Baghdad_Rob
Vital 1st Team Regular
Both sides can have symptoms or not, but in both scenarios it's better if they're vaccinated. You've picked the best of a bad version of events and the worst of a good version.
What about the versions of Mr B without symptoms who are now spreading it at double the rate?
Likewise, what about Mr A's who gets minor symptoms and therefore isolates whilst reducing the chance of needing treatment from the NHS.
As per my prior post, "One of the other things often boasted about is the fact if you do catch it then the illness will be overwelmingly mild or asymptomatic". See links below plus a load of people on social media commenting that their infection was mild and put credit down to the fact they vaccinated.
Logically if true then the majority of asymptomatic spreaders will have had the vaccine if the vaccine makes symptoms more mild if at all.
Since asymptomatic people are inherently more dangerous as spreaders and logically asymptomatic spreaders are more likely to be vaccinated people then that was the reason why I set up Mr A and Mr B as I did. Personally I think in the scenario given Mr A is more dangerous but you have adopted whataboutism.
As for your questions then:
a) I question if this double rate is accurate. As per my prior comment, how would you know what the transmission rate is if a person who has had the jab is not showing symptoms and therefore doesn't report the fact they have Covid?
b) If a person gets symptoms and correctly identifies it as potentially covid and isolates / gets tested then this is good regardless of if the person has been vaccinated or not.
Sources:
https://www.businessfast.co.uk/the-...-reported-in-vaccinated-people-with-covid-19/
https://www.express.co.uk/life-styl...-vaccine-news-update-latest-sneezing-symptoms