Name:   MartiniMan - Subject:   Interesting and why you should read the paper Date:   4/25/2022 2:55:37 PM (updated 4/25/2022 2:56:34 PM)

The quote I included came directly from the CDC paper that Goofy cherry picked the table from, most likely without actually reading the paper and understanding the significance of the limitation section.  That second limitation is a whopper and undermines the entire paper. 

Multivariability analysis is Stats 101 stuff when it comes to correlation and causation.  You have to examine and eliminate all the other variables that could impact the data in order to come to a reasonable causation conclusion.  Otherwise you are committing scientific malfeasance.  That's what bothers me about the paper.  They come to a conclusion that the vaccines work but admit they never looked at other potential causation factors, try to quantify them and then be left with the data that only addresses vaxxed versus unvaxxed.  It is entirely possible and maybe probable that had the eliminated all the other variables that the difference between vaxxed and unvaxxed with regard to IRR or mortality may not in fact be statistically different.  We don't know for sure because they never did that......which is probably why a study released in January has had so little press.  It is fraught with problems in methodology and is really nothing more than a data dump with some rudimentary analysis.

I don't know whether the gene therapies provide statistically significant protection against infection.  I do believe based on studies I have seen that it does provide some level of protection against hospitalization and mortality which is reason enough for the vulnerable to get them at risk of adverse side effects.  For everyone else not so much.....yet.  But for sure it is papers like this that harm the credibility of the CDC as a science-based organization.