Covid-19 reports

[gumbyk]

By the way you are not calculating your fatality rates correctly. I am sure you are fully aware of that though. Its the great thing about statistics. Everyone (and I mean everyone) manipulates them to support their agenda.

Non-vaccinated actually have a fatality rate of 1.11%, partially vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.08% and fully vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.02%.

To portray this correctly you have you divide the number of cases (63 for vaccinated for example) and divide it by the total cases (403,668). That gives you the actual fatality rate.

What you are portraying shows the rate for each group, but not the overall actual rate. This falsely makes it appear as if vaccinated people are dying more than unvaccinated which is "fake news". This is a classic example of manipulating statistics. Some call it "alternative facts". I think we have had enough misinformation though…

I think that's his goal.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics.

 

[33k in the air]

Ontario
Public Health Ontario data covering Dec. 14, 2020, through Aug. 21, 2021. Published Aug. 31, 2021. Confirmed cases of COVID-19 following vaccination in the province of Ontario.

Detailed breakout by age and vaccination status.

Data Source

Hospitalization Rate
Age: Unvaccinated | Partially Vaccinated | Fully Vaccinated (hospitalizations / cases)

12-17 years: . 0.46% (113 / 24,662) .. .| . 1.70% (4 / 235) . . . . | . 0.00% (0 / 53)
18-29 years: . 0.86% (860 / 100,148) ..| . 0.33% (8 / 2,439) .. . | . 0.27% (2 / 741)
30-39 years: . 2.09% (1,388 / 66.272). | . 0.72% (15 / 2,077) .. | . 1.28% (9 / 705)
40-49 years: . 3.35% (1,899 / 56,762) .| . 1.65% (38 / 2,306) .. | . 1.02% (6 / 587)
50-59 years: . 5.84% (3,164 / 54,145) .| . 3.46% (106 / 3,066) .| . 1.58% (9 / 571)
60-69 years: 11.19% (3,542 / 31,643) .| . 6.04% (217 / 3,593) .| . 6.82% (33 / 484)
70-79 years: 23.40% (3,450 / 14,745) .| 14.18% (320 / 2,257) .| 11.17% (23 / 206)
80+ years: . .31.79% (3,698 / 11,631) .| 30.02% (623 / 2,075) .| 21.61% (94 / 435)

ICU Admission Rate
Age: Unvaccinated | Partially Vaccinated | Fully Vaccinated (ICU admissions / cases)

12-17 years: 0.06% (15 / 24,662) .. ..| . 0.00% (0 / 235) . . . | . 0.00% (0 / 53)
18-29 years: 0.11% (109 / 100,148) .| . 0.00% (0 / 2,439) . | . 0.00% (0 / 741)
30-39 years: 0.35% (229 / 66.272).. | . 0.10% (2 / 2,077) .. | . 0.14% (1 / 705)
40-49 years: 0.71% (403 / 56,762) . .| . 0.22% (5 / 2,306) .. | . 0.00% (0 / 587)
50-59 years: .1.37% (743 / 54,145) . .| . 0.65% (20 / 3,066) .| . 0.35% (2 / 571)
60-69 years: .3.03% (958 / 31,643) .. | . 1.36% (49 / 3,593) .| . 2.07% (10 / 484)
70-79 years: .5.40% (796 / 14,745) .. | . 2.13% (48 / 2,257) .| . 1.94% (4 / 206)
80+ years: .. .2.73% (318 / 11,631) .. | . 2.75% (57 / 2,075) .| . 0.92% (4 / 435)

Fatality Rate
Age: Unvaccinated | Partially Vaccinated | Fully Vaccinated (deaths / cases)

12-17 years: . 0.00% (1 / 24,662) .. ... .| .. 0.00% (0 / 235) . . . | . 0.00% (0 / 53)
18-29 years: . 0.02% (23 / 100,148) .. .| .. 0.00% (0 / 2,439) . | . 0.00% (0 / 741)
30-39 years: . 0.07% (49 / 66.272).. . . | .. 0.00% (0 / 2,077) ... | . 0.00% (0 / 705)
40-49 years: . 0.20% (111 / 56,762) .. .| .. 0.22% (5 / 2,306) . . | . 0.00% (0 / 587)
50-59 years: ..0.58% (315 / 54,145) .. .| .. 0.23% (7 / 3,066) ... .| . 0.18% (1 / 571)
60-69 years: ..2.07% (656 / 31,643) ... | .. 1.03% (37 / 3,593) ...| . 1.03% (5 / 484)
70-79 years: ..7.18% (1,059 / 14,745) | .. 2.66% (60 / 2,257) ...| . 2.91% (6 / 206)
80+ years: ...19.73% (2,295 / 11,631) | .10.46% (217 / 2,075) .| .11.72% (51 / 435)

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Still doing it…

 

[at6]

Are you sure that he isn't related to Pops Paolo?

 

[The Basket]

There is a relative who is anti vaxx to the Maxx.

She has a PhD from YouTube.

 

[Marcel]

There is a relative who is anti vaxx to the Maxx.

She has a PhD from YouTube.

I also have a friend like that.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I also have a friend like that.

Its funny how many people barely passed 8th grade science and biology and all of a sudden are medical, virological, and statistical experts.

 

[SaparotRob]

Are you sure that he isn't related to Pops Paolo?

Punctuation is too good.

 

[The Basket]

Now my lung capacity had gone.

Ay Caramba. I am Donald Ducked.

 

[SaparotRob]

Now my lung capacity had gone.

Ay Caramba. I am Donald Ducked.

Man, you have my sympathies. It really must suck. I have no advice. Just hope the "discomfort " passes quickly.

 

[The Basket]

My goal is to say this is real.

I am real. I am not some bot or have an agenda.

So when I see or read any info from the anti vaxx or the conspiracy theorist then I can call nonsense on it.

 

[at6]

Praying for your recovery. Neighbor's daughter has been in hospital for last three weeks and no one knows when she will released. I belong to a local IPMS chapter and there is supposed to be a regional contest this weekend but I'm not going as it is an indoor venue. Updated member list indicates that one member has covid and another died 9/3/21 from it. I'm fully vaccinated but still not stupid.

 

[SaparotRob]

HA! Got you beat. I'm both.

 

[33k in the air]

What you are portraying shows the rate for each group, but not the overall actual rate.

That's the point. To show the rates within each vaccination status category. I thought this obvious.

How else can you compare whether the vaccines are indeed offer a lower rate of hospitalizations, ICU admissions, or deaths without separating the status groups and comparing the results of each status group to the others?

This falsely makes it appear as if vaccinated people are dying more than unvaccinated which is "fake news". This is a classic example of manipulating statistics. Some call it "alternative facts". I think we have had enough misinformation though…

They are on a rate basis WITHIN each group. The numbers are clearly listed. How anyone could get confused by them is a mystery to me.

1.25% = unvaccinated (4,509 deaths out of 381,838 unvaccinated cases)
1.81% = partially vaccinated (326 / 18,048)
1.67% = fully vaccinated (63 / 3,782)

The rate at which partially or fully vaccinated persons have died within their respective status group is higher than unvaccinated. It's right there in the numbers. It's not a large difference, to be sure -- four- to five-tenths of a percentage point. But there is a difference. The question is, will the rates within the partially and fully vaccinated groups stay at current levels or will they drop as the sample of cases gets larger? Are the rate differences a factor of the smaller sample sizes in the partially and fully vaccinated categories? Only time will tell.

Lumping all the deaths and cases together as you suggest hides the fact that there are definite in-group rate differences. I would call that deliberate obfuscation. I would call that "fake news", "alternative facts" and misinformation, to use your jargon.

Why would someone want to hide in-group rate differences?

 

[33k in the air]

By the way you are not calculating your fatality rates correctly. I am sure you are fully aware of that though. Its the great thing about statistics. Everyone (and I mean everyone) manipulates them to support their agenda.

Non-vaccinated actually have a fatality rate of 1.11%, partially vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.08% and fully vaccinated have a fatality rate of 0.02%.

To portray this correctly you have to divide the number of cases (63 for vaccinated for example) and divide it by the total cases (403,668). That gives you the actual fatality rate.

What you are portraying shows the rate for each group, but not the overall actual rate. This falsely makes it appear as if vaccinated people are dying more than unvaccinated which is "fake news". This is a classic example of manipulating statistics. Some call it "alternative facts". I think we have had enough misinformation though…

The in-group rates matter. They are not being discussed much because people such as yourself are lumping together apples, oranges, and lemons rather than looking at what is happening to the apples, oranges, and lemons individually.

If 5% of unvaccinated cases require hospitalization, but only 1% of fully vaccinated cases do, then clearly the vaccines are reducing the risk of hospitalization should one become infected. (It is beyond dispute that fully vaccinated individuals can become infected with COVID.)

But if 5% of fully vaccinated cases require hospitalization, then there is no difference in the rate, is there? In that instance, unvaccinated or fully vaccinated, you'd have the same 5% chance of being hospitalized if you became infected.

The question would be then, do the vaccines lower the chances of becoming infected in the first place? If they do, then having the same hospitalization rate is less of an issue, since that is outweighed by a lower chance of infection.

Do the vaccines significantly lower the chances of being infected? This is a key question now that the rates within each vaccination status group are becoming better defined.

 

[ThomasP]

Hey 33k in the air,

re "Do the vaccines significantly lower the chances of being infected? This is a key question now that the rates within each vaccination status group are becoming better defined."

Read the rest of the report you cite, then read it again, and if necessary again. The "key question" you appear to be unsure of the answer to is quite clearly answered by the numbers in the report.

The chance of a fully vaccinated person being infected is far less than for the unvaccinated, at least as far as the currently actively spreading strains of COVID-19 are concerned. This could of course change in the future if more 'aggressive' strains of the virus become active.

If you feel you are capable of analyzing numbers/statistics, why do you not use the numbers/statistics in the report to present the infection rate for the unvaccinated vs the fully vaccinated? The math is not any more difficult than for the calculations you have already done.

 

[ThomasP]

PS Here are some numbers you can use in the analysis.

As of 14:04 8 September 2021:

fully vaccinated: ~66% of all Canadians, or ~77% of the eligible population of age 12+
partially vaccinated: ~74% of all Canadians, or ~85% of the eligible population of age 12+
unvaccinated: ~26% of all Canadians, or ~15% of the eligible population of age 12+

 

[SaparotRob]

Hey 33k in the air,

re "Do the vaccines significantly lower the chances of being infected? This is a key question now that the rates within each vaccination status group are becoming better defined."

Read the rest of the report you cite, then read it again, and if necessary again. The "key question" you appear to be unsure of the answer to is quite clearly answered by the numbers in the report.

The chance of a fully vaccinated person being infected is far less than for the unvaccinated, at least as far as the currently actively spreading strains of COVID-19 are concerned. This could of course change in the future if more 'aggressive' strains of the virus become active.

If you feel you are capable of analyzing numbers/statistics, why do you not use the numbers/statistics in the report to present the infection rate for the unvaccinated vs the fully vaccinated? The math is not any more difficult than for the calculations you have already done.

oops

 

[ThomasP]

?

 

[SaparotRob]

Fat Finger Syndrome. Whilst scrolling, I accidentally hit the "Button Of No Escape", the reply button.