No, but they'd tax and regulate the shit out of any food product they could categorize as unhealthy, if they could figure out a way to do it while still virtue signaling about "fat is beautiful." Just look at NYC banning certain sizes of soda a few years back. But those are competing agendas, and for now their virtue signaling agenda is the priority. But they'll get back to the tax and tyranny eventually, you can always count on them for that.
Of course they are as 100% prevention is not part of any definition of a vaccine. I posted definitions from 3 different sources and none of them included efficacy as a defining factor of what makes a vaccine, a vaccine. Meanwhile, you've posted exactly zero sources to back your bullshit.
It's not just me calling it a vaccine ... it's the medical community, the encyclopedia, the dictionary, the government. Pretty much every authoritative source available. Whereas your evidence to the contrary is merely you denying it.
I'm citing dictionaries and the Encyclopedia Britannica; while you're citing you.
I never said they were. It's too bad you can't argue with what I actually say.
Of course they are as 100% prevention is not part of any definition of a vaccine. I posted definitions from 3 different sources and none of them included efficacy as a defining factor of what makes a vaccine, a vaccine. Meanwhile, you've posted exactly zero sources to back your bullshit.
It's not just me calling it a vaccine ... it's the medical community, the encyclopedia, the dictionary, the government. Pretty much every authoritative source available. Whereas your evidence to the contrary is merely you denying it.
I'm citing dictionaries and the Encyclopedia Britannica; while you're citing you.
No, you’re citing woke corporate definitions that changed the meaning in 2020 or later.
Before the change, the definition for “vaccination” read, “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.” Now, the word “immunity” has been switched to “protection.”
All because the WuFlu vaccines didn’t work like they promised.
Sure. Not that you will understand it since conservatives have a mental breakdown when it comes to math, but still.....
The report you linked showed in England, for the period between weeks 8-11 of this year, there were a total of 151 covid-related deaths among people between the ages of 60-69. 24 of them were unvaxxed and while the remaining 127 were vaxxed, receiving at least 1 jab at least 3 weeks prior to their unfortunate deaths.
You pointed out that 16% versus 84% respectively. while that's true, that is a dishonest way to look at the figures as that compares unvaxxed deaths with both unvaxxed plus vaxxed Brits; whereas the real measure is comparing unvaxxed deaths out of a pool of unvaxxed Brits only and vaxxed deaths out of a pool vaxxed Brits. In other words, what are the odds of dying from covid if you're unvaxxed versus vaxxed. Now if the line were cut directly through the middle and 50% were unvaxxed and 50% were vaxxed, then yes, the odds of dying from covid would be 16% if you're not vaxxed and 84% if you are.
But that's not the case and the part you're ignoring is, according to the report you linked, that 95.7% of people in England are vaccinated while 4.3% are not. I do admit to a mistake I made earlier which resulted finding an unvaxxed person is 3 times greater than a vaxxed person. My mistake was I only considered those who were fully vaxxed. When you factor in those who received at least 1 jab, it increases to 4.2 times greater. Think of it like this .... you have a room with 10 people ... 1 is unvaxxed and 9 are vaxxed ... 1 unvaxxed person dies from covid while 3 vaxxed people die. Are the odds of unvaxxed dying only 10%? No, of course not. There was only one unvaxxed person in the room and they died. So the odds of an unvaxxed person in that room dying from covid was 100% while the odds of a vaxxed person in that room dying from covid is 33%.
Here's the math ...
There are about 56 million people in England.
With 95.7% vaccinated, that means there are about 53,592,000 vaccinated Brits compared to only 2.408,000 unvaccinated Brits.
With 24 unvaxxed deaths among the 2,408,000 unvaxxed Brits, that's a ratio of: 0.00099667774%
With 127 vaxxed deaths among the 53,592,000 vaxxed Brits, that's a ratio of: 0.00023697567%
And 0.00099667774% is 4.2 times greater than 0.00023697567%.
Yes, we are aware that they had to ummm “update” the definition to include the shit mRNA jabs and remove the statement about preventing infection and spreading it.
Yes, definitions can change. So what? Just like there was a time when a definition for an automobile was a road vehicle, typically with four wheels, powered by an internal combustion engine and able to carry a small number of people. But now that definition changed to include electric cars.
Using your nonsensical con [il]logic, that would mean an electric car is not an automobile.
'Cases' does not mean actual illness. It is, however, not yet proven scientifically that vaccinations are 100% effective. Seems to me that vaccinated or not, all of us will contract this virus just the same as we contract viruses in our everyday lives. I get a flu shot every year but I cannot say if it is actually enhancing my immune system.
Another thought, auto-immune diseases are increasing. Apparently some folks immune systems are too efficient and start attacking their own body. IMO, there is much more to learn. Maybe we ought not tie our immune systems to politics? Just a thought.
No, you’re citing woke corporate definitions that changed the meaning in 2020 or later.
Before the change, the definition for “vaccination” read, “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.” Now, the word “immunity” has been switched to “protection.”
All because the WuFlu vaccines didn’t work like they promised.
By "woke," you mean current. I also note, even in the definition you posted, efficacy is not a factor. And again, using your made up definition, the flu vaccine would not be a vaccine since protection is not guaranteed.
And of course, the flu vaccine is very much a vaccine. A vaccine is something put into the body to teach the immune system how to fight off a virus or bacteria.
And shit, I guess you didn't even read your own link??
mRNA vaccines are a new type of vaccine to protect against infectious diseases.
Sure. Not that you will understand it since conservatives have a mental breakdown when it comes to math, but still.....
The report you linked showed in England, for the period between weeks 8-11 of this year, there were a total of 151 covid-related deaths among people between the ages of 60-69. 24 of them were unvaxxed and while the remaining 127 were vaxxed, receiving at least 1 jab at least 3 weeks prior to their unfortunate deaths.
You pointed out that 16% versus 84% respectively. while that's true, that is a dishonest way to look at the figures as that compares unvaxxed deaths with both unvaxxed plus vaxxed Brits; whereas the real measure is comparing unvaxxed deaths out of a pool of unvaxxed Brits only and vaxxed deaths out of a pool vaxxed Brits. In other words, what are the odds of dying from covid if you're unvaxxed versus vaxxed. Now if the line were cut directly through the middle and 50% were unvaxxed and 50% were vaxxed, then yes, the odds of dying from covid would be 16% if you're not vaxxed and 84% if you are.
But that's not the case and the part you're ignoring is, according to the report you linked, that 95.7% of people in England are vaccinated while 4.3% are not. I do admit to a mistake I made earlier which resulted finding an unvaxxed person is 3 times greater than a vaxxed person. My mistake was I only considered those who were fully vaxxed. When you factor in those who received at least 1 jab, it increases to 4.2 times greater. Think of it like this .... you have a room with 10 people ... 1 is unvaxxed and 9 are vaxxed ... 1 unvaxxed person dies from covid while 3 vaxxed people die. Are the odds of unvaxxed dying only 10%? No, of course not. There was only one unvaxxed person in the room and they died. So the odds of an unvaxxed person in that room dying from covid was 100% while the odds of a vaxxed person in that room dying from covid is 33%.
Here's the math ...
There are about 56 million people in England.
With 95.7% vaccinated, that means there are about 53,592,000 vaccinated Brits compared to only 2.408,000 unvaccinated Brits.
With 24 unvaxxed deaths among the 2,408,000 unvaxxed Brits, that's a ratio of: 0.00099667774%
With 127 vaxxed deaths among the 53,592,000 vaxxed Brits, that's a ratio of: 0.00023697567%
And 0.00099667774% is 4.2 times greater than 0.00023697567%.
This is just another way of saying that the Clot Shots are not YET completely ineffective. Almost, but not completely. Which I think I already acknowledged. But they are waning, will continue to wane, and heaven only know the side effects that will pile up.
(Btw, did anyone take these shots just hoping for a slightly reduced outcome of DEATH?)
This is just another way of saying that the Clot Shots are not YET completely ineffective. Almost, but not completely. Which I think I already acknowledged. But they are waning, will continue to wane, and heaven only know the side effects that will pile up.
(Btw, did anyone take these shots just hoping for a slightly reduced outcome of DEATH?)
The report YOU linked shows the odds of an unvaxxed 60-something year old person dying because of covid is more than 4 times greater than a vaxxed person. That is not a "slightly reduced outcome of DEATH."
The report YOU linked shows the odds of an unvaxxed 60-something year old person dying because of covid is more than 4 times greater than a vaxxed person. That is not a "slightly reduced outcome of DEATH."
Because there's many more of us and because we don't hide in our basements like many umvaxxed idiots. There's a higher percentage of unvaxxed having more severe health issues, being hospitalized & dying from covid than vaxxed.
'Cases' does not mean actual illness. It is, however, not yet proven scientifically that vaccinations are 100% effective. Seems to me that vaccinated or not, all of us will contract this virus just the same as we contract viruses in our everyday lives. I get a flu shot every year but I cannot say if it is actually enhancing my immune system.
Another thought, auto-immune diseases are increasing. Apparently some folks immune systems are too efficient and start attacking their own body. IMO, there is much more to learn. Maybe we ought not tie our immune systems to politics? Just a thought.
By "woke," you mean current. I also note, even in the definition you posted, efficacy is not a factor. And again, using your made up definition, the flu vaccine would not be a vaccine since protection is not guaranteed.
And of course, the flu vaccine is very much a vaccine. A vaccine is something put into the body to teach the immune system how to fight off a virus or bacteria.
And shit, I guess you didn't even read your own link??
mRNA vaccines are a new type of vaccine to protect against infectious diseases.
You haven't shown either of those two things to be true. And what I posted was not a hypothetical. I'm certain now you don't even know what that word means. What I did do was to post the statistical ratio of deaths between vaxxed and unvaxxed Brits using YOUR data.
You haven't shown either of those two things to be true. And what I posted was not a hypothetical. I'm certain now you don't even know what that word means. What I did do was to post the statistical ratio of deaths between vaxxed and unvaxxed Brits using YOUR data.
You haven't shown either of those two things to be true. And what I posted was not a hypothetical. I'm certain now you don't even know what that word means. What I did do was to post the statistical ratio of deaths between vaxxed and unvaxxed Brits using YOUR data.
Nice that Brits who are vaccinated are getting more sick, eh? Exactly my experience with flu "vaccines" which is why I stopped getting them with my drs approval. This is why I hesitated getting the Covid vaccines. One of the best decisions I ever made.
Nope, it doesn't say what you claim. As far as "vaxxed having greater infections," it actually says ....
The rate of death within 28 days or within 60 days of a positive COVID-19 test increases with age, and again is substantially greater in unvaccinated individuals compared to fully vaccinated individuals.
.... which is exactly what I showed you with the math you don't understand.
As far as vaxxed dealing with more "reinfections," the word, "reinfection," appears only once in that report and it's not in relation to vaxxed or unvaxxed specifically....
Please note that from 31 January 2022, UKHSA moved all COVID-19 case reporting in England to use a new episode-based definition which includes possible reinfections. Each infection episode is counted separately if there are at least 91 days between positive test results. Each infection episode begins with the earliest positive specimen date. Further information can be found on the UK COVID-19 dashboard.
So now I see not only can't you do math but you can't do reading comprehension either.
