Even in a largely vaccinated population, if you do widespread community testing you will find a lot of asymptomatic cases. If you don't do widespread community testing you won't. So you can have wildly different caseloads in two highly-vaccinated populations, yet no meaningful medical difference in the outcomes (since, as we know, vaccination is an effective prevention against serious illness and death).
When I look at the pfizer 6 month study (not peer reviewed) I do not see that.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v...
When I look at Scotlands data I do not see that.
https://publichealthscotland.scot/media/9475/21-09-29-covid1...
Same with the UK.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
Same with Israel
https://datadashboard.health.gov.il/COVID-19/general
Every dataset I look says the opposite so I would love to see the peer reviewed study that takes into account all potential confounding factors that led you to your conclusion.
Could you please share a meaningful study that comes to this conclusion and does not ignore all potential confounding factors? (I don't mean it in a confrontational way; I'm genuinely curious since I only managed to find heavily confounded data)
The results of the other article I linked, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7, showing that vaccination does not reduce viral load, supports this notion.
A discussion published in the European Journal of Epidemiology. It doesn't just look at those two countries; its statistical analysis covers 68 countries and 2947 US counties. You don't think that if the vaccine were effective at preventing spread, there should be at least some evidence of this effect when comparing vaccination rate and spread across different regions?