Maybe I missed it but one important thing was not mentioned in the comments. This was not a real study as people would imagine it. It was a computer model. For those who don't know what computer models are, they are basically:

Some dude wants a certain outcome so he keeps tweaking the parameters of the model and keeps running it until he gets the outcomes he wants.

Two things to consider:

1. Multiple real world studies show that the vaccinated are more likely to be super-spreaders. This contradicts this so-called model based study. The question is then, do we live in reality or the computer model of some hack?

2. In Ontario Canada, they based locking everyone in their houses on multiple "independent" computer models. When all was said and done, every single so-called "independent" computer model over-estimated COVID infections and deaths. How could all of these models actually be independent if not a single one of these models was even close to reality or underestimated the COVID infections and deaths. With actual multiple independent models you would actually expect some to be over and some to be under. By the way, that's also how "climate change" is real, in computer models which are also constantly wrong and only in one direction (the models always over-estimate the amount of climate change and they always some excuse as to why that is such as the oceans are absorbing more heat than anticipated).