Reduction is a form of prevention. For an unknown quantity of the vaccinated, transmission appears to be prevented. The unknown quantity is important but we are learning more every day.

How does the reduction in transmission due to the vaccine, differ from the reduction in transmission due to being unvaccinated but currently asymptomatic?

The studies and real world data thus far show a reduction in _all_ infections, not just symptomatic infection. The trials for approval only really measured symptomatic infection, so it was unknown whether the vaccines prevented all infections (sterilizing immunity) or just symptomatic infections. So the difference is that a non-vaccinated asymptomatic carrier can still infect others as they are _infected_. Whereas the vaccinated person never becomes an asymptomatic carrier in the first place.

>The studies and real world data thus far show a reduction in _all_ infections

>Whereas the vaccinated person never becomes an asymptomatic carrier in the first place.

I'd like to see which studies those are.

"A reduction in infections" is also not the same as "the vaccinated never become asymptomatic carriers".

It isn't absolutes and you should know that. It does not prevent all infections, or all symptomatic infections. It reduces both. Do condoms prevent all pregnancies? No, do they prevent many? Yes. And if I don't want a baby, I am wearing a condom, even if they aren't perfect. I am not going to say "welp, condoms are not 100% perfect, so I am going in raw!"