US statistics

[TotorosCatBus]

Just under 50% vaccinated
99.5% deaths unvaccinated people
97% hospitalizations unvaccinated people
Delta is the dominant strain but not as high as in UK

In England
60% of hospitalizations aren't double jabbed (so 40% have had one or two jabs)

Is this difference because many over 40s in England were vaccinated with AZ rather than mRNA vaccines?

What is the harm, if they're all as effective as each other, in releasing the data? Which vaccine were fully vaccinated in hospital given?

@mumwon

re double jabbed - many are extremely vulnerable with issues with their immunity systems ie blood/ chemo & extreme old age (it was mentioned somewhere)

Where is the data?

I understood it was still a large proportion of diabetes (and not all old by any means, although many over 40... which isn't old). Perhaps I got this wrong?

What we need is transparent data on the fully jabbed in UK hospitals. Ages, underlying conditions (if any known). And, which vaccine.

@TotorosCatBus - It's a statistic that the anti-vaxxers online have been loving.

The problem is, most people don't understand statistics. You can use stats to deliver any message you like really, you just need to frame it to match your message. So 100% increase in cases today sounds a lot more scary than cases increased from 1 to 2 people. Conversely, 10% increase in cases doesn't sound too bad but you could be going from 1000 to 1100.

diabetics DO have lower immunity they are more likely to get certain infections - pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31657690/#:~:text=Hyperglycemia%20in%20diabetes%20is%20thought,to%20more%20susceptible%20to%20infections.
& whilst the other groups have not been detailed they do have lower immune response as well & in extreme old age - well they were the first to be vaccinated & there is data on decline in immunity - & of course, there will be people who, for some reason, have inherited issues about immune response to infection. Others may just be unlucky
We don't have all the details but the profs did mention this sometime ago in passing
It is quite possible, to have a chronic blood disorder or clotting disorder & not know about it (dh ITP was only discovered in a blood test prior to op)

Yes but when people, including the government, refer to the immunocompromised and immunosuppressed they usually don't include diabetes. Also, diabetes is not included as first priority phase for boosters, and will be in stage two (so far as I know - perhaps things have recently changed?).

I know - but some people are more vulnerable than others & the listing of Extremely vulnerable definitely had some anomalies & gaps - people who had multiple issues that didn't come into the categories (discussion with chemists about this re deliveries & when dh got vaccinated with the doctor who vaccinated him was interesting)
I imagine many people who are extremely vulnerable tend (nb personal observation amongst friends) to still more careful than most.
Note type 1 diabetics (mixed age group many quite young) have weaker immunity than type 2 in general( it depends on age) But type 2 diabetics are usually older (more of them) so age & diabetes it a double jeopardy. Note the Asian community have worse outcomes than general population &, guess what?, they have a higher level of diabetes (possible/probably inherited issue) - its an interesting correlation.

Cases are really low in some parts of the US, so the less-vaccinated areas with higher infection ratesare going to dominate the statistics. (Some states have only 35% of the eligible population vaccinated.)

Where are the actual data, say broken down by US state or even county level, that lists date person entered hospital with or for covid, and what their vaccination status is?

I don't trust the statements like "99.5% deaths unvaccinated people
97% hospitalizations unvaccinated people" - because they seem to be made in a very generalised way, with no actual data to support them.

www.cnet.com/health/99-of-covid-deaths-are-now-of-unvaccinated-people-experts-say/

" More than 97% of hospitalizations from COVID right now are of unvaccinated people, Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention, said Friday, adding: "There is a clear message that is coming through: This is becoming a pandemic of the unvaccinated." In early July, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the president's chief medical advisor, told CBS that 99.2% of COVID deaths are now in unvaccinated people."

More than 97% of hospitalizations from COVID right now are of unvaccinated people

I heard this statistic being challenged on Simon Marks' "American Week" on LBC an hour ago. A CDC spokesperson confirmed that the data was collected pre-Delta variant and from selected US states.

Thanks for that. Very helpful

Some good questions. One thing I'd add, living in a US state, is that at this point most of the deaths we're reporting are actually coming from reviews of death certificates. We've had something like 15 deaths reported in the last week, but none of them actually died in the last week, or even the last month. Some are from 2020. I'd imagine this is skewing the death rates if it's happening in all states.

@ragged

Where are the actual data, say broken down by US state or even county level, that lists date person entered hospital with or for covid, and what their vaccination status is?

I don't trust the statements like "99.5% deaths unvaccinated people
97% hospitalizations unvaccinated people" - because they seem to be made in a very generalised way, with no actual data to support them.

There is an astonishing amount of data out there if you look for it.

@NightmareLoon

Cases are really low in some parts of the US, so the less-vaccinated areas with higher infection ratesare going to dominate the statistics. (Some states have only 35% of the eligible population vaccinated.)

Yes - this week 20% of new cases are in Florida, which has 6% of the US population.

Do we regard 'hospitalisations' as the same thing? Our 40% vaccinated 'hospitalisations' could be in for an appendectomy and have tested positive for Covid ......doesn't mean that they are being treated for Covid

In my state we're counting people as having died with Covid even if they were admitted to hospital with something else, and tested positive at some time in hospital. I can't speak for all states though.

AssocPress says
"Of more than 18,000 people who died from COVID-19, for example, only about 150 were fully vaccinated. That's less than 1%..... The AP came up with these numbers using CDC data. The CDC tracks the numbers of cases, hospitalizations and deaths, but does not break down rates by vaccination status."

I'm confused by that -- how did AP derive the estimates from data CDC don't hold or collect?

"The CDC itself has not estimated what percentage of hospitalizations and deaths are in fully vaccinated people, citing limitations in the data."

Among the limitations: Only about 45 states report breakthrough infections, and some are more aggressive than others in looking for such cases. So the data probably understates such infections, CDC officials said.

This page is about breakthru infections, but doesn't count the non-breakthru hospitalizations.

I imagine that among the hospitalised, AP counted up confirmed break-thru in, subtracted from all hospitalised, to come up with their 99%ish numbers.

But right there - says surveillance for break-thru infections may be unreliable.

let's imagine the surveillance is 'reliable' in California... but it isn't that good, is it.

There are some caveats to the data. While California’s public health agency reported 584 people were hospitalized after a breakthrough COVID-19 infection, hospitalization status wasn’t available for 46% of the post-vaccination cases. State officials also noted that some of them may have been hospitalized for an unrelated condition and tested positive for COVID-19 after being admitted to the hospital.

US statistics have problems.

ragged - again, I can't speak for all states, but mine doesn't count breakthrough infections unless those people are either hospitalised or die, at which point they do count and track them.

So yes, the CDC is not tracking breakthrough infections reliably, but their tracking of breakthrough infections that lead to hospitalisation or death is much more reliable.

@mumwon

re double jabbed - many are extremely vulnerable with issues with their immunity systems ie blood/ chemo & extreme old age (it was mentioned somewhere)

Age is holding up pretty well, it's the immune compromised (who may it may not also be CEV) who can't count on being protected by the jab

Worth factoring in that the vaccine rollouts have been very different. In the UK, we had a very orderly queue, in descending order of risk. Which is great, but means that the most vulnerable to dying are also the most likely to be double jabbed. That makes the vaccine look less effective than it is, because we're comparing a vulnerable vaccinated population with a not particularly vulnerable unvaccinated one.

The US roll out, albeit with huge variations by state, hasn't followed such a strict priority order.

Doesn't sound like any state is accurately recording vaccination status of all people hospitalized for covid. or accurately recording the outcomes for all people who get covid+ (if they went to hospital or not).

A lot of reports are incomplete. Like this report says 107 breakthru infections --but over what time period, and how many were hospitalised?

“Data are about individuals who claim residency in Maine regardless of what state they were tested in, or where they are currently living,” the Maine CDC says. “For example, an individual who claims residency in Maine but lives in Florida will appear in this data even if they were living in Florida at the time of illness. County listings are by residence of patient, not location of the hospital or testing location.”

That's interesting because someone could be following no social distancing rules when snowbirdng in a opened-up state like FA yet get counted in Maine totals. Do they get double-counted in Florida totals, esp. if they get hospitalised?

I wonder if that not-actually-resident counting skews Maine totals as reported by WaPo.

can't get a reliable % if can't get an accurate denominator

Maybe people are more hesitant to visit hospital in US, due to cost, so Bly the very very ill go.

Also sickpay situation is bad -- don't want to take time off work since no pay. So case count itself could be reduced.

I think Motorina’s point is key. The UK has achieved near universal coverage amongst groups 1-5, and very high indeed among groups 6-9. They make up the overwhelming majority of the groups who might die from Covid.

In the US it’s been much more of a free for all and they haven’t prioritised getting to as many of the over seventies as humanly possible.

For a back of the envelope work though.

If you vaccinate absolutely all of the people who make up 90% of the deaths (call them High Priority) and half of the people who cause the other ten percent (call them Low Priority) and reduce deaths in both vaccinated groups by 95% then you’ll end up with the following allocation of deaths as a proportion of a nominal 10,000 you would have had without vaccines:
Vaccinated HP 450
Unvaccinated HP 0
Vaccinated LP 25
Unvaccinated LP 500
So vaccinated people represent 450/975 of the deaths - just under half

But if you vaccinate 75% of HP and 50% of LP your numbers will look like this:
Vaccinated HP 348
Unvaccinated HP 2250
Vaccinated LP 25
Unvaccinated LP 500
Which if my arithmetic is correct (not my strong point) means that vaccinated people make up 373/3123 of the deaths - about 12%
Huge difference.

@ragged

Doesn't sound like any state is accurately recording vaccination status of all people hospitalized for covid. or accurately recording the outcomes for all people who get covid+ (if they went to hospital or not).

A lot of reports are incomplete. Like this report says 107 breakthru infections --but over what time period, and how many were hospitalised?

“Data are about individuals who claim residency in Maine regardless of what state they were tested in, or where they are currently living,” the Maine CDC says. “For example, an individual who claims residency in Maine but lives in Florida will appear in this data even if they were living in Florida at the time of illness. County listings are by residence of patient, not location of the hospital or testing location.”

That's interesting because someone could be following no social distancing rules when snowbirdng in a opened-up state like FA yet get counted in Maine totals. Do they get double-counted in Florida totals, esp. if they get hospitalised?

I wonder if that not-actually-resident counting skews Maine totals as reported by WaPo.

can't get a reliable % if can't get an accurate denominator

Well, that first 'report' is a news story, so yes, it's not giving a huge amount of detail. You'd be better off going to the Maine CDC site for actual details of how many were hospitalised and over what time period. Channel 5 isn't your ideal source for statistics.

From talking to a lot of snowbirds, they're actually being very careful about socially distancing while in Florida, because they are generally elderly and therefore higher risk. My snowbird neighbour's community in Florida had zero Covid cases.

But yes, I'd imagine there's some double-counting or missed counting.

Ok so why can't we have the easily accessible data in the UK re which vaccines were given to the fully jabbed in hospital? Perhaps it might help reassure some of the vaccine hesitant.