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

Covid-19 breakthrough data

coronavirus.health.ny.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 180 posts

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#151

Post by mlyle »

derobert wrote: post #148
mlyle wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a piece of data I've been following, for Santa Clara County: https://covid19.sccgov.org/dashboard-case-rates-vaccination-... The number --- 871 cases per day per 100,000 unvax'd, for the week preceding 1/10-- is an amazing rate (7 day average). It tells us that 6.1% of the unvaxxed population became a case during a 1 week period. This doesn't count people who were infected and did not test or did not test in a…

A quick warning: be wary of that computation because of how it's likely made, and it's worse than higher the vaccination rate gets. The sources section says: > Sources: California Reportable Disease Information Exchange; California Department of Public Health, California Immunization Registry; the U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. So the the numerator (number of cases) from the…

Yes, this is a good point. On the other hand, while S.C.C. has a high vaccination rate, it's not high enough that a small population uncertainty makes such a huge difference.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#152

Post by xeromal »

sschueller wrote: post #122
xeromal wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Any chance you remember where you read the reinfection data?

On Page 27 and 28 of the daily reports [1] from the city of Zürich you can see the hospitalization and ICU rates. [1] https://www.zh.ch/content/dam/zhweb/bilder-dokumente/themen/...

Thank you!!

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#153

Post by benpiper »

This report provides only age-adjusted numbers for vaccine effectiveness, but doesn't provide the model used to arrive at those numbers. If you look at the raw numbers, a different picture emerges:

Chances of not being hospitalized with Covid:

Unvaccinated: 99.9%

Vaccinated: 99.99%

Instead of providing a useful picture, the report compares two tiny numbers from each group and makes it a point to amplify the differences.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#154

Post by pstoll »

peteradio wrote: post #100
pstoll wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one gets a free pass, for sure, but he’s a pretty qualified thinker of things medical and health. So coming here and calling him out on it should probably warrant a bit more than a “uhn uhn”. (Edited - asimpletune above said it more eloquently than I did!)

"pretty qualified thinkers" are putting out all sorts of thought provoking ideas with no intention of being right all the time.

Sure, perhaps I was inarticulate - he’s a world leading medical researcher who heads up a world leading medical research institution; he is one of the 10 most cited medical researchers in the world. Yadda yadda…

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#155

Post by StephenAmar »

wand3r wrote: post #13

Does anyone have data on boosted death rate? It is really hard to find stats. “Vaccinated” is such a difficult term because it can encompass J&J from nearly a year ago for example. I see some breakdowns by vax supplier vs hospitalizations. Really would like to know how many people who have taken the booster have died from covid ideally with age data.

An interesting thread on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/nursing/comments/s5p4g1/how_many_fu...

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#156

Post by darepublic »

ryandrake wrote: post #106
pelasaco wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany, but what is the upside to do the PCR test? You get officially in Isolation and can get a visit from the regulatory office to check if you are at home. AFAICS there is no upside. You won't get any treatment protocol, any help. You just get more pressure over you. I won't have the proof of recovery, but actually I don't need it since I have all certificates (2 shots + booster). That's make me think if this who…

You should be isolating either way. Just because you can go everywhere doesn't mean you should. People going out and about while unknowingly positive is why this thing won't end. Testing positive and deliberately not isolating is even worse. You're right though: If you look at it only through the lens of individual incentives, the official test has no upside. One of the huge problems with governments' responses to th…

> To align individual and societal incentives, governments need to make not-isolating when infectious more inconvenient/costly than isolating.

All stick no carrot huh

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#157

Post by curt15 »

curt15 wrote: post #132
resource0x wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data#casesByVaccinationStatus Search for "hospital but not the ICU". Look above it for ICU stats. For "Not in ICU", it can be argued that even 10% is an overstatement. The author of the article, meanwhile, doesn't provide any sources whatsoever. Another interesting piece of data was recently removed from Got-t of Alberta website, but you can see it here: https://alexberenson.substack.com/p…

The Ontario dashboard for "Not in ICU" currently shows 739 unvaccinated and 2050 vaccinated. But since effectiveness compares rates, not absolute numbers, one needs to normalize those numbers by the size of each subpopulation. Since roughly 80 percent of Ontarios are vaxxed, the relative risk for being unvaccinated is approximately (739/0.2) / (2050/0.8) = 1.4

Any reason for the downwote? If anything, this underestimates the risk since it assumes no difference in infection rates.

If one normalizes instead by the actual number of unvaccinated cases and vaccinated cases as reported further down on that page, one gets

(739/1456) / (2050/8079) = 2

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#158

Post by argvargc »

rsynnott wrote: post #144
argvargc wrote: post #67

To enjoy an interesting and arguably also somewhat more accurate experience reading articles such as these, try mentally replacing the term "vaccine breakthrough" with "vaccine failure". Going to hospital is not protection.

The vaccine does two things; it reduces the chance of getting covid (not terribly effectively, for Omicron), and it reduces the average severity of cases (very effectively). "Breakthrough" is where it fails on the first point; failure would imply failing in _both_ cases. So you could possibly call the hospitalised cases failure (though even then, hospitalised vaccinated cases are on average less severe and less likel…

This depends on which definition of the vaccine you've chosen to adopt. As the product has not changed, only the manufacturers claims about it, the original definition is the most applicable in terms of its success or failure.

What's misleading is to pretend that a product, sold as a "vaccine", sold as originally possessing many of the commonly-understood qualifiers of the use of that term, turns out in reality to possess none of them.

It does not vaccinate against the disease. It does not vaccinate against being infected, harmed or killed by the disease. It is for all intents and purposes, not a "vaccine" by any prior widely-accepted definition.

These "vaccines" limited effects at reducing symptoms (the only remaining claim of late), do not even persist more than a week or two before beginning to wane to nothing. These are at best therapeutic drugs, not vaccines.

That is, they are - broadly - failures. Quibbling about ever narrower definitions of what constitutes the failure bears little useful relevance to the unfortunate reality, instead only seeming to facilitate manufacturer public relations.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#159

Post by herbst »

pelasaco wrote: post #78
pridkett wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It makes it easier for most cases of international travel. In a lot of contexts if you're vaccinated + boosted + recovered in the last 90 days, you can just travel and not worry about the result of the COVID test you need to return to the United States as long as you have a letter stating recovery.

In Europe if you are double vaccinated + boosted, you don't need a test to travel by plane.

It depends on the country. Maybe you mean EU?

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#160

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

benpiper wrote: post #153

This report provides only age-adjusted numbers for vaccine effectiveness, but doesn't provide the model used to arrive at those numbers. If you look at the raw numbers, a different picture emerges: Chances of not being hospitalized with Covid: Unvaccinated: 99.9% Vaccinated: 99.99% Instead of providing a useful picture, the report compares two tiny numbers from each group and makes it a point to amplify the differenc…

That's a pretty big risk reduction in either case.
Post reply on HN