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

Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

ons.gov.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 171 posts

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#111

Post by [deleted] »

_-david-_ wrote: post #94
some_furry wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone needs vaccination. Full stop. I wrote more about this topic here: https://soatok.blog/2021/05/10/why-i-chose-to-be-vaccinated-... Some real-world data: https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/143741231155210240... A Twitter thread from a scientist and vaccine researcher: https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/143814553785796199...

Young males perhaps shouldn't be vaccinated since they are more likely to have a side effect than covid. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r...

[deleted]

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#112

Post by benmmurphy »

lmilcin wrote: post #55
eagsalazar2 wrote: post #52

This data needs to be framed against the % of the population that was vaccinated at the time they contracted the virus, right? Otherwise, for all we know, the vaccine could actually increase mortality if the % vaccinated was smaller than the % of deaths that group represents. I'm assuming that isn't the case but hard to make meaningful conclusions about efficacy without that context. The apparent efficacy of vaccinat…

> This data needs to be framed against the % of the population that was vaccinated at the time they contracted the virus, right? No, it does not. It compares chance of you dying to covid compared to all other possible causes. This dimensionless number does not depend on relative population sizes. So if in one population you get 458 deaths from Covid compared to 57,263 from all other causes and in the other population…

I think the problem with this report is the headline figure is due to an apples and oranges comparison. The big number of deaths is mostly due to a point in time where LOTS of people were dying from Covid19 in the UK.

We end up comparing the population at one point in time where there were lots of deaths and a low vaccination rate to another point in time where there were few deaths and a much higher vaccination rate. No doubt part of the reason why there are fewer deaths now is due to the vaccine. However, I suspect part of the reason is also not vaccine related. You can see this if you look at the raw data. There was a very high rate of deaths for the unvaccinated in the first few months of the year. But now there is a very low rate of deaths for the unvaccinated. However, this comparison is fraught with danger because there is a selection effect with a lot of vulnerable people opting into the vaccine leaving the unvaccinated population much less susceptible to the virus.

Also, it is important to note that data has been apparently truncated at a point where it paints a more positive picture for vaccines.

Personally, I think the vaccine has had very large impact for some vulnerable groups. For some other groups I suspect it has had a negligible impact. But I also think there has been a strong push to juice the figures to make the vaccines look better than they are.

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#113

Post by peakaboo »

LurkingPenguin wrote: post #92
spookthesunset wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Linked is a fascinating dataset showing exactly what you are talking about. The average american thinks if they get covid, their odds of dying from it around 10%. In younger age brackets this is almost 1000x wrong. People are very, very badly misinformed about their risks for covid. This makes it almost impossible to have rational, grounded discussion of public policy. If everybody is walking around thinking covid is…

> People are very, very badly misinformed about their risks for covid. This seems to be by design though.

Of course. The conspiracy guys has been the ones who have been correct through this pandemic, predicting every escalation, and the coming response.

If you are someone intelligent who wants to know about covid for real, you should read the conspiracy subreddit on reddit and also turn off the TV news. That's the actual truth, but people can't take it.

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#114

Post by peakaboo »

bryan0 wrote: post #70
rkk3 wrote: post #2

Deaths 21 days or more after second dose: .89% Percent of all Covid Deaths That seems like great news?

I guess you could say that, but this isn't really "news". There have been a variety of studies[0][1] over the past 6 months from various countries showing the remarkable effectiveness of covid vaccines. Just some people apparently don't want to believe it. 2 random examples: [0] https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-941fc... [1] https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/italy-says-99-covid-dea...

Because there are articles showing the vaccines are not effective and even dangerous as well. We can't hold two contradictory beliefs at the same time.

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#115

Post by human »

wallacoloo wrote: post #104
distrill wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am confused at how people are still asking questions like this, seemingly in good faith. The point of masks and vaccines and even staying home as needed, is not specifically to prevent healthy 18-50 year olds from dying. It's to limit the spread to everyone else, bunging up hospital capacity, killing off old folk needlessly, and causing local governments to freak out and impose restrictions because their hospitals…

If you’re on this site, you probably work in an industry where it feels like very large things can get done in 18 months. I remember in February 2020, before anything reached the US, watching China build a new hospital in all of 10 days. I have some vague understandings of “all-hands-on-deck” govt projects of the past. FDR’s WPA jobs program, etc. So it’s dishearteningly easy to look at this situation from that point…

Thank you for your answer. I was asking the question in good faith.

Coming from an engineering and entrepreneurial background, I can't help but recognize myself in your comment. I do feel like we should have done a "war effort" to improve our healthcare system and even our public buildings. I can agree it's not an easy task, but it seems 1000 times more productive than locking people at home. Plus, it would ready us for the next epidemic or pandemic. Now, if we get hit again, we're doing lockdowns again.

As for protecting myself versus protecting others, I do understand the logic. I haven't been living under a rock for the past 18 months. However, what I hear is that vaccinated people don't get very sick from Covid. If that is true, why do I need to be vaccinated as well? Aren't they already protected? Let's put this simply, my grand-mother is 84 years old and vaccinated. If I end up giving her Covid she will most-likely be fine. And even if I were vaccinated I could still catch and transmit Covid.

Once all at-risk people are vaccinated, haven't we "won" the war on Covid?

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#116

Post by dang »

sto_hristo wrote: post #99
bedhead wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facts like these don't matter to the COVID-obsessed. Turns out that screaming 24/7 for 18 months at people they're going to die messes with their cognitive abilities. Go figure! And here I thought doing this would keep us calm and rational. We basically have a best-case scenario today and an awful lot of people don't care and still think it's doomsday. Vaccines are fantastic at reducing COVID to a cold, kids are at n…

Dear Facebook Karen, What is ironic is how people like you talk with such confidence and self-assurance, but don't know the meaning and can't use simple words like endemic. Kids from 4th grade know more stuff about viruses, the immune system, and what vaccines are supposed to do. But those kids actually went to biology class and opened a real textbook. Textbooks. Not facebook posts. Difference of mere 4 letters, but…

Could you please not post in the flamewar style to HN? You've done it repeatedly lately (e.g. this comment, and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28514075). It has the effect of destroying curious conversation, which is what we're trying for here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#117

Post by bedhead »

spookthesunset wrote: post #82
bedhead wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facts like these don't matter to the COVID-obsessed. Turns out that screaming 24/7 for 18 months at people they're going to die messes with their cognitive abilities. Go figure! And here I thought doing this would keep us calm and rational. We basically have a best-case scenario today and an awful lot of people don't care and still think it's doomsday. Vaccines are fantastic at reducing COVID to a cold, kids are at n…

Linked is a fascinating dataset showing exactly what you are talking about. The average american thinks if they get covid, their odds of dying from it around 10%. In younger age brackets this is almost 1000x wrong. People are very, very badly misinformed about their risks for covid. This makes it almost impossible to have rational, grounded discussion of public policy. If everybody is walking around thinking covid is…

There have been a bunch of surveys similar to this that are all strong evidence of how disgraceful the messaging has been from politicians, health departments, media, etc. But the real problem with surveys like this are asking people what the "average" chance of death or hospitalizations are. We know that the risk from COVID are highly stratified by things like age and obesity and pre-existing conditions, so "average" is wildly inadequate as a measure to describe the real world. A statistics course explaining the difference between normal and Pareto distributions would go a long way in bringing many people back to reality. Alas...

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#118

Post by Izkata »

lmilcin wrote: post #10
allturtles wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is a particularly interesting stat without a baseline of what % of people fell into that category. Since this is computed over the time period January 2 to July 2 and mass vaccination didn't really take off until the spring, you wouldn't have a large number of people in that category until near the end of the study period.

I think you need to read it again. Especially table 1. In the data they have they found that: 1. For all unvaccinated people, they had 38,964 covid-related deaths and 65,170 of other, non-covid-related deaths of unvaccinated people. 2. For all vaccinated people 21 days or more after second dose they found 458 covid-related and 57,263 non-covid-related deaths. It doesn't matter when these were recorded (unless we want…

> So unless we are seeing huge increase in non-covid-related deaths of vaccinated people, this data suggests that vaccination makes it many, many times less likely that you are going to die of covid as compared to you dying to other things.

Unless it's happening within that 21-day window, which is the claim I've been seeing elsewhere for around a month now.

Re: Deaths involving Covid-19 by vaccination status, England

#120

Post by lamontcg »

rich_sasha wrote: post #78
b3nji wrote: post #62

This data is out of date. The cut off is July 2nd, it doesn't take into account delta, or the fact not a high amount of people were vaccinated at that point. The most up to date data comes from Public Health England. Public Health England published a report last week which gave us this data for the period of August 9th to September 5th. It shows that of 2,381 deaths in this period, 1,659 or 69.7%, more than two third…

Glancing though the report you linked, it says 55-70% reduction in symptomatic disease after 1 dose and more after 2. Higher effectiveness against severe disease, hospitalisation and death. For delta, they quote a 10-15% drop of effectiveness after two/one doses respectively. That seems in line with the “official” line and different to your numbers? Or am I reading you wrong? Another nugget in there is that something…

> Another nugget in there is that something like 95-97 of the population has Covid antibodies

That is almost certainly wrong. Vaccine uptake in under-12 is 0% and vaccine uptake in young adults is low. There's no way to make those kinds of seroprevalence numbers work.

Post reply on HN