UK data on delta variant and vaccine deaths

2,759 Views | 16 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Aston94
Goose06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So if I wanted confirmation I was reading this correctly I would post it to the politics board. I found this extremely surprising even as a vaccine hesitant person. I have generally believed vaccines provided significant protection from severe illness and death, but I am hesitant for 3 reasons (1) lack of long term safety data (I.e can it cause cancer or heart disease), (2) low probability of me dying (I'm 37, less than 15k people my age or younger have died of Covid
In the US), and (3) it doesn't appear the vaccines prevent infection or spread.

All of that said, I don't want to discuss or debate the above, just wanted to caveat this post so you are aware of my own inherent bias to generally seek and find information that confirms my own position.

The UK data in the below link appears to my biased eyes that to say there is minimal reduction in death against delta, particularly in young people (see pages 21-22 and excerpts below):

Unvaccinated cases (by age group)
Under 50: 212,989
Over 50: 6,724

Unvaccinated deaths (% vs cases):
Under 50: 99 (0.0046%)
Over 50: 437 (6.5%)

Vaccinated Cases:
Under 50: 62,403
Over 50: 51,420

Vaccinated deaths (% vs cases):
Under 50: 37 (0.0059%)
Over 50: 1,054 (2.05%)

So in my conclusion, the vaccine was helpful for old people but at best was not helpful for young people. Given the sample size, I don't think you can say there is sampling error here. On plausible explanation would seem to be there is a large difference in the overall health of the unvaccinated vs the vaccinated (I.e.: all the fat people got vaccinated and all the healthy people didn't). I am curious to hear others thoughts on the data in young people. Maybe there is something about this report that I don't understand?

I did also find it interesting that the report clarified that even though the data appeared to show alpha as more severe than delta, a more thorough examination of the data showed otherwise, but I didn't find any similar explanation for this conundrum.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1014926/Technical_Briefing_22_21_09_02.pdf#page=21
deadbq03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'd offer that it's possible that the vaccinated case count is highly underrepresented.

No idea what the vaccination rate for under 50 is there, but the case count is noticeably lower.

Psychologically, if you're young and vaccinated and get extremely mild Covid-like symptoms, then there's not much incentive to bother getting a test. This is certainly true for my wife and I who have both had moments the past month where we have a few very mild symptoms (but never a fever).

The inverse is also plausible: if unvaccinated individuals are experiencing symptoms more noticeably - especially if they're getting a fever which might be a screening metric at their place of work, etc - then they're going to get tested, either out of concern or as a way to try to prove that their mild fever wasn't Covid so they can go back to work or whatever.
amercer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7034e5.htm
Goose06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
deadbq03 said:

I'd offer that it's possible that the vaccinated case count is highly underrepresented.

No idea what the vaccination rate for under 50 is there, but the case count is noticeably lower.

Psychologically, if you're young and vaccinated and get extremely mild Covid-like symptoms, then there's not much incentive to bother getting a test. This is certainly true for my wife and I who have both had moments the past month where we have a few very mild symptoms (but never a fever).

The inverse is also plausible: if unvaccinated individuals are experiencing symptoms more noticeably - especially if they're getting a fever which might be a screening metric at their place of work, etc - then they're going to get tested, either out of concern or as a way to try to prove that their mild fever wasn't Covid so they can go back to work or whatever.
These are certainly plausible explanations. But I would argue an unvaccinated person might also be unlikely to go get tested. I had congestion that seemed to be allergies the last couple weeks and I didn't go get tested (also never had a fever). My daughter simultaneosly had tonsilitis and my son an ear infection (both negative for covid) so I figured I didn't have covid but might have whatever was causing their congestion issues.

Either way, I wouldn't rule out your explanation for some portion of the explanation, but that would just bring down the vaccinated IFR % as opposed to increasing the unvaccinated IFR.
WoMD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Goose06 said:

deadbq03 said:

I'd offer that it's possible that the vaccinated case count is highly underrepresented.

No idea what the vaccination rate for under 50 is there, but the case count is noticeably lower.

Psychologically, if you're young and vaccinated and get extremely mild Covid-like symptoms, then there's not much incentive to bother getting a test. This is certainly true for my wife and I who have both had moments the past month where we have a few very mild symptoms (but never a fever).

The inverse is also plausible: if unvaccinated individuals are experiencing symptoms more noticeably - especially if they're getting a fever which might be a screening metric at their place of work, etc - then they're going to get tested, either out of concern or as a way to try to prove that their mild fever wasn't Covid so they can go back to work or whatever.
These are certainly plausible explanations. But I would argue an unvaccinated person might also be unlikely to go get tested. I had congestion that seemed to be allergies the last couple weeks and I didn't go get tested (also never had a fever). My daughter simultaneosly had tonsilitis and my son an ear infection (both negative for covid) so I figured I didn't have covid but might have whatever was causing their congestion issues.

Either way, I wouldn't rule out your explanation for some portion of the explanation, but that would just bring down the vaccinated IFR % as opposed to increasing the unvaccinated IFR.

That's the case for me and my girlfriend. We both had mild classic cases, and took multiple Abbott rapid tests I picked up at Walgreens only. I also didn't want to inflate the numbers that are being politicized in Idaho for something that is more of an inconvenience than anything. Most people shrug it off the same way, so a huge amount of the Idaho population gets it, doesn't test for it, and now are protected against it after a couple weeks of feeling a bit ****ty. So who knows what the caseload truly is, but it's obvious that a lot more people are getting it than are tested for it. They just handle it like a cold and move on with life. Most people here have had it by now, so itl finish burning through pretty soon and itl be over until the next variant. It's annoying losing employees for a couple of weeks, but at the end of the day in Idaho we will literally kill to preserve our freedoms, so going the Sweden route is a win in the eyes of everyone here.

And spare me the "but the hospitals are full" stories. We're doing fine. Kids are in school, everyone's working (except for healthcare workers potentially being canned for choosing to not vaccinate), the economy is strong, there's no masking, and civil liberties haven't been infringed upon, and most importantly very few are dying. Oh, and our vaccination rate is relatively low, but our natural immunity is high, so not a single person is worried or terrified to live their lives.
Windy City Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I am not sure if this is the same Public Health England report that has been hashed over a few times in other threads. Several senior research folks in that group had to follow up once this started becoming a talking point.

They tried to clarify the findings by linking data to the larger populations. When you do that, you will see a pretty massive skew in outcomes between vaxxed and unvaxxed.

Several government statistical groups have shown that nearly 90% of the UK over 16 population has received at least one dose.

There are roughly 68.3 Million people in the UK and 80% or so are over 18 per a bit of internet sleuthing.

So that breaks down to an estimated halfway or fully vaxxed population of 68.3 Mill*.8*.9 = 49.2 Million in the sample set

Unvaxxed per that same calc = 68.3 Mill*.8*.1 = 5.464 Million


So given your stats, you had:

219,713 cases in the unvaxxed population, or 4.0% of the 5.464 million getting sick with Covid.

113,823 cases in the vaxxed population of 49.2 Million, or 0.2% getting sick with Covid.


It shouldn't be too hard to confirm the effectiveness of vaccines when you have 1/2 the number of cases in a population 9x larger. You really can't claim point #3 above with those numbers on the table.




AggieHusker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'm not sure this data set is providing a good denominator for making the % death calculation. Per the report on page 12:

"Tables 4 and 5 show the number of cases who visited an NHS Emergency Department, were admitted, and died in any setting"

To me this means the total number of cases is under reported. It's ignoring everyone (both vaccinated and unvaccinated) that did not need to be admitted. One could argue that the vaccinated case count is under reported more than the unvaccinated case count since vaccinated individuals are less likely to be hospitalized.

Also, the % you calculate ignore the unlinked, <21 days post dose 1, and >= 21 days post dose 1 groups. In the <50 age group, there are a large number of cases in these groups. If you include >= 21 days post dose 1 in the "vaccinated" calculation, then the vaccinated death % is .033% (btw I think you have one too many 0s in your percentages; but I could be wrong).


The UK publishes a separate vaccine surveillance report:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019992/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_38.pdf

Pages 15 and 16 of this report provide the death rates per 100,000 people for deaths in weeks 34-37 of 2021. The death rates are higher among the unvaccinated. Here the are Rates among persons vaccinated with 2 doses per 100,000 vs rates among persons not vaccinated per 100,000 by age.

Ages 18-29: 0.1 vs 0.4
Ages 30-39: 0.3 vs 1.4
Ages 40-49: 0.7 vs 4.8
Ages 50-59: 1.9 vs 15.2
Ages 60-69: 5.5 vs 31.4
Ages 70-79: 15.2 vs 74.9
Ages 80+: 57.3 vs 166.3
Goose06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieHusker said:


Also, the % you calculate ignore the unlinked, <21 days post dose 1, and >= 21 days post dose 1 groups. In the <50 age group, there are a large number of cases in these groups. If you include >= 21 days post dose 1 in the "vaccinated" calculation, then the vaccinated death % is .033% (btw I think you have one too many 0s in your percentages; but I could be wrong).

I did ignore those groups because I was trying to limit the uncertainty around the partially vaccinated group or the just barely vaccinated group and not knowing which group to lump those in with.

Sorry on the %'s, I just quickly took 0.00046 and converted to %. Should be 0.046% instead of 0.0046% (and vaccinated equivalent should be 0.059% instead of 0.0059%).
Goose06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AggieHusker said:

The UK publishes a separate vaccine surveillance report:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019992/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_38.pdf

Pages 15 and 16 of this report provide the death rates per 100,000 people for deaths in weeks 34-37 of 2021. The death rates are higher among the unvaccinated. Here the are Rates among persons vaccinated with 2 doses per 100,000 vs rates among persons not vaccinated per 100,000 by age.

Ages 18-29: 0.1 vs 0.4
Ages 30-39: 0.3 vs 1.4
Ages 40-49: 0.7 vs 4.8
Ages 50-59: 1.9 vs 15.2
Ages 60-69: 5.5 vs 31.4
Ages 70-79: 15.2 vs 74.9
Ages 80+: 57.3 vs 166.3

This is interesting data. I will check out that link. Thanks for sharing.
Goose06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Windy City Ag said:

I am not sure if this is the same Public Health England report that has been hashed over a few times in other threads. Several senior research folks in that group had to follow up once this started becoming a talking point.

They tried to clarify the findings by linking data to the larger populations. When you do that, you will see a pretty massive skew in outcomes between vaxxed and unvaxxed.

Several government statistical groups have shown that nearly 90% of the UK over 16 population has received at least one dose.

There are roughly 68.3 Million people in the UK and 80% or so are over 18 per a bit of internet sleuthing.

So that breaks down to an estimated halfway or fully vaxxed population of 68.3 Mill*.8*.9 = 49.2 Million in the sample set

Unvaxxed per that same calc = 68.3 Mill*.8*.1 = 5.464 Million


So given your stats, you had:

219,713 cases in the unvaxxed population, or 4.0% of the 5.464 million getting sick with Covid.

113,823 cases in the vaxxed population of 49.2 Million, or 0.2% getting sick with Covid.


It shouldn't be too hard to confirm the effectiveness of vaccines when you have 1/2 the number of cases in a population 9x larger. You really can't claim point #3 above with those numbers on the table.





Appreciate the additional color.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Ages 18-29: 0.1 vs 0.4 (4x)
Ages 30-39: 0.3 vs 1.4 (5x)
Ages 40-49: 0.7 vs 4.8 (7x)
Ages 50-59: 1.9 vs 15.2 (7x)
Ages 60-69: 5.5 vs 31.4 (6x)
Ages 70-79: 15.2 vs 74.9 (5x)
Ages 80+: 57.3 vs 166.3 (3x)
These are the death numbers.
I suppose the hospitalization numbers are similar.

I wish we had a new category - what's the clinical definition for "pretty damn sick?" ...Cause I'm not really a big fan of that either. Maybe that's just me, though.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
AggieHusker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Here is the hospitalization data from the same report linked above. Defined as "Cases presenting to emergency care (within 28 days of a positive test) resulting in overnight inpatient admission, by specimen date between week 34 and week 37 2021". Shown as Rates among persons vaccinated with 2 doses (per 100,000) vs. Rates among persons not vaccinated (per 100,000):

18-29: 1.5 vs 10.1
30-39: 2.5 vs 19.8
40-49: 4.5 vs 27.8
50-59: 8.3 vs 51.5
60-69: 13.9 vs 74.2
70-79: 28.0 vs 92.3
80+: 54.2 vs 141.1
Troglodyte
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Two thirds of the deaths are by vaccinated. That's way different than the 90-95% our doctors have reported here.
94chem
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:


Death:
Ages 18-29: 0.1 vs 0.4 (4x)
Ages 30-39: 0.3 vs 1.4 (5x)
Ages 40-49: 0.7 vs 4.8 (7x)
Ages 50-59: 1.9 vs 15.2 (7x)
Ages 60-69: 5.5 vs 31.4 (6x)
Ages 70-79: 15.2 vs 74.9 (5x)
Ages 80+: 57.3 vs 166.3 (3x)

Hospitalization:
18-29: 1.5 vs 10.1 (7x)
30-39: 2.5 vs 19.8 (8x)
40-49: 4.5 vs 27.8 (6x)
50-59: 8.3 vs 51.5 (6x)
60-69: 13.9 vs 74.2 (5x)
70-79: 28.0 vs 92.3 (3x)
80+: 54.2 vs 141.1 (3x)
So, taken together, the "adverse outcomes" indicate:

Hospitalization or death:
Ages 18-29: 28x
Ages 30-39: 40x
Ages 40-49: 42x
Ages 50-59: 42x
Ages 60-69: 30x
Ages 70-79: 15x
Ages 80+: 9x

That's pretty darned good. And you could probably multiply by another factor of 3 - 7 if you wanted to include my "pretty darned sick" category, but I don't see data for that.
94chem,
That, sir, was the greatest post in the history of TexAgs. I salute you. -- Dough
Dad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Troglodyte said:

Two thirds of the deaths are by vaccinated. That's way different than the 90-95% our doctors have reported here.
That doesn't sound good but I think it is more complicated than just looking at numbers of total deaths and breaking them down into vaccinated and not vaccinated.

I'm going to break out some anecdotes here but all of the least healthy people I know ran out and got the vaccine the moment that they could and most of the younger and healthier people I know did not get the vaccine. I know normally anecdotes don't work on the general population but I think this has happened all over the world where vaccines are available.

If you put all of the sickest people in one group, it isn't fair to compare the deaths in that group to the deaths in the healthy group. Maybe a better comparison would be to look at people of a similar age and a similar number of comorbidities and see how the vaccinated did vs the unvaccinated. If the deaths still look bad for vaccines in that breakdown then that is something to talk about.
Gordo14
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Here's a great evaluation of COVID vaccine effectiveness against the Delta variant in the US. Shows the vaccines - particularly Moderna, but also Pfizer - have held up very well. They also breakdown the effectiveness by elderly and everyone else. Makes the case for giving over 65 and immunocompromised a booster shot (but no need for everyone else as it currently stands), and explains very effectively how population size differences of unvaxxed vs vaxxed makes the absolute numbers a poor comparison. I believe over the study length they had more vaccinated hospitalized for COVID than unvaccinated in the over 75 age group... But also validated that the vaccines are giving 75% efficacy at preventing hospitalization in that age group.
03_Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Goose06 said:

AggieHusker said:

The UK publishes a separate vaccine surveillance report:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1019992/Vaccine_surveillance_report_-_week_38.pdf

Pages 15 and 16 of this report provide the death rates per 100,000 people for deaths in weeks 34-37 of 2021. The death rates are higher among the unvaccinated. Here the are Rates among persons vaccinated with 2 doses per 100,000 vs rates among persons not vaccinated per 100,000 by age.

Ages 18-29: 0.1 vs 0.4
Ages 30-39: 0.3 vs 1.4
Ages 40-49: 0.7 vs 4.8
Ages 50-59: 1.9 vs 15.2
Ages 60-69: 5.5 vs 31.4
Ages 70-79: 15.2 vs 74.9
Ages 80+: 57.3 vs 166.3

This is interesting data. I will check out that link. Thanks for sharing.


Looks like they are counting deaths, or at least a portion, of people who died and had tested positive for Covid 19 but did not necessarily die FROM Covid 19:

Quote:

The PHE data series does not include deaths in people where COVID-19 was suspected but a laboratory test was not carried out or was negative. Furthermore, the PHE data series does not report cause of death, and as such represents deaths in people with COVID-19 and not necessarily due to COVID-19. The weekly counts of deaths from ONS includes all deaths where COVID-19 is recorded on the death certificate.
Aston94
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Troglodyte said:

Two thirds of the deaths are by vaccinated. That's way different than the 90-95% our doctors have reported here.


2/3rds of the deaths out of 1/9th of the population gets you to 95% pretty quick.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.