One of the complaints about the data used to determine vaccinated vs vaccinated rates, if unable to verify vaccination status, it's assumed they're vaccinated. That would increase the unvaccinated numerator and decrease the vaccinated numerator, for a better death rate for vaccinated. But, given that this information is stored in databases, and should be readily available, I don't think the undocumented vaccinated, though not zero, is in an order of magnitude to match the statistics.
I can believe that vaccinated people, at least those with high enough antibodies, might have a better outcome than unvaccinated people. But not to the extent claimed. I've seen as much as 20x. Possibly 2x, maybe 4x. Not 20x. I think that's ridiculous given the rest of the math.
Another recent study might make more sense of it. That there is no realized statistical advantage to being vaccinated under the age of 65. But once a person is over 65, the advantage is more apparent. But most of the deaths are people over 65. I still don't see where the overall math works out where 20x is realistic. But you can get a lot closer if outcome under 65 isn't affected by vaccines, but over 65 it is.
So it looks to me like one should consider vaccination if he's over 65. Under? Meh.
