Un cik procenti no vakcinētajiem ir inficējušies? Cik procenti no nevakcinētajiem ir inficējušies?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Njemsim ned 17:

Cik procenti no nevakcinētajiem ir inficējušies? 699/542,293 (man liekas = 129/100,000)

Un cik procenti no vakcinētajiem ir inficējušies?

Bustereti: 808/507,643 (159/100,000)
Vakcineeti (bez bustera): 1,311/789,864 (166/100,000)

Ned 18:
Nevakcineeti: 475/542,293 88/100,000)
Bustereti: 554/507,643 (109/100,000)
Vakcineeti (bez bustera): 821/789,864 (104/100,000)

Viss dati no SPKC.

Bet paarbaudi. Es jau aizsuutiju, lai citi parbaudiitu. Iepejams, esmu shur tur kljudies.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Tu nesaprati. No visiem vakcinētajiem valstī kopā - cik procenti ir inficējušies?

Un no visiem nevakcinētajiem visā valstī - cik procenti inficējušies?

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Es sekoju informaacijai no SPKC liidz taa informacija tika nonjemta pirms dazhaam nedeljaam (so week to week changes). Es tagad peetu pashreizeejo tendenci (current trends) no ned 13 - ned 18 ar info, ko pieprasiiju no SPKC.

Ja vajag info par to, cik procenti ir inficeejushies no nevakcineetajiem un vakcineetajiem visu sho laiku (kopsh vakcinaacijas sakuma), tad pasham tas buus jaaatrod. Gan jau kaut kur ir.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

A bez tā tavi spriedelējumi ir tufta, biedri. Jo es atkārtošu, ja visi būtu vakcinēti, visi inficētie būtu vacinētie, a nevakcinētā neviena. Te tas pats. A tu esi apmaldījies trīs priedēs - esi sajaucis, kas ir daļa no daļas, un kā salīdzināt dažādas daļas un to daļas. Tu beigu beigās apples and oranges uzskati par vienu un to pašu...

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

How can an analysis of infection rates per vaccination status (that is per 100,000) be 'tufta'? If I analyse the trends, then I will see which group over the last few months has the highest infection rates (per 100,000).

For example, from the information I gave you for Weeks 17 and 18 (which I got from SPKC), can you tell me clearly and explicitly where I have gone wrong? After all, we have the total number for each group and the infected number per each group. Are you saying it is not possible to calculate the number/100,000 from this information?

Are you saying 699/542,293 is not 129/100,000? I mean I stand to be corrected, but that is what I get.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Math is a conspiracy theory.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

Maybe - I just don't understand where he thinks I have gone wrong. I genuinely don't get why he can't see that it is possible to calculate trends concerning rates of infection according to vaccination status (per 100,000) over a period of time if we know a) the number of infections per group each week and b) the total number of each group. Maybe someone else could explain? If I have gone wrong somewhere: fine. I'm not a statistician, bet pagaidam...

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

:bezmenov.jpg:
As i said, don't bother. They will double down on 2+2=5 forever now. Remember that chick (Hedera), who suddenly couldn't understand basic proportion calculations that is learned in primary school, when it didn't suit The Message. Yeah.

(Reply to this) (Parent) (Thread)

oh - atceros kaut ko tam liidziigu! It was odd cos - as far as I understood - she has a PHD in being clever or something from Oxford University: might be wrong about that.

If your thesis is right, then the future is simply appalling. We are in a home for the .... I don't know the adjective: 'bewildered' doesn't cut it. Maybe 'terrified'? An Irish pagan I listen to from time to time claims the majority of people are mortified about not fitting in - which in this case is fitting in - maybe ostentatiously - with the current correct opinion about whatever is coming down the pipe (you wouldn't want to be an idiot, far-right, populist, conspiracy theorist with the brain of a potato - (think of all the people who will think you are an orrible cretin!). The only way you can resist this (without resisting for the sake of resistance) is by understanding reality as best you can - which often, as Orwell stated, is recognising 2 + 2 = 4.
Like I said, though: if I have fucked up in my calculations, just let me know (anyone reading this). I can take it. They will need some revision in any event as I am waiting for some more up-to-date data from the relevant institutions.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

I also ought to point out that SPKC was giving exactly this form of data (so-called 'tufta'), namely infection rates for each group (according to vaccination status) per 100,000.

Until they took it down.

Had they got confused among those three pine trees, too? someone should tell them.

(Reply to this) (Parent)