Thanks for that. It says their definition of "Unknown" is that those 121 patients do not show up as vaccinated in the Australian Immunisation Register. Leave it to V&C1 to twist that into only one patient being unvaccinated.
It also says "The minority of the overall population who have not been vaccinated are significantly overrepresented among patients in hospitals and ICUs with COVID-19." But V&C1 wouldn't tell you that in a million years.
It says their definition of "Unknown" is that those 121 patients do not show up as vaccinated in the Australian Immunisation Register.
This doesn't refudiate VaxedAndContagious1's headline. They're showing the stats separately now.
The minority of the overall population who have not been vaccinated are significantly overrepresented among patients in hospitals and ICUs with COVID-19.
Only if you count "unknown" as "unvaccinated.” What do you think the point of this post was?
How about this line from the link, though:
There were 98 COVID-19 deaths reported this week. Of these, 97 were eligible for a third dose of a COVID-19
vaccine but only 64 (66%) had received a third dose.
Nice way of saying that 97-out-of-98 of the deaths were fully vaccinated. Didn't these people get the covid vaccine specifically not to die?
Didn't these people get the covid vaccine specifically not to die?
The first vaccine appeared in December of 2020 and you cannot come up with a single link where any infectious disease specialist or public health official claimed that it or any other vaccine was 100% guaranteed to prevent anyone dying or getting sick from covid-19.
Yet here it is 18 months later and people like you are asking why vaccinated people are getting sick or dying. It's hard to believe that you have been missing all those memos.
So why do you continue to pretend the vaccine should provide that guarantee?
They claimed it was 95% and 94.5% effective (only 5% and 5.5% of those who got symptomatically infected during the clinical trial were vaccinated).
The demographics represented in the trial should be 95% disease free. Older and sicker people will of course get sick, but math the mathematical comparison of age cohort to age cohort, adjusted for pre-existing conditions, should show that there have been more than twice as many unvaccinated infected as vaccinated. 5% of 90% VS 100% of 10%.
If this is not the case, the vaccine has less efficacy than was claimed. It's baffling that anyone would argue that the 2020 wild spike vaccines targeting a pathogen that replicates primarily in the lungs, are going to have the same efficacy against a distant descendant that's had evolutionary pressures to circumvent reliance on the wild spike and which replicates in the upper respiratory tract. You appear to be that anyone and are incapable of just moving on and admitting that mandates that might have been arguable as appropriate out of an abundance of caution, are no longer proportionate or rational during the omicron waves.
Thanks for that. It says their definition of "Unknown" is that those 121 patients do not show up as vaccinated in the Australian Immunisation Register. Leave it to V&C1 to twist that into only one patient being unvaccinated.
It also says "The minority of the overall population who have not been vaccinated are significantly overrepresented among patients in hospitals and ICUs with COVID-19." But V&C1 wouldn't tell you that in a million years.
This doesn't refudiate VaxedAndContagious1's headline. They're showing the stats separately now.
Only if you count "unknown" as "unvaccinated.” What do you think the point of this post was?
How about this line from the link, though:
Nice way of saying that 97-out-of-98 of the deaths were fully vaccinated. Didn't these people get the covid vaccine specifically not to die?
The first vaccine appeared in December of 2020 and you cannot come up with a single link where any infectious disease specialist or public health official claimed that it or any other vaccine was 100% guaranteed to prevent anyone dying or getting sick from covid-19.
Yet here it is 18 months later and people like you are asking why vaccinated people are getting sick or dying. It's hard to believe that you have been missing all those memos.
So why do you continue to pretend the vaccine should provide that guarantee?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/health/covid-vaccine-95-effective.html
They claimed it was 95% and 94.5% effective (only 5% and 5.5% of those who got symptomatically infected during the clinical trial were vaccinated).
The demographics represented in the trial should be 95% disease free. Older and sicker people will of course get sick, but math the mathematical comparison of age cohort to age cohort, adjusted for pre-existing conditions, should show that there have been more than twice as many unvaccinated infected as vaccinated. 5% of 90% VS 100% of 10%.
If this is not the case, the vaccine has less efficacy than was claimed. It's baffling that anyone would argue that the 2020 wild spike vaccines targeting a pathogen that replicates primarily in the lungs, are going to have the same efficacy against a distant descendant that's had evolutionary pressures to circumvent reliance on the wild spike and which replicates in the upper respiratory tract. You appear to be that anyone and are incapable of just moving on and admitting that mandates that might have been arguable as appropriate out of an abundance of caution, are no longer proportionate or rational during the omicron waves.
Baffling.
I don't have a subscription to the New York Times.
This is a discussion about pretending the vaccines should be 100% effective at stopping infection.