Editorial: 99.9%? – The Herald of Gila
File photo by Jacqueline Marshall / Wyoming National Guard
Mike Bibb Chronicle
Wow, according to a recent Gila Herald article, 99.9% of near-perfect people over 65 have received at least one injection of COVID.
I find this number incredible and absolutely unbelievable. When was the last time someone heard of something administered by a government agency being 99.9% effective? Even the IRS cannot boast of such success.
“According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Graham County has a total vaccination rate of 65.2% of residents aged 12 and older, with 74.4% of that population having at least one dose. , and 99.9% of 65 and older have at least one dose. – Gila Herald, “Graham lists 113 total deaths with 399 active cases,” October 14, 2021
It seems a little dubious to me. Maybe I don’t understand what “99.9% of people 65 and over have at least one dose” really means. Or, does the article awkwardly report that 74.4% and 99.9% of the 65.2% were inoculated?
Either way, it’s almost absurd.
With all the hype around COVID, vaccination warrants, and President Joe Biden’s mind-numbing claim that “the vaccinated must be protected from the unvaccinated,” how is it possible that only 0.01% of those 65 and over of the population of Graham County went unvaccinated?
Is it 0.01% of the 99.9% of the 65.2% who have not been vaccinated? Who knows?
Suppose there are 5,000 citizens aged 65 and over out of a population of approximately 40,000 in Graham County. 99.9% of 5,000 is equivalent to 4,995. That means that only five people aged 65 and over in the entire county have not been vaccinated at least once.
I imagine there are at least that many unvaxed customers lining up at the post office at any given time.
Five – the number of fingers on one hand. Less than half a dozen.
Keep in mind that this information comes from the same government health agency that can’t seem to decide overnight what our country’s COVID policies should be.
For nearly two years, the CDC and its spokespersons told us one thing, then another, and stammered revisions to the rules and regulations only to repeat the process a few days later. It is absolute confusion.
A classic example of “Who is first and what is second”. Or, in contemporary terminology, WTF? And, I don’t mean, “Where’s the fish?” “
It is perhaps possible that the numbers have been manipulated to reflect a more positive report and give credit to a presidential administration that appears to be totally ignorant of just about everything.
Does anyone actually verify these statements or are we supposed to accept the frequent CDC newsletters as some sort of Moses-down-Sinai moment?
At least Moses had data written in stone.
The opinion expressed in this editorial is that of the author.
Thank you for following us and loving us: