"Would have concluded this
Simply by observing"

 And how would you Observe who received vaccinations and who did not?  Same way you Observe all those dead kids in your town, or the same way we all observe the dead NFL players that they constantly have to replace?


 The advantage to this study is it is done in a relatively controlled environment.  

 This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at the Cleveland Clinic Health System (CCHS) in the United States. The study was approved by the Cleveland Clinic Institutional Review Board as exempt research (IRB no. 22-917). A waiver of informed consent and waiver of HIPAA authorization were approved to allow the research team to access to the required data.


 This portion is interesting regarding Omicron:

This study found that the current bivalent vaccines were about 30% effective overall in protecting against infection with SARS-CoV-2, when the Omicron BA.4/BA.5 lineages were the predominant circulating strains. The magnitude of protection afforded by bivalent vaccination was similar to that estimated in a recent study using data from the Increasing Community Access to Testing (ICATT) national SARS-CoV-2 testing program [16].



So obvious,, but how many will be unable to accept it, because
Safe and Effective?

 About as many that refuse to acknowledge how many actual dead kids there are versus how many are falsely claimed by lying websites and Facebook pictures.

Wow,you have An Instance and you can't get past it? You want to pretend I don't have a really good batting average on
Exactly WTF Is going on?

 You don't.  The majority of the information you post here is a lying headline referencing information, you wont read, that does not say what you think it does, or a Facebook image that is just made up nonsense.

 "Insurance company" data is actually UK health statistics you said can't be trusted in Sept 2021.  I tell you this and you re-post and insist insurance companies are claiming the vaccinated are dying.  You were lied to about that.  Hundreds of humans you claim are "D.E.A.D." are alive.


"I'm ahead of you for seeing what is going on."

 You make guesses then search the internet, where anything can be found, for evidence your guess was true.

 I wait for evidence to tell me what to make guesses on.



"If it pisses you off that you weren't sounding the alarm and worked as carefully against what I was saying without just SAYING
I approve of what the government and media are doing."

 Incorrect.  Your inability to have an adult conversation prohibits you from accepting that if I think a portion of the data you present is inaccurate, that is NOT equal to saying vaccines are safe.  I over and over said I do not use or recommend anyone use mainstream "media" for research purposes.  You again claim I believe the "media", I assume so you can continue to make false claims about things I never said.

 You refuse to Observe I literally worked to create a system that corrects poor CDC guidance in CO, I imagine so you can continue to claim, falsely, I said to trust the government.  If you don't Observe these things, you can keep saying I worked "against you" when everyone else can see I was trying to show that you were being lied to, about specific components of a very large issue.


You just went after everything I posted to denigrate and deny it as you could.
It was not because it wasn't happening, it's The Numbers are false.
But when did you post the actual numbers?

 You mean the hundreds and hundreds of pages of references I offered?  You mean like where I broke down the data just to have you say "documents don't matter"?  Or the data I presented that without reading you said was "lies" only to later put that exact same information here as truth?  Or when I posted the specific vaccine batch numbers and demographics most effected, that you still completely ignore?

 Those numbers?  Those numbers you refuse to Observe?

 Besides, you claim looking at vaccinated living humans is not needed.  How exactly can we create a percentage of harmed humans, if we only use ONE number?  You want numbers, then absolutely refuse to talk about them.
 

Please explain how, 'who did and did not receive vaccinations' ?
have anything to do with;

'The Higher the Number of Vaccines Previously Received, the Higher the Risk of Contracting COVID-19'
        and
' It showed, in a nutshell, that more COVID-19 shots correlated to a greater risk of contracting COVID-19.'


 Seriously?  You don't see how knowing who was vaccinated is important when one is claiming vaccinated humans get Covid more often?

 My question is how would one Observe who is vaccinated?  How do you know, when you Observe humans with Covid, when or if they were vaccinated?  Or, is this Observation just cherry picking what one wants to find on the internet?

So now, it is important to know ?


 Yes, if the claim is anyone who "Observes" would know vaccinated people get Covid more.  How would one Observe who is vaccinated and who is not?  The claim is one could Observe this.  I'd like to know how one would Observe who is vaccinated and how many times they were.  Unless of course they go get official data.  But Official data can't be trusted, so how exactly does this work?  You only Observe data that says what you think is true and ignore/do not Observe anything else.



That people who would have died from some other problem, whether they got the shot or not.
VS the people who did not have any underlining problem who got the shot and died from the shot.
Yet it was not important in 2019/2020/2021 ?

 It was, but you were lied to about CDC guidance and documentation methods, however you insist you were not lied to about that.  The telltale sign should be that nobody has yet to provide actual CDC documentation, or piles of death certificates with these outcomes etc.  Why withhold that kind of empirical evidence?

 
Today it is being discovered that the shot, was/is Not good, despite many medical people saying otherwise.
(And the ones that said, no, were called whacks, or threatened)

 Agreed.  There was a lot of cancel culture type responses to anything indicating the vaccine is not as effective.  Of course all the lies about spike protein, graphene, etc. didn't help, but there is no reason to resort to violence, threats or similar over questioning a new drug.

 My logic is that anyone can guess, with no evidence to support something, then look for information that proves their guess correct.  I'd rather say I do not know, then use evidence to try to figure it out.  


 

Yeah, anyone can guess.
I've been Guessing for decades and I just Keep being Correct.. While others are afraid to formulate opinions because they don't have the lying government telling them what to believe. Waiting until it's a foregone conclusion to pay attention to What is Available, and Starting From
If government And Media are pushing it, bet against it
Is just not that hard and will, over the long run, make you correct much more often than not. Try it.

.

Really ???????
I did ?
Can you quote where and when,
I said ,
the CDC and WHO and local health care people, did NOT lie to me ?


 No because I never stated that you "said" CDC WHO and local health care people did NOT lie to you.

 I claimed you were lied to about what CDC guidance actually said to do.  For instance when the CDC said to classify a car wreck as dying FROM Covid.  They never said that.  You imply they did.

 You were lied to about that.  The CDC said to provide COD like it has always been, but to also include Covid in provisional coding.  You were lied to about how CDC guidance indicated COD was to be categorized.