That was the study that showed that Delta has a much lower death rate than Alpha. Comparing the death rate is tricky:
Young (< 50) * 13 deaths out of 25,536 vaccinated (2 doses) = 0.05% * 48 deaths out of 147,612 unvaccinated = 0.03%
Old (>= 50) * 389 deaths out of 21,472 vaccinated (2 doses) = 1.81% * 205 deaths out of 3,440 unvaccinated = 5.96%
Young people (< 50) are a better off unvaccinated, old people are better off vaccinated. If you mix both age groups, the unvaccinated group does better - because there are three times as many young people (better off unvaccinated) than old people (better off vaccinated) in this study.
old people are better off vaccinated
In the short term, maybe, but not in the longer term.
Time is an important factor because scientist love to adjust the observation period until the result fits the expectations of their sponsors. In this case, they have chosen an observation period of one month, ignoring all the C19 deaths that occured later.
How did they identify "Delta"? From everything I've read, there is no test for Delta. Well, there is but is cost-prohibitive and thus virtually never used.
Stop asking questions!!
tHe sCiEnCe! Is all you need to know.
Delta gets identified by sequencing after isolation. Isolation is done routinely by machines for decades. Some say that the virus was never isolated because the process is fraudulent ("tainted", "not pure"). Some say that the machines only malfunction with SARS-2, but most admit that then every other virus must be fraud too - they then promote the terrain theory. So if you are in the viruses-are-real camp, Delta gets identified by its RNA sequence.
There is another test for delta, quick and dirty until the more expensive tests are done: One of the antibody tests uses two antibody types that bind to Alpha. If one type binds, but the other fails, it's most likely Delta.
Thanks for the info. It sounds like you have some knowledge in this area.
What do you think about the narrative that the sequence that identifies COVID is a fraud because the sequence was never isolated but pieced together from viruses which ought to be similar? I think the Saulk Inst claimed they had isolated the entire sequence but I've not read the technicals to see if they also stitched.
Your commend about "most others"....is that stitching/sampling common practice when identifying viruses? Even other than COVID?
Thx
Aka natural immunity
Not really, natural immunity exists in both groups (vaccinated and unvaccinated) because they vaccinate people with natural acquired immunity too. Maybe the younger ones (< 50) have more natural acquired immunity because some of the older ones have not survived the process of getting immune.
They have tried many times to show us that people with natural acquired immunity need vaccination to become fully protected. But they could never show that in real live. What they can show is that the number of antibodies gets even higher after vaccination, but it seems that it makes no difference if you can kill the virus or if you can double-kill it.
Double 2+ extra large fries gud killit
(post is archived)