The jabs seem to provide some protection against severe disease and death when normalized for the population (vaxxed versus unvaxxed)...but 79.3% of the C19 deaths in the latest UKHSA report (week 44) were fully vaxxed. 17.4% were unvaxxed.
Probably a silly question but how do they arrive at their hospitalisation and death rates in table 6 if 60% of people are fully vaccinated but 64% of hospitalizations and 80% of deaths were fully vaxxed?
Sorry. I should have written Table 5a, page 20 above.
They normalized for the population (vaxxed or unvaxxed) in each age cohort. There was a bit of controversy wrt the data source for vaccination rate in each cohort. They use the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) (explained on page 17).
The vaccination rate (two doses) is very high in some age cohorts (see page 14). Age 50 and above is at least 85% double vaxxed.
Since we don't have all the data, we have to rely on them; but they've been pretty upfront so far. Even if the death rate is lower in the fully vaxxed, the reality is that 4 out of every 5 people who died from/with C19 in the week 45 report were fully vaxxed. That wasn't what was promised, and it certainly conflicts with the narrative of "a pandemic of the unvaxxed" in the United States.
I suspect the CDC narrative will "evolve" over time. As Herr Doktor Drosten (Germany's Fauci) discovered, it's hard to sell boosters if you keep lying about the effectiveness of the first two doses.
But who in the Biden Administration, in Australia, in Israel, in Canada, is open to looking at this data and changing course? No one, apparently. People are being scared, restricted and forced into taking a jab they don't need (or want)- for what?!
The jabs seem to provide some protection against severe disease and death when normalized for the population (vaxxed versus unvaxxed)...but 79.3% of the C19 deaths in the latest UKHSA report (week 44) were fully vaxxed. 17.4% were unvaxxed.
Table 4a, page 18...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032671/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_44.pdf
Week 45 report dropped. 79.7% of the deaths were fully vaxxed. 17.1% were unvaxxed.
Table 52, page 20...
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1032859/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_45.pdf
Probably a silly question but how do they arrive at their hospitalisation and death rates in table 6 if 60% of people are fully vaccinated but 64% of hospitalizations and 80% of deaths were fully vaxxed?
Sorry. I should have written Table 5a, page 20 above.
They normalized for the population (vaxxed or unvaxxed) in each age cohort. There was a bit of controversy wrt the data source for vaccination rate in each cohort. They use the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) (explained on page 17).
The vaccination rate (two doses) is very high in some age cohorts (see page 14). Age 50 and above is at least 85% double vaxxed.
Since we don't have all the data, we have to rely on them; but they've been pretty upfront so far. Even if the death rate is lower in the fully vaxxed, the reality is that 4 out of every 5 people who died from/with C19 in the week 45 report were fully vaxxed. That wasn't what was promised, and it certainly conflicts with the narrative of "a pandemic of the unvaxxed" in the United States.
I suspect the CDC narrative will "evolve" over time. As Herr Doktor Drosten (Germany's Fauci) discovered, it's hard to sell boosters if you keep lying about the effectiveness of the first two doses.
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/christian-drosten-actually-we-dont
But who in the Biden Administration, in Australia, in Israel, in Canada, is open to looking at this data and changing course? No one, apparently. People are being scared, restricted and forced into taking a jab they don't need (or want)- for what?!
I cobbled together the data from successive UK reports to see how VE was faring over time. The answer is, uh, not good: https://inumero.substack.com/p/evidence-of-waning-vaccine-protection?r=tv61s&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=
Great reporting as usual!
What do you think about this study?
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2110475