I continually see memes quoting statistics that claim to show the ineffectiveness of vaccines.
Anybody with even middle school level math competency should be able to see through the misrepresentation of these statistics.
A recent example stated that 85.7% of deaths over a particular week in Scotland were vaccinated people. The conclusion drawn was that the vaccines don't work because the vast majority of people dying were vaccinated.
What was left out in the post was that 94% of Scotland has received at least 1 dose and 74% has received 3 doses. That leaves only less than 6% of the population unvaxxed accounting for 12% of the deaths. This data suggests (suggests, doesn't prove anything), just the opposite of the conclusion drawn.
Misuse of statistics makes people look either stupid or dishonest. If you see something posted like this, you should immediately question your source. Anybody passing off this kind of stuff isn't vetting their sources or their numbers either through actual intent to mislead or sheer stupidity. Either way, the source cannot be trusted. Trusting such a source is just allowing yourself to be duped (which makes you a dupe) or a liar yourself.
Hold yourself to higher standards of integrity, please, everybody. It doesn't help anybody to lie about facts or pass on lies about facts.
You know math? Ha ha ha ha. I don't think so.
Let's see if that's true. David cited this article.
From the data in the table alone, what percentage of the total deaths from COVID were unvaxxed? What % were Fully + Fully & boosted? Which % is higher?
What % of the population in the study were unvaxxed? What % of the population was Fully + Fully-boosted?
Now using that very straightforward data, explain how that data support a conclusion that the vaccines are not effective?
(You might want to quibble with 95% effective vs 75% effective, but any amount of effectiveness is good if it results in fewer deaths, right?)
Like I said, I've already done the math a long time ago. You're claiming we can't do it, you have the burden of proof here. Calculate the odds and cite your sources... if you can
What odds? What are you talking about? My point is that it is not legitimate to take one week of data to make any conclusions regarding the effectiveness of vaccines. I have continuously quoted the Scotland report:
Nonetheless, I demonstrated that, in fact, using that methodology demonstrates exactly the opposite of what was claimed.
It's up to you to make your case against effectiveness. I haven't seen it. There are plenty of actual, legitimate studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of the vaccine. Those studies outweigh someone on the internet who claims to have "done the math long ago."
I don't believe you've done any math.