this post was submitted on 24 Nov 2021

4 points (66.7% liked)

COVID-19 Pandemic

978 readers

1 users here now

Any news or discussion around the pandemic. Anti-vaccination posts and comments will be removed, as well as personal attacks.

Relevant:

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Little confused over the data presented on UK Vaccination Surveillance Report week 46, maybe you guys can correct me? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 3 years ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

27 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Page 23 of this report https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1034383/Vaccine-surveillance-report-week-46.pdf

The current data given a 3 week period appears to show that the ages 30-80 that have been double jabbed are signficiantly more likely to get a positive covid-19 result than those who are not vaccinated. Also please note that the data presented is per 100,000, meaning that it has taken into account the proportion size of the fully vaccinated and the people that are unvaccinated.

Little confused here I thought that the whole reason the UK were mandating that the NHS and care home workers get this covid-19 vaccine was so that it would help stop the spread of this virus and yet this data seems to show that for ages 30-80 the vaccinated are more likely to actually get this virus. So little lost as to the Governments reasoning behind this is? I would say that money is behind the motive, but I don't think the Government would swoop that low?

Before you all call be an anti-vaxxer I am proud to announce that I am doing my part in helping prevent the spread of the virus in the process saving lives because I am a good person that cares for the wellbeing of others and have received a covid-19 vaccine and so therefore am indeed vaccinated against this virus which has killed millions of people (even though this data I have presented here shows that 30-80 year olds are more likely to get this virus and maybe suggests that the fully vaccinated are more likely to transmit the virus...)

But yeah I would love to hear all your thoughts on this data that the UK Government have released here. Also currently reading this book "The Real Anthony Fauci" by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr and he presents a lot of really good information in this book which I think may be of interest to the readers here.

Mods please don't ban for being anti-vax I am 100% for vaccination even if data shows that it may increase transmisibility of a virus.

top 27 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 years ago (1 children)

^1^Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection. Vaccine effectiveness has been formally estimated from a number of different sources and is summarised on pages 5 to 8 in this report.
The case rates in the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations are unadjusted crude rates that do not take into account underlying statistical biases in the data and there are likely to be systematic differences between these 2 population groups. For example:

• people who are fully vaccinated may be more health conscious and therefore more likely to get tested for COVID-19 and so more likely to be identified as a case (based on the data provided by the NHS Test and Trace)

• many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher risk from COVID-19 due to their age, their occupation, their family circumstances or because of underlying health issues

• people who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions and therefore may have differing levels of exposure to COVID-19

• people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19 in the weeks or months before the period of the cases covered in the report. This gives them some natural immunity to the virus for a few months which may have contributed to a lower case rate in the past few weeks

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 years ago (2 children)

Yes there are some flaws with this data as there is with all data. But to touch on the good point that you mention here.

people who are fully vaccinated may be more health conscious and therefore more likely to get tested for COVID-19 and so more likely to be identified as a case (based on the data provided by the NHS Test and Trace)

Ok if this is in fact the case why doesn't this report actually compare the number of vaccinated people in proportion to the number of unvaccinated people who get tested for this virus. I kinda feel like this is a red hering because the fact of the matter is if you are experiencing covid like symptoms regardless if you are vaccinated or unvaccinated then you will get a test for yourself... If you are not experiencing covid like symptoms then why do you feel the need to get tested?

Is they Government saying that the unvaccinated are less likely to get a covid-19 test even if they have symptoms? If so do they have any evidance to actually support this at all? And is significant enough to actually affect the outcome of the data presented here?

many of those who were at the head of the queue for vaccination are those at higher risk from COVID-19 due to their age, their occupation, their family circumstances or because of underlying health issues

Not really sure what this is getting at to be completely honest? Almost all ages have had this vaccination and I don't see how the timing of when you have had the vaccine would affect this data.

people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19 in the weeks or months before the period of the cases covered in the report. This gives them some natural immunity to the virus for a few months which may have contributed to a lower case rate in the past few weeks

Ok yes the unvaccinated are very likely to have caught COVID prior to the date at which this report got the data. However the truth of the matter is - is that we really don't know how many of the unvaccinated have actually had COVID in the past and if so if their R number is any different to that of the vaccinated. On the face of it - this data seems to suggest that the people that are fully vaccinated are more likely to receive a positive COVID test.

people who are fully vaccinated and people who are unvaccinated may behave differently, particularly with regard to social interactions and therefore may have differing levels of exposure to COVID-19

In all honesty I don't really think that the differences in behaviour of those that are vaccinated and those that are not is really that significant as to actually make much of a difference in the data.

However with things such as vaccine passports needed for night clubs and other events in Wales and Scotland - there is an argument that the vaccinated are spreading the virus more than the unvaccinated because of things like that - we just don't know...

But this three week period is a sample size of the cases of COVID in the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Of this sample size the vaccinated appear to be signifcantly more likely to have this virus in this three week period.

Happy to have a further discussion about the points that you mentioned here. But I feel that these points don't really justify this massive difference in the vaccinated that are getting COVID. But I appreciate your input here.

As a reminder I am not anti-vax (mods please don't ban me for misinformation or for being anti-vax)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago (1 children)

I mean, even if you're somehow more likely to get covid if vaccinated, you're still more likely to likely to die without vaccination according to this data.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 years ago

Yes I agree with your assessment of the data in this report that you are more likely to die without vaccination according to the data.

But my basic argument was that well if vaccination actually makes it more likely that you have covid-19 and theremore more likely to spread it to others then why are the UK making covid-19 vaccinations mandatory for the NHS and care homes citing concerns of patient safety? Its a really interesting issue and to be honest the more I look into this the more I realize just how hard it is to draw definitive conclusions about issues such as this. Hence why I wanted to receive some input regarding this data to see if my assessments of this data were correct and from the very little dicussion on this post it seems that nobody has actually debunked this data drawing me towards the idea that the vaccianted are actually more likely to spread the virus than the unvaccinated.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 years ago (1 children)

But I feel that these points don’t really justify this massive difference in the vaccinated that are getting COVID.

Facts don't care about your feelings. Ask a doctor. Not a bunch of techies on the internet.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago

Facts don’t care about your feelings

Interesting point... How do we define what a "fact" is? Who makes that judgement and by what rationale is this judgement based on? I argue here that we define facts based on how we feel because I believe that we are emotional creatures - not rationale ones.

Regardless you seemed to have missed by entire argument and not said anything about the points I raised suggesting that you can't actually argue against them and so have resorted to how I have worded a sentence - not the points and arguments I actually made.

Regardless the post will likely be censored soon by mods even though I have said multiple times on this post and comments that I am in no way anti-vax and have myself gone ahead and received my vaccination for covid-19 in the hopes that it will save many people's lives from this deadly virus (virtue signaling)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 children)

Hey look it's you again

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Any comment on this data? I am not anti-vax and have gotten the vaccine myself (definteley not virue signaling at all)

I'm just an innocent vaccinated citizen of the world trying to do my part in helping to stop the spread of this deadly disease which I was told by the people on the TV that if I went and got a jab in my shoulder that I would be saving lives and helping to stop the spread of this deadly virus. But yet the data from the same organisation that advocated on the TV to get this jav in the shoulder has suggested that my efforts actually do the exact opposite of what I thought it would.

Any help in clarifying this would be helpful and @sexy_[email protected] seems to believe I am "cherry picking" when I have just looked at the most recent Government report on vaccination.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 years ago (2 children)

You're the guy in that antivaxx cult who was unhappy with getting banned from posting your wacko philosophy here. That's why your account isn't even a day old.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago

I don't know about any wacko philosophy man. I'm just an innocent vaccinated citizen of the world in search of the truth and for some reason people seem to label me as "anti-vax" when I am 100% for vaccination even if there is data to show that vaccinated people spread covid more than the unvaccinated.

The unvaccinated are extremely selfish people and if it were up to me we would have mandates everywhere in the country that says that everyone needs to stop being so selfish and take these vaccines. Then if people still refuse we restrain them and forcibilly inject the needles into them in the name of science even if there is data to suggest that the vaccinated are more likely to contract this virus and therefore more likely to spread it.

I should also mention here again that I am in no way an anti-vaxer and have myself gotten this vaccination.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 3 years ago

Instead of personal attacks, how about discussing the actual data that the post is about? What you are doing is not moderation, but just attacking people who disagree with you.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 years ago (1 children)

To everyone who comes to this post: this is how extremists spread their message. This guy realized he couldn't post his wackadoodle new age antivax opinions here, so he scaled back and is now saying he's vaccinated and that he just wants to "discuss" the data. Doing this so he can sow seeds of doubt and "redpill" unsuspecting, gullible people who come across it sending them down the antivax rabbit hole. He's hiding behind plausible deniability as an "innocent vaccinated citizen of the world" so people won't report/ban him due to being antivax (Come on, who talks like that). This guy has been here before and literally thinks vaccines have microchips in them (as if everyone's smart phones aren't good enough at tracking us) and that they make you sterile.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Not too sure where you are getting this thinking from? I as a vaccinated curious innocent citizen of the world reviewed the recent report from a Governments data. I then saw inconsistency with what was previously said and so therefore wanted to see what you guys thoughts were regarding this recent data. I assure you I didn't "cherry pick" this data - I literally viewed the recent report from UK Government - saw that the data showed something interersting and wanted to see what other's thoughts were on it.

This guy has been here before and literally thinks vaccines have microchips in them (as if everyone’s smart phones aren’t good enough at tracking us) and that they make you sterile.

From what I understand of the message you are referring to this group "The Great White Brotherhood" put out a message (which has been censored here because the mods seem to be against this group for some reason) that the vaccines have been introduced which contain microchips designed to reduce life expectancy of the elderly and toxins which sterilize men/women. The reason being is because the powers that be want to reduce the population of the world and also to save money on the costs of elderly people and save money from the costs of upbringing children into this world. Weather you believe it or not is up to you... I don't really care if you believe it or not and I am certainly not "Doing this so he can sow seeds of doubt and “redpill” unsuspecting". I'm just another everday truth seeker as my username suggests.

You seem to be arguing that I have "scaled back"? I mean at what point in contradictory information do you reassess your previous beliefs and understandings? Have you ever heard of confirmation bias at all? Whereby you selectively only read information which conforms to your prior belief and attack/ignore any information which doesn't conform to your beliefs? Hence why rationality is needed in assessing the truth, and rationality is a whole other subject which has its criques i.e. Kants critque of pure reason.

I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything I'm just trying to get to the truth in the matter. But it would appear that nobody on this forum is open minded enough to believe that the things they have been told by mainstream media may actually not be based on reality and so I find myself in the unfortunate position of hearing what some may refer to as "NPC"s promoting the narrative which has been established by mainstream media who seem to ignore anything and everything which questions their narrative. Hence why there are so many downvotes to this post, hence why the message of "The Great White Brotherhood" is being actively censored on this platform and hence why this entire post with all comments will likely be censored here as well.

Let me just repeat it again for further clarity for the people in the forum in case they didn't read my previous messages. I am in no way anti-vax and am myself vaccianted (virtue signaling)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago

You should learn how to write shorter. Stick to few mmain points per comment. No one can follow a discussion where you list 20 different (tangential) aspects.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 years ago (1 children)

stop cherry picking

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Little confused here? I'm not "cherry picking". I clicked on the latest report by the UK Government and this is what their data has shown. Are you saying that I am correct in how I've read this data? That ages 30-80 double vaccinated are more likey to spread covid-19.

Are you denying this data or what? I don't understand man. Please educate me. As I have stated I am not anti-vax and have went out of my way to get this vaccine to save others lives because I am a selfless person that cares for the wellbeing of others most sincerly but this data from the most recent UK Government report seems to show that my efforts were in vein?

Any help on understanding the significance of this data and helping me to come to the truth of the reality of this whole situation would be good. Thank you.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 3 years ago (1 children)

fuck off we had this discussion in the last thread

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Little confused here? I don't recall having any conversation with you about this data? Also the fact that you are swearing suggests that you don't actually want to discuss this issue at all?

I'm just trying to find the truth and get some more opinions on this data? The fact that you commented "stop cherry picking" seems to suggest that you think that this data is correct and I am right in my assessments of this data.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 3 years ago (1 children)

That's right, I don't want to discuss it with you.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 years ago (1 children)

Little confused? Why did you bother taking the time to add your comment if you didn't actually want to discusss this data. It almost sounds to me like you are slipping into confirmation bias where you will ignore all things which contradict your views and beliefs on a certain topic which would explain why you are choosing not to have a discussion about this data and have instead just left a comment that reads "stop cherry picking" instead of having an actual discussion about this.

I mean I think that a lot of people currently are experiencing confirmation bias to be honest. I mean a lot of people still seem to think that vaccination is the way out of this pandemic when countries such as Israel have shown that vaccination doesn't actually help to defeat this virus and yet people are pushing things like mandating vaccination for the population when data here and from many other places suggest that this may not be the right move in helping to prevent the spread of this virus.

Would love to hear some of your views regarding these issues instead of dismissing them and saying you don't want to have any discussion.

For refernce to the people reading this I am indeed vaccinated (don't yet have my vaccine passport) and have chosen to get the covid-19 vaccine because I care for the wellbeing of others and want to help protect the people around me from this deadly virus (I am indeed virtue signaling, which as a side note is a little sad that medical status has become a form of virtue signaling... it would be similar to me saying that I have no STDs and using that as a form of virtue signaling... little strange I think)

Again mods just to clarify I am not anti-vax. Please don't censor me.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 3 years ago (1 children)

You either had a special copy and paste answer for me or you typed all this, both are equally funny

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago (2 children)

Little confused? which part specifically do you find funny?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 children)

The "little confused?" throws me off. Are you confused? Then why the questionmark? It has this condecending undertone... Who is confused? sexy_peach laid out their arguments what else do you need? Either get to the point that you are trying to make or change the phrasing... Also, this is just a surveillance report (not a carefully designed and peer reviewed study) so I would not interpret to much into it based on a single data table.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 years ago (1 children)

You are right this clearly isn't a "carefully designed and peer reviewed study" - its a surveillance report. Do you think that peer reviewed studies don't study and analyse data such as this in their study to justify their conclusions?

I think that just because it isn't a "carefully designed and peer reviewed study" doesn't mean that it shouldn't be at least discussed and analysed by others. I feel that this data is in fact in accordance with the situation concerning Israel which had a vast majoirty vaccinated and yet had some of the highest covid cases the world has ever seen. My point here is that the vaccinated seem to be spreading the virus more than the unvaccinated which is what this data and Israel seem to suggest.

Please debunk this.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 years ago

If most people are vaccinated you will also find more people spreading it (in absolut terms - assuming a constant probablility of breakthrough). However, we know that these are not entirely constant (e.g., depend on vaccine type, age of people etc.) and might be confounded by other societal measures (e.g., lockdown/isolation of only unvaccinated people). Reporting one data table does not provide enough information... even looking at a single country is just anectotal evidence. Hence, the need for thorough studies or meta-analysis. Nothing to "debunk" here. This is not a conspiracy theory. If you have a hypothesis, test it or quantify its liklihood using all data available.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 years ago (1 children)

all of it

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 years ago

Which part and for what reason?