Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Can someone please explain these numbers to me??

25 replies

Toria84 · 01/11/2021 21:14

These are taken from the independent…

The mortality rate was 849.7 out of 1,000 for people who were unvaccinated. This was compared to 26.2 out of 1,000 for people who had received a second vaccine dose

What exactly does this mean?!

Is that saying that 84.9% of unvaccinated people die?!

Here’s the article

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-uk-booster-vaccine-cases-news-b1948894.html%3famp

OP posts:
mynameiscalypso · 01/11/2021 21:17

Sky news quotes the same figures as being per 100,000 people which makes a lot more sense!

news.sky.com/story/amp/covid-death-risk-32-times-higher-for-the-unvaccinated-figures-suggest-12457074

pombal · 01/11/2021 21:17

Did someone miss a 0 off???

CakesOfVersailles · 01/11/2021 21:27

If those numbers were correct, yes that is what they would mean.

However there is an error for sure. I think mynameiscalypso is right - they are meant to be per 100, 000. So 0.8497% for unvaccinated and 0.262% for vaccinated.

Non-AMP link for those who want it.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-uk-booster-vaccine-cases-news-b1948894.html

ICUDoc · 01/11/2021 21:30

I’m guessing they are saying for every 1000 people that die, 849 of them are unvaccinated.

Seeing similar stats in our unit. When we looked at the deaths of the patients on our unit last month from covid, 80 percent of those deaths were in unvaccinated individuals.

Whyevencare · 01/11/2021 21:31

This report is very misleading as the data is from the 2nd January 2021 to 24th September and the vast majority of the UK we're not double jabbed until at least late summer.

SickAndTiredAgain · 01/11/2021 21:35

If you google it, everywhere else that’s reporting the study gives it as 100,000, not 1,000. A fairly significant typo from the independent.

ICUDoc · 01/11/2021 21:38

That’s a massive typo!

CakesOfVersailles · 01/11/2021 21:39

[quote CakesOfVersailles]If those numbers were correct, yes that is what they would mean.

However there is an error for sure. I think mynameiscalypso is right - they are meant to be per 100, 000. So 0.8497% for unvaccinated and 0.262% for vaccinated.

Non-AMP link for those who want it.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/covid-uk-booster-vaccine-cases-news-b1948894.html[/quote]
Sorry, 0.0262% for double jabbed.

CakesOfVersailles · 01/11/2021 21:51

@Whyevencare why would that matter when you are looking at rates and not raw numbers?

Toria84 · 01/11/2021 23:12

@CakesOfVersailles

Sorry if I’m being really stupid here, but what’s a non amp link?

OP posts:
CakesOfVersailles · 02/11/2021 03:11

@Toria84 Do you see how on your link it still has www.google.co.uk at the start despite being a link to a news website? And then it says /amp and there is also amp at the end.

AMP stands for Accelerated Mobile Pages and it helps load ads faster on mobile websites. AMP has changed a lot recently and a lot of the arguments for and against are no longer very relevant, but it's basically quite controversial.

bumbleymummy · 02/11/2021 08:41

[quote CakesOfVersailles]@Whyevencare why would that matter when you are looking at rates and not raw numbers?[/quote]
Because it includes figures from the start of the year when most of the vulnerable groups were still unvaccinated.

Sugarandtime · 02/11/2021 09:36

This is screen shots from the Government’s website for weeks 34-41 2001. So exact figures

Deaths within 28 days of a positive test result.

2745 deaths
12 unlinked. So total of 2726
502 unvaccinated
2224 had received at least one dose of vaccine

Can someone please explain these numbers to me??
Can someone please explain these numbers to me??
Sugarandtime · 02/11/2021 09:38

Apologies, 19 unlinked

So these figures are from last month when majority of us have received the injections

Toria84 · 02/11/2021 19:21

@Sugarandtime

So the deaths are higher amongst vaccinated people?

OP posts:
Tealightsandd · 02/11/2021 19:29

What would be interesting to know is which vaccine the vaccinated deaths were given. It might be evenly split, it might not. It could be helpful to know.

SnugKnights · 02/11/2021 19:35

[quote Toria84]@Sugarandtime

So the deaths are higher amongst vaccinated people?[/quote]
Yes because the vast majority of people are vaccinated. So it’s inevitable that most deaths will be in the vaccinated. They’ll be people who were CV/ECV mostly the elderly. So although the vaccine can still help to protect people in those groups they’re still more at risk even when vaccinated.

Sugarandtime · 02/11/2021 19:52

@Toria84

Yes, you are correct the vast majority of death are in the vaccinated. The complete opposite to what the main stream media report. As SnugKings wrote there will always be more deaths in certain groups but overall you cannot deny the actual figures the government have themselves reported.

It’s just a shame the msm like to report differently to create more of a divide in society.

Toria84 · 02/11/2021 19:54

It’s just a shame the msm like to report differently to create more of a divide in society.

@Sugarandtime

What do you mean by this?

OP posts:
Tealightsandd · 02/11/2021 19:54

That is because the vast majority of people are vaccinated.

Proportionally deaths amongst the unvaccinated are higher.

It's also worth looking abroad. Again, the vast majority of deaths are in the unvaccinated.

Tealightsandd · 02/11/2021 19:56

Immunity wanes after a period of time particularly astrazeneca (which is lower efficacy in the first place). Hence the boosters. The unvaccinated remain at higher risk.

duffeldaisy · 02/11/2021 20:20

The vaccine turns a potentially life-changing or life-threatening illness into a less serious one. But that doesn't mean no symptoms.

If someone's frail already, or elderly,

  1. Their immune system may not respond as well to the vaccines because their immune system is also elderly. So they may have less protection from getting it in the first place, and their antibodies are fewer.
  2. It doesn't necessarily take much to tip them over the edge.
So for someone who is elderly with COPD, for example, even a light bout before their antibodies kick in might be enough to kill them. Without the infection, plenty might have lived for years, though and their lives should be valued.

Because the take-up has been really successful in elderly and vulnerable groups means that, obviously, a large number of those kinds of cases will be among the double-jabbed.

If there are 100 vulnerable people in a room, 90% of them jabbed, if 50% of the unvaccinated died (5 people), and just 5 of the vaccinated people died, then antivaxxers would frame it as 'the same number of people died in each group, so it doesn't make a difference', when in fact being vaccinated clearly saved 40 people's lives.

summermode · 02/11/2021 20:20

mortality rate of unvaccinated is nearly 33 times of vaccinated. vaccine indeed makes huge difference.

But,vaccine alone is not enough (looking at the absolute figure)

duffeldaisy · 02/11/2021 20:28

"But,vaccine alone is not enough (looking at the absolute figure"

Exactly this.
It's the Swiss cheese thing that seems best - different layers of protection which aren't perfect, but all together keep cases down enough to stop it getting to the most vulnerable, and reduce the risks of mutation.

If everyone wore masks on public transport and in small spaces, that would help. Plus better ventilation everywhere (especially schools). Then proper sick pay and support for anyone who needs to take time off to isolate. Plus vaccines too. All those kinds of things done together and we'd massively reduce the numbers. It's only a virus. We can outwit it if enough people try together.

Sugarandtime · 02/11/2021 21:37

@summermode

mortality rate of unvaccinated is nearly 33 times of vaccinated. vaccine indeed makes huge difference.

But,vaccine alone is not enough (looking at the absolute figure)

I’m not sure I’d agree looking at the government figures which I posted upthread. Wasn’t that 33 times figure a headline in a msm paper? It’ll probably say the opposite tomorrow, they chop and change their headlines like a yo yo
New posts on this thread. Refresh page