence of medical murder or worthless statistics.
But if they restricted their analysis to the numbers of infected alone, they'd have to admit that the unvaccinated are the extreme minority of infected, 4.8%, and that previously infected unvaxxed make up the tiniest chunk (0.5-1%) while the boosted make up 70-80% of infected.
I'm becoming comfortable with the prospect that whatever tiny amount of trustworthy research on this shit has already been done and anything left simply isn't worth the pfizerbucks it's printed on. All the justifications for their continued use now boil down to 'reduction in severe outcomes', which is something they seem to pull out of their ass. According to the preprint in question 1.5% of unvaccinated who got infected with BA.5 went to hospital but almost all of those, 8 out of 9 people, died - which is either evidence of medical murder or worthless statistics.
But if they restricted their analysis to the numbers of infected alone, they'd have to admit that the unvaccinated are the extreme minority of infected, 4.8%, and that previously infected unvaxxed make up the tiniest chunk (0.5-1%) while the boosted make up 70-80% of infected.