Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Simpson’s paradox should be taken into account.

If you group the population into only 2 groups: all of the vaccinated and all the unvaccinated, regardless of age; then the vaccinated had a higher death toll.

But age is a hidden factor. The older have more risks and are more vaccinated.

If you group by vaccination AND by age bracket, the opposite happens. For example, the 60 to 65 vaccinated have a lower death rate than the 60 to 65 unvaccinated.



Just so I understand what you're saying, it sounds to me like covid is killing old people and something else is killing everyone else at a higher rate, correlating with vaccination status?

So only old people and high risk individuals should've gotten the vaccine?


I think you jumped to a conclusion. COVID still kills vaccinated individuals, just at a lower rate than unvaccinated.


That much was obvious. Young people weren't asked to take the vaccine to protect themselves but to protect the herd.


And by „asked“ you mean (in many cases) forced.

Not to mention, the emergency auth clearly stated (in europe at least) that it was unknown if the serum prevented spread. Lookup the documents, it‘s right there.

So the reality is that young people were forced to take untested gene therapy for no medical reason at all.


Despite the fact that the clinical trials didn't test for ability to stop transmission and infection. So the CDC, FDA, and Pfizer outright lied to the public. And when that lie fell apart, it was so 'you don't overrun the hospitals' despite the fact that young people weren't being hospitalized at any rate more than the seasonal flu.


And for anyone skilled enough in mathematician to check the assumptions for the formulas for "herd immunity": It was clear from the beginning that the term "herd immunity" was based on totally unrealistic assumptions. These are seasonal viruses - and outbreaks were following strict mathematics fitting a seasonal outbreak. This was clearly visible from the beginning (people posted formulas for that in early 2020....). The term Herd immunity absolutely doesn't make any sense for a seasonal virus like this. There is no such thing as a constant R-Value. That model is based on stochastic independent infections... (which is very unrealistic... and dumb...)


Pfizer didn't. Their press release distinguishes between SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19, only claims they prevented symptoms in people not previously infected by the virus, and didn't make any claims about infection/transmission. It was the conflation of the two terms in the media, referring to the virus as "COVID-19", that resulted in this mistake.

And even so, for several months articles were coming out questioning of it stopped infection/transmission at all. It was only once we got a few months into 2021 that that got buried with the assumption it did.


The study is about age group 25-44 where you should really not expect heart attack (very rare).




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: