meh.
Thin data on the edge of importance.
That variant is 1% of cases and from the WE article, they saw 8 cases when they expected 1.... It's data, not sure if it is information.
Vaccines aren't 100%, just like the virus attacks people asymmetrically. The reason that this study can gain any traction is that there aren't a lot of that SA variants out there. The data shows that the vaccines protect against the variants. How do I know? The variants are now the major virus circulating here and old people are dying and becoming cases at a lower rate than the under 50/unvaccinated.
This is something to watch, but you need a LOT more data before making that claim. It deosn't protect, maybe. It makes you more susceptible..... that extraordinary claim needs at least some data.
The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.
It's that simple.
Bookmarks