Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

ourworldindata.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 330 posts

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#161

Post by Godel_unicode »

mint2 wrote: post #95
encryptluks2 wrote: post #11

If you change the age group to the youngest possible, there are times where those dying that are vaccinated actually surpasses those that are unvaccinated. The difference is so low though that I don't understand how it would make sense to vaccinate those under 12. I remember at the onset of COVID-19 that they tried so hard to make everyone scared to death (literally) that they would push videos of people dying in the…

The data there is clearly extremely noisy the way it jumps around so much

This observation always really irritates me; making no comment about this particular instance, data jumping around doesn't necessarily mean it's noisy. Some datasets have high variance.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#162

Post by ben7799 »

vimy wrote: post #84
poxrud wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaccination greatly reduces the rate of spread compared to the unvaccinated. [0] [0] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...

I’m not convinced it matters that much. Regions with high vaccination rates are having corona spikes right now. In my country 92 % of adults are vaccinated and we have the highest number of cases since 2020. Gibraltar with 100 %, Ireland with 95 %, there are more countries/regions…, all having a big rise in cases and are going back into lockdown. So it doesn’t seem like the lower viral load is making much of a differ…

Do those #s include children?

The numbers here are very high (in one of the most vaccinated US states) but only if you look at the 18+ number or something similar.

We still have plenty of unvaccinated kids spreading it around and they end up spreading it to some vaccinated people.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#163

Post by lpolovets »

notatoad wrote: post #155
lpolovets wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that figure is already three orders of magnitude lower than the 1.6% (772,000) I think the interesting ethical/moral/etc debate is what to do for people who are at lower or negligible risk of dying from COVID in the first place. For example, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-... suggests that <20k people under 40 have died from covid over 2 years. There might be age groups or demographics…

what demographic has a 1 in 50k chance of dying from the vaccine but a 1 in 200k risk of dying from covid?

Based on the link in my comment, 600 deaths from covid in the 17 and under bracket since 2019. ~70m people in that age group, so that's 1 in 200k per year for 2 years, roughly? The vaccine risk (1 in 50k) is based on the .0022% figure in the grandparent comment. Not sure how that varies by age.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#164

Post by nradov »

Bud wrote: post #101
steviedotboston wrote: post #32

It really seems like it's safe to say that a fully vaccinated person's risk of dying from covid is low enough where based on the pre-2020 accepted societal standards for risk there should be next to no behavior modification expected.

Sigh. How many times does this have to be explained before everyone gets it? It is not all about you. There are other people in the world. Masks and social distancing protect them, too. In addition, as others have noted in this thread, death is not the only bad result, here. Long covid is horrific, and even milder cases can have permanent health effects that are extremely undesirable.

Nonsense. The virus is now endemic and will never go away. You can't seriously expect people to continue with masks and social distancing indefinitely. Fortunately vaccines and other treatments reduce the risk to a very low level.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#165

Post by petmon »

silent_cal wrote: post #158

Why are vaccinated people under 60 are dying at a higher rate than unvaccinated in England? https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/vaccinated-english-adult...

Probably Simpson's Paradox. A 59 year old is both more likely to be vaccinated and to die from any cause, compared to a 10 year old.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#166

Post by angelzen »

jointpdf wrote: post #120
rob74 wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that vaccination protects you from having a bad case of Covid, but it doesn't protect you from getting infected and infecting others. So, if the vaccinated carry on as if it's 2019, the disease will jump from one vaccinated person to the next until it finds an unvaccinated person.

This is completely wrong—being vaccinated does reduce your likelihood of getting infected (and thus reduces likelihood of infecting others). > In September, unvaccinated persons had a 5.8X risk of testing positive for COVID-19 and a 14X risk of dying from COVID-19 compared to vaccinated persons. Source: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-s...

The risk of testing positive for covid is conditioned on the probability of being tested in the first place. The CDC guidance skews towards testing unvaccinated people more aggressively, hence the numbers are predictably skewed towards the unvaccinated. Further confounding the issue, vaccination among kids and teenagers is recent, their VE numbers are going to decline over time.

Medical research indicates VE against infection of about 50% after 6 months, which is 2:1.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/symptoms-testing/t...

* People who have symptoms of COVID-19.

* People who have come into close contact with someone with COVID-19 should be tested to check for infection:

* Fully vaccinated people should be tested 5–7 days after their last exposure.

* People who are not fully vaccinated should get tested immediately when they find out they are a close contact. If their test result is negative, they should get tested again 5–7 days after their last exposure or immediately if symptoms develop.

* Unvaccinated people who have taken part in activities that put them at higher risk for COVID-19 because they cannot physically distance as needed to avoid exposure, such as travel, attending large social or mass gatherings, or being in crowded or poorly-ventilated indoor settings.

* People who have been asked or referred to get tested by their healthcare provider, or state, tribal, localexternal icon, or territorial health department.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#167

Post by bellyfullofbac »

HMH wrote: post #70

Maximum death rate for all age groups with Moderna, which at least according to these plots provides the lowest death rate, is at 0.8/100_000 in August 2021 for all age groups. Maximum death rate for the unvaccinated of age 12-17 is at 0.17/100_000, for age 18-29 it is 0.76/100_000, also in August 2021. So even unvaccinated younger people (age < 30) are better off than the average vaccinated Joe. The thing is, so far…

That's a curious interpretation of the graphs... in all age groups in the US, the unvaxed line is higher than the vaxed graph (except for 1 data point for ages 12-17).

If you're unvaxed and using "So even unvaccinated younger people (age And please just compare data from close time periods, if we can pick different times for our rates, then I would pick October 2016, the chances of dying from Covid-19 at that time was absolute 0, even for the unvaxed!

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#168

Post by notatoad »

dougmwne wrote: post #71

Dear HN, should I, a man under 40 get a booster shot? How many months after my second dose should I get it? What are the best resources to answer this question? This information is scary hard to get for someone who wants science, not politics.

as a person asking this question on the internet, i'm going to assume that you are not a scientist, and probably unqualified to make a scientific decision. you might be able to read some scientific-sounding information, but unless you're a professional in the field your odds of coming to a correct conclusion based on information you read is no better than random, and will almost certainly be biased by your politics.

i'll be getting a booster when my local health authorities say i'm eligible for one, because i know i have no relevant expertise that enables me to make a scientific conclusion on this subject. and neither does HN.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#169

Post by Godel_unicode »

zwieback wrote: post #14
curiousgal wrote: post #3

I mean can we just get over this already? I feel like the more effort that we spend trying to prove that vaccines work, the more merit the anti-vax movement gains. Can we just ignore those people or simply just laugh at them and move on?

Agreed, convincing people who think the entire thing is orchestrated by dark forces is pointless. At this point, what I'd like to see: a) accept natural immunity alongside vaccination status, probably need some kind of antibody count test for that to work b) "incentives" for vaccinated population, e.g. 90% discount on COVID treatments while unvaccinated pay full price

There are several studies saying that vaccines are beneficial even for people who have natural immunity from an infection. Also, if we have learned anything the last two years it's that at a population level people flatly cannot handle nuance. Anything other than a flat "you must have proof of vaccination" isn't going to work.

Re: How death rates from Covid-19 differ between vaccinated and unvaccinated

#170

Post by concinds »

benchaney wrote: post #152
concinds wrote: post #40

I don't believe this statistical analysis is proper, because it doesn't take into account the statistical problems highlighted here: https://probabilityandlaw.blogspot.com/2021/11/is-vaccine-ef...

This article doesn’t identify any statistical problems. It just points out that it would be possible to get a misleading result if you handle your data incorrectly. It provides no actual evidence that such a mishandling is actually occurring.

The problem isn't only mishandling of data by statistical analysts, it is merely sufficient that government data be improperly recorded (as was famous last year, when people saw Covid statistics miraculously jump down on weekends and back up on Mondays in several countries) or that vaccinated/unvaccinated populations were misclassified (for example, by only defining people as vaccinated 2 weeks after they had their second dose, i.e. 3 months after the first dose, a rather long time). The article shows that artefacts you'd expect to see if data was improperly recorded, is actually visible in the real government figures. Whether due to the issues discussed, or due to other causes would require deeper analysis. But the onus then goes on people doing statistical analyses to understand, and correct for any mistakes in the originally compiled government data, and not blindly put numbers in Excel without deeply understanding the data they're feeding into it. Any good undergrad statistics prof would cringe at that.
Post reply on HN