Vaccine Progress, Approval, and Deployment

[The Ham]

Simple maths.

The vaccine has efficacy against infection of around 70% - ie 30% of people fully vaccinated can still catch it. The vaccine has much better efficacy against the illness being bad enough to cause hospitalisation, so while there are many infections, hospitalisations are much, much lower than pre vaccine (when we also had lockdown restrictions).

Also, there are still a lot of people unvaccinated: 20m+ in this country, although many are children. They have no protection other than natural immunity if they have had it.

I would be very interested to see data on the vaccination status of those hospitalised, split by age group. Is this in the public domain?

There's some data here:

Covid-19: How is vaccination affecting hospital admissions and deaths?

An analysis of UK data from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) and the Coronavirus Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN),1 endorsed by the UK Scientific and Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE),2 shows that of 40 000 patients with covid-19 who were admitted to hospital between...

www.bmj.com

For example, between the week beginning Monday 16 August 2021 and the week ending Sunday 12 September, the rate of hospital admissions of over 80s was 50.5 per 100 000 in the fully vaccinated and 143.9 per 100 000 in the unvaccinated, while deaths were 45.5 and 145.4 per 100 000, respectively. These trends were seen across the board. For example, for 60-69 year olds the hospital admission rates were 13.5 per 100 000 in the fully vaccinated and 74.3 per 100 000 in the unvaccinated, while deaths were 4.1 and 24.3 per 100 000, respectively.

 

[Farang]

Does anyone really use these excuses for not getting vaccinated? If you have not had one how do you know you will have side effects and minor side effects never did anyone any harm. The other two reasons you mentioned

I don't think a phobia of needles is pathetic, you can't comment on how bad someone's phobia is; that's not on. I don't have a phobia of needles but do of other things and only I know how I feel in such circumstances however irrational it may seem to someone else

My niece fainted after her first jab; her anxiety level was through the roof before her second.

 

[Bald Rick]

There's some data here:

Covid-19: How is vaccination affecting hospital admissions and deaths?

An analysis of UK data from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) and the Coronavirus Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN),1 endorsed by the UK Scientific and Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE),2 shows that of 40 000 patients with covid-19 who were admitted to hospital between...

www.bmj.com

Thank you, that’s a good read. And very clear!

 

[DustyBin]

Thank you, that’s a good read. And very clear!

I should point out yet again however that the unvaccinated currently make up 30-35% of hospital admissions.

 

[nedchester]

I should point out yet again however that the unvaccinated currently make up 30-35% of hospital admissions.

That’s significant when most of those likely to be hospitalised are vaccinated proving that vaccination helps prevent hospitalisation.

 

[DustyBin]

That’s significant when most of those likely to be hospitalised are vaccinated proving that vaccination helps prevent hospitalisation.

I don’t dispute it; the vaccines are effective in preventing serious illness and death it would be silly to argue otherwise. The issue I have is that people are being misled into thinking the unvaccinated account for the majority of hospital admissions, which they don’t.

What would be very interesting to know is how many of the unvaccinated hospitalisations (and deaths for that matter) are unvaccinated for medical reasons. I suspect, although I don’t have the data to back it up, a significant number fall into this category and that they are/were extremely high risk also.

 

[davews]

Detailed information from PHE/UKHSA:

COVID-19 vaccine quarterly surveillance reports (September 2021 to June 2023)

Data on the real-world effectiveness and impact of the COVID-19 vaccines.

www.gov.uk

If you believe these figures they are somewhat depressing and certainly show the vaccine doesn't stop you catching it and deaths in some age categories is a bit high for comfort.

 

[adc82140]

The significant figure is really how many vaccinated versus unvaccinated are ventilated in hospital, being ventilated because they can't breathe as a direct result of a Covid infection. As mentioned up thread the hospitalisation figures cover anything within 28 days of a positive test, even if you're actually in for 6 hours having an ingrowing toenail removed. Incidentally, the amount of ventilated people has been pretty much flat since the summer, and has indeed dipped a bit in the autumn.

Detailed information from PHE/UKHSA:

COVID-19 vaccine quarterly surveillance reports (September 2021 to June 2023)

Data on the real-world effectiveness and impact of the COVID-19 vaccines.

www.gov.uk

If you believe these figures they are somewhat depressing and certainly show the vaccine doesn't stop you catching it and deaths in some age categories is a bit high for comfort.

People over 80 die for a lot of reasons. If you are 80, you have a 1 in 10 chance of dying this year for any reason. Statistically, now that over 90% of this age group have been vaccinated, many of those will die having been double jabbed but still testing positive in the preceding 28 days. It doesn't mean that Covid has killed them. We know that the jabs are only about 70% effective at preventing symptomatic disease, possibly less in this age group. That's why they are getting booster jabs.

 

[Bantamzen]

Detailed information from PHE/UKHSA:

COVID-19 vaccine quarterly surveillance reports (September 2021 to June 2023)

Data on the real-world effectiveness and impact of the COVID-19 vaccines.

www.gov.uk

If you believe these figures they are somewhat depressing and certainly show the vaccine doesn't stop you catching it and deaths in some age categories is a bit high for comfort.

Sorry but why is this depressing? It reports that the risk of hospitalisation is down by at least 90%, that is great news.

 

[Bald Rick]

Detailed information from PHE/UKHSA:

COVID-19 vaccine quarterly surveillance reports (September 2021 to June 2023)

Data on the real-world effectiveness and impact of the COVID-19 vaccines.

www.gov.uk

If you believe these figures they are somewhat depressing and certainly show the vaccine doesn't stop you catching it and deaths in some age categories is a bit high for comfort.

That’s great, thanks

I don’t see why anyone should not believe these figures. They are official, with numerous peer reviewed sources and references.

Neither are they depressing. The vaccine was never going to stop people being infected, but it significantly reduces the chances. Similarly, if you do catch it, the chances of being hospitalised are decided (by about 75%).

 

[big_rig]

Quiz question: do stories like this from ‘experts’ promote or hinder the cause of increasing vaccination coverage? Are people who haven’t bothered to get it going to be more encouraged to do so by a message which roughly translates to ‘vaccines aren’t that good anyway?’

I also note the esteemed professor was speaking ‘virtually from Portugal.’ Travelling ‘during a pandemic’ - fine for some.

Bristol professor's 'winter meltdown' covid-19 warning

He suggested implementing ‘some kind of Plan B’

www.bristolpost.co.uk

Bristol Professor Adam Finn tells Sky News we can’t rely on vaccines to avoid ‘meltdown’​

​

 

[DustyBin]

Quiz question: do stories like this from ‘experts’ promote or hinder the cause of increasing vaccination coverage? Are people who haven’t bothered to get it going to be more encouraged to do so by a message which roughly translates to ‘vaccines aren’t that good anyway?’

I also note the esteemed professor was speaking ‘virtually from Portugal.’ Travelling ‘during a pandemic’ - fine for some.

Bristol professor's 'winter meltdown' covid-19 warning

He suggested implementing ‘some kind of Plan B’

www.bristolpost.co.uk

​

We’ve also had Harries and then Boris stating that the vaccines offer very little protection against infection and transmission. It seems odd that they would seek to undermine the efficacy of the very thing they’re trying to promote! Either way, we were lied to previously or we’re being lied to now, the question is why? (The obvious answer is that they want to scare people into getting their third jab, but again it’s a risky strategy IMO).

 

[davews]

Maybe when I used the word 'depressing' earlier it was a bit of an over-reaction. The clear thing from the PHE/UKHSA reports is that vaccines do little to reduce the spread although they offer significant reduction in hospitalisations and deaths.
On a related matter, as someone who had both doses of AZ earlier in the year has there been an official statement from AZ that use of Pfizer as a booster is allowed. The patient information leaflet I was given in May clearly states that the second dose (and presumably any others) should be of AZ and no other. Who decided that AstaZeneca is now not available for boosters?

 

[The Ham]

I should point out yet again however that the unvaccinated currently make up 30-35% of hospital admissions.

Whilst not a majority, clearly a significant number given that 86% of 12+ year olds have had at least a signature dose of a vaccine.

As such, on that basis, the unvaccinated are at about double the risk of going into hospital than those with at least a single dose.

 

[Bald Rick]

The clear thing from the PHE/UKHSA reports is that vaccines do little to reduce the spread

Vaccines do a lot to reduce the spread. by reducing the chance of infection by c 70%, they effectively reduce the R number by 70%. That’s why infections now are broadly the same as they were between December 20 and February this year, when we were in lockdown - schools closed, all entertainment and hospitality closed, no household mixing, etc etc.

 

[yorksrob]

Vaccines do a lot to reduce the spread. by reducing the chance of infection by c 70%, they effectively reduce the R number by 70%. That’s why infections now are broadly the same as they were between December 20 and February this year, when we we’re in lockdown - schools closed, all entertainment and hospitality closed, no household mixing, etc etc.

This point needs to be emphasized.

 

[Mag_seven]

Quiz question: do stories like this from ‘experts’ promote or hinder the cause of increasing vaccination coverage? Are people who haven’t bothered to get it going to be more encouraged to do so by a message which roughly translates to ‘vaccines aren’t that good anyway?’

I also note the esteemed professor was speaking ‘virtually from Portugal.’ Travelling ‘during a pandemic’ - fine for some.

Bristol professor's 'winter meltdown' covid-19 warning

He suggested implementing ‘some kind of Plan B’

www.bristolpost.co.uk

​

People like that are no better than anti-vaccers and the thing is they don't even see it.

 

[DustyBin]

Vaccines do a lot to reduce the spread. by reducing the chance of infection by c 70%, they effectively reduce the R number by 70%. That’s why infections now are broadly the same as they were between December 20 and February this year, when we were in lockdown - schools closed, all entertainment and hospitality closed, no household mixing, etc etc.

Apologies as I know I’m repeating myself here, but we’re now being told that this isn’t the case. Why I’m not sure, but the message is very clear. Whether it’s accurate or not is another matter.

This point needs to be emphasized.

And yet the “experts” are now saying exactly the opposite. As I said previously, if they’re trying to scare people into getting their third dose I don’t think this is the way to go about it.

 

[Bald Rick]

Apologies as I know I’m repeating myself here, but we’re now being told that this isn’t the case. Why I’m not sure, but the message is very clear. Whether it’s accurate or not is another matter.

I haven’t seen any such ‘news’, but then I do have a ‘bulls***t’ filter in my head that automatically skips any news items that are rubbish.

 

[Busaholic]

Apologies as I know I’m repeating myself here, but we’re now being told that this isn’t the case. Why I’m not sure, but the message is very clear. Whether it’s accurate or not is another matter.



And yet the “experts” are now saying exactly the opposite. As I said previously, if they’re trying to scare people into getting their third dose I don’t think this is the way to go about it.

People who've been vaccinated aren't at all scared about getting their third dose: it's a case of waiting for this shambolic government to organise getting the right number of doses in the right places at the right time, something they formerly managed to a reasonably successful degree.

 

[DustyBin]

I haven’t seen any such ‘news’, but then I do have a ‘bulls***t’ filter in my head that automatically skips any news items that are rubbish.

You clearly haven’t been looking at much news at all then… We’ve had Harries, Boris and then some “expert” today on Sky News who’s name I didn’t catch saying the same thing. They may be lying and I don’t trust any of them to be honest, but just because you don’t want something to be true it doesn’t mean it isn’t.

People who've been vaccinated aren't at all scared about getting their third dose: it's a case of waiting for this shambolic government to organise getting the right number of doses in the right places at the right time, something they formerly managed to a reasonably successful degree.

I think you’ve misunderstood my point. I’m not claiming people are scared of getting their third dose, the government may be trying to encourage them however by claiming the vaccines don’t offer protection against infection and transmission and that immunity wanes over time. This is unnecessary in my opinion (unless of course they’re actually telling the truth, which would mean the science has changed fairly dramatically in a short space of time).

 

[kez19]

Quiz question: do stories like this from ‘experts’ promote or hinder the cause of increasing vaccination coverage? Are people who haven’t bothered to get it going to be more encouraged to do so by a message which roughly translates to ‘vaccines aren’t that good anyway?’

I also note the esteemed professor was speaking ‘virtually from Portugal.’ Travelling ‘during a pandemic’ - fine for some.

Bristol professor's 'winter meltdown' covid-19 warning

He suggested implementing ‘some kind of Plan B’

www.bristolpost.co.uk

​

I’d ask something else … well what do they want or what’s the solution other than trot lockdown/masks/hygiene etc, what’s the solution then? I see media don’t ask or bother challenge it from that angle.

Media have become so predictable you couldn’t make it up.

As for him being in Portugal it’s because he is special compared to you or I! One rule for you another…

 

[AlterEgo]

As for him being in Portugal it’s because he is special compared to you or I! One rule for you another…

You're allowed to go to Portugal.

He doesn't suggest you shouldn't be allowed to travel.

 

[yorkie]

People like Adam Finn are best ignored; they live in the bubble of academia and would not be able to hack it in real world jobs.

He's an attention seeker and his rants are just part of the latest culture war; he's part of the far left authoritarian brigade who need to be ignored.

People like that are no better than anti-vaccers and the thing is they don't even see it.

These extreme academic types cannot see the bigger picture.

Apologies as I know I’m repeating myself here, but we’re now being told that this isn’t the case. Why I’m not sure, but the message is very clear. Whether it’s accurate or not is another matter.



And yet the “experts” are now saying exactly the opposite. As I said previously, if they’re trying to scare people into getting their third dose I don’t think this is the way to go about it.

Some experts claim vaccines do not reduce transmission but the evidence says otherwise.

If vaccines did not reduce transmission, why are rates of transmission so much higher in vaccinated individuals? Earlier in the pandemic, the rate of detected transmission among children was very low compared to older populations; now this has been completely reversed with the rates among children several times higher than over 60s.

The problem with some of these people is that they cannot see real world evidence; they are too busy looking at theoretical minutiae.

I’d ask something else … well what do they want or what’s the solution other than trot lockdown/masks/hygiene etc, what’s the solution then? I see media don’t ask or bother challenge it from that angle.

Far left authoritarians (which include some individuals working in academia who are out of touch with reality) are absolutely desperate to get people wearing face masks, as this is a symbol of compliance. It is highly symbolic but will not bring cases down for obvious reasons.

Some of these odious individuals sense that cases are going to start to come down relatively soon, and therefore they are keen to get such measures mandated urgently, so that they can be credited with any reduction in cases. They are huffing and puffing on social media and desperately trying to get any media outlet to give them airtime. They're sad and pathetic and we need to ignore them.

 

[kez19]

You're allowed to go to Portugal.

He doesn't suggest you shouldn't be allowed to travel.

Whilst I see your point but giving these experts airtime this will or would be the next to be talked about again.

 

[The Ham]

Perhaps the confusion is down to the news stories which say that passing on Covid isn't reduced by the vaccine (i.e. if you get Covid the likelihood of passing it on is the same as without the vaccine).

However that's very different to how likely it is to catch the virus, which is where the vaccine shows those reduction figures.

Both have been reported, unfortunately sometimes when the former is reported it doesn't explain that to get it in the first place is much reduced by the vaccine.

 

[Bald Rick]

You clearly haven’t been looking at much news at all then… We’ve had Harries, Boris and then some “expert” today on Sky News who’s name I didn’t catch saying the same thing. They may be lying and I don’t trust any of them to be honest, but just because you don’t want something to be true it doesn’t mean it isn’t.

Ah, I don’t watch Sky news.

 

[DustyBin]

Ah, I don’t watch Sky news.

A wise choice!

 

[greyman42]

Some of these odious individuals sense that cases are going to start to come down relatively soon, and therefore they are keen to get such measures mandated urgently, so that they can be credited with any reduction in cases. They are huffing and puffing on social media and desperately trying to get any media outlet to give them airtime. They're sad and pathetic and we need to ignore them.

This is exactly as i see it. They are desperate for masks to be mandated so they can say that this is what caused cases to fall. If they fail to get masks mandated and cases fall, it will be a serious blow to them being able to call for the return of masks in the future. Sajid Javid must hold firm.

 

[DustyBin]

This is exactly as i see it. They are desperate for masks to be mandated so they can say that this is what caused cases to fall. If they fail to get masks mandated and cases fall, it will be a serious blow to them being able to call for the return of masks in the future. Sajid Javid must hold firm.

Agreed, we need to win this one.