Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I think that's his goal.By the way you are not calculating your fatality rates correctly. I am sure you are fully aware of that though. Its the great thing about statistics. Everyone (and I mean everyone) manipulates them to support their agenda.
Non-vaccinated actually have a fatality rate of 1.11%, partially vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.08% and fully vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.02%.
To portray this correctly you have you divide the number of cases (63 for vaccinated for example) and divide it by the total cases (403,668). That gives you the actual fatality rate.
What you are portraying shows the rate for each group, but not the overall actual rate. This falsely makes it appear as if vaccinated people are dying more than unvaccinated which is "fake news". This is a classic example of manipulating statistics. Some call it "alternative facts".I think we have had enough misinformation though…
I also have a friend like that.There is a relative who is anti vaxx to the Maxx.
She has a PhD from YouTube.
I also have a friend like that.
Punctuation is too good.Are you sure that he isn't related to Pops Paolo?
Man, you have my sympathies. It really must suck. I have no advice. Just hope the "discomfort " passes quickly.Now my lung capacity had gone.
Ay Caramba. I am Donald Ducked.
What you are portraying shows the rate for each group, but not the overall actual rate.
This falsely makes it appear as if vaccinated people are dying more than unvaccinated which is "fake news". This is a classic example of manipulating statistics. Some call it "alternative facts".I think we have had enough misinformation though…
By the way you are not calculating your fatality rates correctly. I am sure you are fully aware of that though. Its the great thing about statistics. Everyone (and I mean everyone) manipulates them to support their agenda.
Non-vaccinated actually have a fatality rate of 1.11%, partially vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.08% and fully vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.02%.
To portray this correctly you have to divide the number of cases (63 for vaccinated for example) and divide it by the total cases (403,668). That gives you the actual fatality rate.
What you are portraying shows the rate for each group, but not the overall actual rate. This falsely makes it appear as if vaccinated people are dying more than unvaccinated which is "fake news". This is a classic example of manipulating statistics. Some call it "alternative facts".I think we have had enough misinformation though…
oopsHey 33k in the air,
re "Do the vaccines significantly lower the chances of being infected? This is a key question now that the rates within each vaccination status group are becoming better defined."
Read the rest of the report you cite, then read it again, and if necessary again. The "key question" you appear to be unsure of the answer to is quite clearly answered by the numbers in the report.
The chance of a fully vaccinated person being infected is far less than for the unvaccinated, at least as far as the currently actively spreading strains of COVID-19 are concerned. This could of course change in the future if more 'aggressive' strains of the virus become active.
If you feel you are capable of analyzing numbers/statistics, why do you not use the numbers/statistics in the report to present the infection rate for the unvaccinated vs the fully vaccinated? The math is not any more difficult than for the calculations you have already done.