From a purely objective look at the above graphic, it appears that two different "sources" are used. The graphs on the right are purportedly from the CDC, while the text on the left is an interpretation by someone else. Use of non-technical terms like "vaxxed" and "unvaxxed" suggest this is not from a study but a personal interpretation.
I'm not disputing the content of the text, just wanting to know who did the analysis? It's quite likely the interpretation is correct, or CLOSE to correct, but can we have more transparency and analysis on this?
From a purely objective look at the above graphic, it appears that two different "sources" are used. The graphs on the right are purportedly from the CDC, while the text on the left is an interpretation by someone else. Use of non-technical terms like "vaxxed" and "unvaxxed" suggest this is not from a study but a personal interpretation.
I'm not disputing the content of the text, just wanting to know who did the analysis? It's quite likely the interpretation is correct, or CLOSE to correct, but can we have more transparency and analysis on this?
Excellent insight. Thanks. I hope we see the source and either validate or refine this.
Still ---- we all need to print this out and give a copy to our local head pharmacist.