ight now. Which group is more likely to get the most shots and the most boosters? The ones who know they have no real risk to begin with and they're not around people all the time. What are the people who are around people and also have the highest risk? They should be the ones who are around people should be the most vaccinated. The ones who also have comorbidities or they're old. So if you took that group and you decreased the risk by half I'm just making up a number if you decrease the vulnerable group it should still be way higher than the people who never got vaccinated at all even if the vaccination worked great. So these numbers tell me the vaccination could be working great if it reduced the risk by half but it's still like two or three times more than the healthy people. That's exactly what I'd expect. So the numbers are exactly what I'd expect if the vaccine did protect people. I'm not saying it did. That's not my claim because we don't know right? We could be surprised tomorrow. You know tomorrow we learn all kinds of new stuff who knows and it hasn't been tested for long enough that you can be sure about anything but here's my problem.

I don't know if that's a good point and here's what I would need to know. When they do these studies of who's hospitalized are they looking at people with the same comorbidities vaccinated versus unvaccinated or are they looking at healthy people who didn't get vaccinated much compared to unhealthy people who are around a lot of people all the time who did get vaccinated? Because that's probably what it is. If all they did is look at the outcomes then they didn't do the study right. It's just a dumb study.

Now I always mention Andres Bachhaus you know because he's better than I am by a lot in looking at data and figuring out if at least the analysis is correct or they've confused correlation and causation and I believe his exact comment on all of this stuff was lol. I don't know exactly what he's thinking but I don't think it was worth more than an LOL because there's no way that they've sorted out causation from correlation. I don't think so. And there was nobody on that Spaces call who would even bring up the question. Now again I'm not sure it's the right question because if they really controlled the study somehow and then maybe they controlled for it but I doubt it. I don't think they could. It's proven to Scott no it's the data might be proven the data might be proven but the interpretation is sketchy.

N