My earlier post was already too long. If I had then tried to quantify what I said by examining instances of the effect of COVID and various of vaccines on the virus over range of different counties then it would have been too long to post. My response, therefore, is just a summary of what I have observed. I’d add that I’m a professional—although not a medico—so I’m used to reading scientific papers and journals and I reckon since the advent of COVID I’ve almost doubled my reading. I've read papers on almost every aspect of the disease and that includes some that are of a highly technical nature which have challenged my comprehension thereof. Simply, I’ve been covering COVID in considerable detail and I believe I'm reasonably well informed.

“That was a paper from the Lancet.”

When I said ”damn lies and statistics taken out of context.” I meant it. In fact, The Lancet article is almost the quintessential example of what I was talking about: someone cites a very reputable source to prove a point and then expects everyone to take its findings as gospel, or readers are bamboozled with the science and then don't question any further—these outcomes being the original objective. I've known The Lancet for years and have read articles from it in the past, and I'm well aware that it's an authoritative source of information. Moreover, I have no doubt that when The Lancet published the article the information therein was both authoritative and up to date—the trouble is that it was published on April 20, 2021—some nine months ago! (Here, your objective may not have been to deliberately mislead but one sees so many instances of this tactic that it's hard not to believe that most of them are nothing other then a deliberate ploy to deceive.)

The information the article contains is now nigh on useless—it's nothing other than ancient history, thus it can no longer be relied upon for fact and authoritative information, as the COVID situation has changed vastly from the time of its publication. For starters, we've developed better methods of treating the disease, we’ve had time to evaluate booster shots—and probably the most important factor of all, which is that we’ve seen the subsequent emergence of COVID's most contagious strains to date—Delta and Omicron—and they have altered everything.

I’m far from the smartest person around but I’m certainly smart enough not to be conned or mislead this easily whether deliberately or otherwise. When presented with a link like that or when reading scientific papers the first thing I check is the paper's submission date, I then check the publication date.

However, what this demonstrates is that in this highly polarized climate over COVID, people have very few qualms about twisting or distorting the truth—or exaggerating for the point of emphasis: as the saying goes ‘if the facts don't agree with one's own worldview then alter them to suit’. Unfortunately, it's this widespread propensity to not to bother checking the accuracy of source material, or to cheat and be loose with the facts that’s been one of the most significant and substantial reasons for why our response to the COVID pandemic has been—and still is—in so much of a schemozzle.

Re: hospitalization rate by vaccination status in Denmark, I have now read various docs and I’ve nothing further to add other than Denmark’s response to COVID, like almost every other country or different location across the globe, has had a very different response to the disease when compared to many other places. And that’s happened for any number of reasons: the time of its first lockdown, vaccinations rates, etc., etc. are likely to be very different to anywhere else.

With respect to tolerating the risk, yes I do spend more time at home than previously. This makes sense for two reasons, the first is that it just makes sense to do so if it’s at all possible, and because of COVID I am able to do just that. The second reason is that I have yet to receive my booster (third) shot, so it’s prudent to be more careful than normal. Where I am I’ve not been able to get the booster shot because of damn stupid rules set by the authorities who require a certain set time between the initial shots and the booster, here that’s four months. And for similar bureaucratic reasons, the initial shots weren’t available earlier. Whilst it's likely that maximum antibody response will be achieved at four months or more, we simply don't have the luxury to be overly fussy with Omicron about.

Moreover, it’s not for the want of trying, I told both my doctor and pharmacist on multiple occasions that if I couldn't get my booster very soon then I’d obtain it on the black market. I further suggested that they report me to authorities for both making such a suggestion, not to mention overly 'harassing' them and making a nuisance of myself. Of course, nothing happened, it was just water off a duck's back—and I'm still waiting (and looking for alternative sources).

Again, my experience here only further demonstrates the enormous variation between counties, states and even towns in their differing approaches to dealing with COVID—like your comment about vaccine mandates being dead. Whether they’re dead or not clearly depends upon where one is. As you're well aware, Djokovic’s efforts to buck the system over vaccine mandates only brought him big trouble, and he’s likely to strike the problem again if he doesn't pull his head in and bow to the inevitable. The forthcoming French Open comes with new mandate that all players be vaccinated. As we’ve just witnessed, if anything, there are more vaccine mandates now than previously, and from what we've seen it's clear that some countries have become much less tolerant of difficult and recalcitrant people than previously. Like them or not, evidence suggests we're stuck with vaccine mandates for the foreseeable future.

As for vitamin D, no I’ve not had my levels tested but I’ve been taking about double the normal dose for about a year now, so my levels won’t be low. BMI: I’m close to the middle of the normal range. Insulin: no, air: not yet but it's still early in the day.