Panic in Boris Johnson’s UK as Fully Vaccinated have a higher Covid Hospitalisation-Rate

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: chris_stibrany
a reply to: chr0naut

If they protect, then how are there so many people vaccinated in hospital?
Surely it is not protecting that well then?

Last time I heard about vaccines I was taught that they prevented illness.
Now apparently they do not.

The vaccines are protecting people, right now, from developing severe disease, and from dying. The few vaccinated who do develop severe disease or die, are called breakthrough cases, and are of a very low percentage of those both infected and vaccinated. That is the 'real world' part of the way things are, as opposed to the fantasy of magical perfect cures.

But the infection has already spread to greater numbers of people, and has developed more infectious strains, than there were back in the times before the vaccines were available, and so now there are a lot more cases of the infection 'going around'.

The vaccines don't begin to help your body fight the virus until the virus is in your system - infecting you. They aren't a magic shield outside of your body.

Over time, as numbers of people develop an immune response (either from being vaccinated, or from getting over an infection of the disease) the virus will abate in the population pool and then the cases will decline. But that will take time, and is a balance between the infectiousness of the virus, and the percentage of the population with an immune response (herd immunity).

Wrong.

So, the paper shows that while the mRNA vaccines were effective in reducing deaths from COVID-19 (shown in table 1 of the paper as COVID-19 mortalities), they did nothing to prevent deaths from other causes?

So the COVID-19 vaccines won't stop you from dying from something unrelated to COVID-19. Oh noes!!

LOL!

Here's the paper, not peer reviewed, nor published in The Lancet, as per the disclaimer at the top of the page:

Randomised Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines: Do Adenovirus-Vector Vaccines Have Beneficial Non-Specific Effects?

This is one of the stupidest refutations of the effectiveness of the vaccines that I have seen. These guys should have been working for the tobacco companies doing their fake science. Then we'd all still be puffing away and dying from "unrelated lung cancer" like several of my ancestors.

originally posted by: litterbaux

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Mandroid7

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Soloprotocol
But why are the vaccinated ending up in the hospital...and dying from covid?. They're vaccinated, right?

Because the vaccines are real world medicines which don't always protect perfectly, but do protect most of the time.

What alternative medicine or treatment do you have to offer, that is better overall, than vaccination?

You don't even know the ingredients or the effects of the vaccine/s you are pushing.
Admit it

However, I'm also sure that not knowing the 'secret formula' for a popular cola, or the 'secret herbs and spices' for particular fried chicken, prevents anyone from consuming them.

Coca Cola and Kentucky Fried Chicken don't have "experimental" before the products they sell.

That's a key difference for me. If KFC came out with experimental extra crispy chicken, I would steer clear. Are they frying it in used motor oil or something?

None of these fast food vendors products have gone through the full FDA approval process. Show me their approval details, the papers, and the clinical trial data. Other foods and additives have approvals!



Also, Maccas chips used to taste really good, then they started frying them in vege oil. Tragedy!

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: chr0naut

Would you care to show the provenance of your information that the world fertility rates are unaffected I have been looking for the latest data and have been unable to locate any?

World Birth Rate 1950-2022 - Macrotrends

(To skip all the speculative projections, look down the page to the table: World - Historical Birth Rate Data).

a reply to: chr0naut

The world birth rate is interesting, as it would tend to dilute the actual fall in birth rates in the most vaxed countries. Thanks for that. I know in 2021 Italy was down by 24%, but I can't seem to get any figures for any other country.

a reply to: Deetermined

I posted data on actual outcomes on the vaccinated vs unvaccinated. I wonder why you refused to comment on that.

a reply to: ARM1968

I would say the 80+ population is a great place to start since they are the most at risk, and the data shows 11x greater risk for unvaccinated in that group. What data would you like to look at?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Deetermined

I posted data on actual outcomes on the vaccinated vs unvaccinated. I wonder why you refused to comment on that.

I didn't think it was worth commenting on because it only included people over the age of 80. At that age, anything could be the cause or reason for why they have Covid or are being hospitalized.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: ARM1968

I would say the 80+ population is a great place to start since they are the most at risk, and the data shows 11x greater risk for unvaccinated in that group. What data would you like to look at?

That's just it, the 80 and over population are the MOST AT RISK for EVERYTHING, so I'm not sure why you think that's a great place to start.

The vaccine does not work well on really old people. You cannot stimulate an immune system that is pretty shot and most people over eighty have a weak immune system...this is stated in some of the research conclusions. Also those who have a severely reduced immune response from certain meds that lower it as a design of action are at high risk of getting a more severe covid reaction, vaccinated or not. There are a lot of people taking meds that effect proper immune system utilization these days. Cancer therapy often messes up the immune system for months too.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04


Vaccinated 80+ covid hospitalizations per 100,000: 217.88
Unvaccinated 80+ covid hospitalizations per 100,000: 123.5

Unvaccinated 80+ are 10.77x more likely to be hospitalized for Covid than vaccinated 80+

Am I reading this wrong?
ETA: Or have you just failed miserably to make your point, evidence provided

OccamsRazor04 the data in your link in the op is showing the hospitalisation rate for covid 19 for double vaccinated vs unvaccinated in over 80's

102,811 double vaccinated over 80 year olds with 224 hospitalised for covid 19 in week 13 = 217.88 per 100,000
118,823 unvaccinated over 80 year olds with 147 hospitalised for covid 19 in week 13 = 123.5 per 100,000
which clearly shows a much worse outcome for double vaccinated

that data in your op only compares the unvaccinated to the remaining double vaccinated over 80's not the single and triple vaccinated.
so it is not 4.4% unvaccinated vs 95.6 vaccinated over 80year olds in that data.

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

I don't know anyone who is panicking in the UK.
Life is more or less back to normal.

Yup no one's panicking over here and no reason to either as Daily Expose is yet again lying with numbers and abusing stats via cherry picking.

It's a basic law of stats that you can't compare ratio groups lover than a 25:75 ratio and get a valid restult for any analysis on any subject.

It's a law that's been known for over 100 years and as group tenss to 1 the innacuracy becomes bigger. That's why it's never been used by any statistician for any analysis for decades.

In the case of Covid it was pointed out at the start of the rollout that there would be an skew of the results that would generally over exagerrate the efficacy of the vaccine if this form of analysis is used until a reasonable ratio of people had taken it.

The opposite occurs when the ratio flips (in this case the vast majority are vaccinate) and the skew occurs in favour of the unvaccinated which is what we're seeing here. This has been poinited out in all ONS reports and similar.

If the same stats method is applied week on week the result will fluctuate wildly as the group sizing doesn't provide a realiable comparrison and will never provide an accurate, reliable result due to the laws of stats.

It's not a conspiracy, cover up or cause for panic- it's just daily expose yet again abusing maths and their audience to produce clickbait nonsense.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Soloprotocol

The vaccine is not 100% protection. Why are the unvaccinated in the hospital and dying at a rate 11 times greater? I answered you, will you answer me?

You're correct. These Vaccines are 100% no protection at all. In fact, they do unnecessary damage to perfectly healthy individuals.
11x greater?. I doubt those figures.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

All talking around in circles, where are the weekly death figures compared to pre vax death figures, that's all we want to have no maths just a straight data fact. If they are not readily available, there is a reason. Also the live birth figures pre and post vax....these are the only figures needed to determine if it was worth it. Where are they?

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Soloprotocol

All talking around in circles, where are the weekly death figures compared to pre vax death figures, that's all we want to have no maths just a straight data fact. If they are not readily available, there is a reason. Also the live birth figures pre and post vax....these are the only figures needed to determine if it was worth it. Where are they?

ONS figures for births and deaths are here.

www.ons.gov.uk...

This covers England and Wales. Scotland and Northern Ireland are recorded separately.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
I find it curious how people focus on only one part of the data, that which they think supports their beliefs, and then ignore the rest. So looking at the data here we can deduce two things.
dailyexpose.uk...

1. More vaccinated people are getting hospitalized.
2. Unvaccinated people have a much greater risk of hospitalization.

I made this post in response to another person posting this as an example of how the vaccine is bad, proven by the data. Here are the numbers.

Week 13 data.
Vaccinated 80+ population: 95%
Unvaccinated 80+ population: 5%

Vaccinated 80+ covid hospitalizations per 100,000: 217.88
Unvaccinated 80+ covid hospitalizations per 100,000: 123.5

Unvaccinated 80+ are 10.77x more likely to be hospitalized for Covid than vaccinated 80+

So while there are almost 2x as many hospitalizations in the 80+ vaccinated group, that group comprises 95% of that population.

Easy to explain, unvaxxed are mostly young people who are rarely admitted for covid regardless of status.

You'd expect low numbers in this group vaxxed or not.

This is like saying that people who live in abusive homes are more likely to be abused.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Of course you do, they don't support your preconceived beliefs. Those numbers you doubt were used by anti covid vaccine people as evidence the vaccine is bad. It's funny how the numbers are true until it's pointed out the numbers don't say what people think, then suddenly they are wrong.

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: ARM1968

I would say the 80+ population is a great place to start since they are the most at risk, and the data shows 11x greater risk for unvaccinated in that group. What data would you like to look at?

That's just it, the 80 and over population are the MOST AT RISK for EVERYTHING, so I'm not sure why you think that's a great place to start.

My link has all the ages, so you simply chose not to look. Here is the 18-29 group (vax status is broken down into 18-20, 20-25, and 25-30 so I estimated the 18-29 vax rate using those figures)

Week 13
18-29 unvax hospitalizations (estimated 37% of population) - 246
18-29 vax hospitalizations (estimated 63% of population)- 190

a reply to: litterbaux

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Soloprotocol

The vaccine is not 100% protection. Why are the unvaccinated in the hospital and dying at a rate 11 times greater? I answered you, will you answer me?

which is it, are they dying at 11 times the rate, or hospitalized at 11 times the rate, or both?

Soloprotocol clearly said "dying".

Yes, and OccamsRazor04 clearly said:

The vaccine is not 100% protection. Why are the unvaccinated in the hospital and dying at a rate 11 times greater? I answered you, will you answer me?

words matter and in this case, both hospitalizations and deaths were lumped in with the "11 times greater", so since you decided to jump into this conversation, perhaps you can explain which it is, or is it both? And offer a citation to proved proof. We can't have lies being thrown around here unchecked.