Define 'full vaccination', and explain how this is not motivated thinking on the part of those reporting on the research, to arrive at the desired conclusion, when the basis for your statistics is in part weighted on the 'time of announcement' of the occurrence of a viral mutation by an organization. I'm not seeing enough evidence here to make the leap of logic you're making, and I think you're cherry picking your data. " In contrast, a high mutation frequency was observed in the United States, Japan, and Switzerland, despite higher vaccination rates than in Australia." Seems to contra-indicate the conclusion you are coming to.