COVID-19 Coronavirus current events

Mendel

Senior Member.
That's correct.
Article:
covidhospitalizationsinfographic_dec20_122021.jpg

This roughly reflects vaccine efficacy because Michigan's vaccination rate is 63% (first vaccinations), which puts vaccinated:unvaccinated at around 3:2; to compare them, all "vaccinated" numbers should be multiplied by 2/3.
As more people in Michigan get vaccinated, their proportion in hospitals will grow correspondingly, so watch out against people misinterpreting that.
U of Michigan is now showing boosters as well. Note that older population segments have better booster coverage, but also higher risk of severe disease, so this graph does not indicate booster efficiency.
Article:
covidhospitalizationsinfographic_jan17REV_011722.jpg
 

Agent K

Senior Member
U of Michigan is now showing boosters as well. Note that older population segments have better booster coverage, but also higher risk of severe disease, so this graph does not indicate booster efficiency.
Article:
covidhospitalizationsinfographic_jan17REV_011722.jpg
This doesn't look good for boosters, frankly. The under-65 fraction of boosted patients is about a quarter of the 17 in the hospital, and a quarter of the 4 in the ICU, and half of the two on ventilators.
The boosted fraction of vaccinated patients is a third of the 51 in the hospital, and a third of the 6 on ventilators.
This might all be explained by other factors, but still, I wouldn't expect to see boosted patients under 65 on ventilators.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
This doesn't look good for boosters, frankly. The under-65 fraction of boosted patients is about a quarter of the 17 in the hospital, and a quarter of the 4 in the ICU, and half of the two on ventilators.
The boosted fraction of vaccinated patients is a third of the 51 in the hospital, and a third of the 6 on ventilators.
This might all be explained by other factors, but still, I wouldn't expect to see boosted patients under 65 on ventilators.
I think you're overinterpreting the numbers, given what little we know.
I recommend instead looking at the weekly death rates in my previous post at https://www.metabunk.org/threads/covid-19-coronavirus-current-events.11085/post-264367 , they're based on more data and don't have selection bias.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
The WA DOH had/has a very thorough weekly report on "COVID-19 Cases, Hospitalizations, and Deaths by Vaccination Status", but they're not reporting boosters yet.
Article:
January 19, 2022, Summary

Unvaccinated 12-34 year-olds in Washington are
• 2 times more likely to get COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 12-34 year-olds.
• 5 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 12-34 year-olds.

Unvaccinated 35-64 year-olds are
• 3 times more likely to get COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 35-64 year-olds.
• 8 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 35-64 year-olds.

Unvaccinated 65+ year-olds are
• 4 times more likely to get COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 65+ year-olds.
• 7 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 65+ year-olds.

That's current data that should apply to Omicron: cases December 15 to January 11, hospitalisations December 08 to January 04, 2022.
 

FatPhil

Senior Member.
there are alot less boosted people in hospital than non boosted.

What matters is what proportion of boosted people vs. proportion of non-boosted people are in hospital, which requires knowing the total number of boostees and non-boostees. I couldn't see that stat, even from the webpage @Mendel linked to. I have no idea about MI, but here our boost ratio (out of vaxed which is 62% of whole) is about 43%, which means that you'd expect somewhat fewer boosted hospitalisations here, as there are fewer boostees to hospitalise.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
What matters is what proportion of boosted people vs. proportion of non-boosted people are in hospital, which requires knowing the total number of boostees and non-boostees. I couldn't see that stat, even from the webpage @Mendel linked to. I have no idea about MI, but here our boost ratio (out of vaxed which is 62% of whole) is about 43%, which means that you'd expect somewhat fewer boosted hospitalisations here, as there are fewer boostees to hospitalise.
I looked for them, but they're hard to find. I found some official stats about institutions in Michigan that have over 60% of their residents boosted, but under 30% of their staff, which made me think that vulnerable populations were more likely to be boosted; hence my comment on my post with that graph.
(Note that e.g. obesity doesn't have a triangle either.)
 

Agent K

Senior Member
the white triangle does not necessarily indicate they are over 65.
Fine, over 65, immunocompromised, or with significant underlying lung disease, even better. Same point.
there are alot less boosted people in hospital than non boosted.
That's what I said, it's a third of the vaccinated patients, which is still more than I expected after hearing doctors say things like this:
Article:
Delgado said that he "hardly saw anyone who had gotten a booster because if they caught COVID-19 they're likely at home doing fine or having regular cold/flu-like symptoms."
About 40% of vaccinated Michigan residents received a booster.
https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/0,9753,7-406-98178_103214_103272-547150--,00.html

The booster may keep some people out of the hospital, but once they're hospitalized, it doesn't seem to prevent ICU or ventilator use in that one chart.
I'd expect boosted patients on ventilators to be extremely immunocompromised or old, but half of them aren't, and for that matter, half of vaccinated patients on ventilators aren't, versus only one third of unvaccinated patients on ventilators in that chart.
 
Last edited:

Mendel

Senior Member.

UK Health Security Agency - England


COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report: 20 January 2022 (week 3)


via https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-surveillance-reports

Excerpts:
Article:
SmartSelect_20220120-163108_Samsung Notes.jpg
SmartSelect_20220120-163432_Samsung Notes.jpg
Studies have now reported on vaccine effectiveness against infection in healthcare workers, care home residents and the general population with the Alpha and Delta variants (12, 13, 14, 15). Generally estimates are similar to or slightly lower than vaccine effectiveness estimates against symptomatic disease and there is evidence of significant waning in protection against infection over time. Estimates for vaccine effectiveness against infection with the Omicron variant are not yet available.

Effectiveness against transmission
As described above, several studies have provided evidence that vaccines are effective at preventing infection. Uninfected individuals cannot transmit; therefore, the vaccines are also provide some protection against transmission. There may be additional benefit, beyond that due to prevention of infection, if some of those individuals who become infected despite vaccination are also at a reduced risk of transmitting (for example, because of reduced duration or level of viral shedding). Several studies have provided evidence of reduced risk of household transmission from vaccinated cases compared to unvaccinated cases (16, 17, 18, 19).

SmartSelect_20220120-163646_Samsung Notes.jpg

This report provides first the early data on COVID-19 vaccination in pregnant women and provides preliminary findings.
SmartSelect_20220120-163927_Samsung Notes.jpg

SmartSelect_20220120-164504_Samsung Notes.jpg

The last graph shows that about a quarter of the UK population has been infected with Covid. Thus varies by age and region; for young Londoners, it's more than a third.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
The booster may keep some people out of the hospital, but once they're hospitalized, it doesn't seem to prevent ICU or ventilator use in that one chart.
unless the surrounding county hospitals transfer their more difficult cases to the University hospital
which would confound your ratios

please do not draw conclusions that your information about the data set will not support
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
, which means that you'd expect somewhat fewer boosted hospitalisations here, as there are fewer boostees to hospitalise.
oh. i see how you are looking at it.
so @Agent K was right. it doesn't look good for boosters frankly. huh.


I found some official stats about institutions in Michigan
https://www.michigan.gov/coronavirus/0,9753,7-406-98178_103214-547150--,00.html

note: problem, as CDC notes (and connecticut numbers all but verify), American is recording some booster doses as first doses. i have no idea why our computer systems are so inept.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
after hearing doctors say things like this:
yea the bulk of media is definitely quoting doctors that are exaggerating. i see that in my state all the time.

add: also in America covid hospitalizations dont mean they are sick with covid. people go on ventilators for other things.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
If I'm less likely to be infected, I'm also less likely to infect others, since the former is a prerequisite
for the latter. I believe that the severity of the infection (and my behaviour) determines how many other people I endanger.
and if "protection against symptomatic disease" is a proxy for transmissibility, then the difference is more than 2-fold
Explicit support for these two statements of mine is in post #1131.
 

Agent K

Senior Member
unless the surrounding county hospitals transfer their more difficult cases to the University hospital
which would confound your ratios

please do not draw conclusions that your information about the data set will not support
Wouldn't the more difficult cases be unvaccinated? Based on all the other stuff I've read, I expected fewer boosted patients under 65 in the ICU and on ventilators, what can I say. How many did you expect? Does the chart make boosters look good to you?
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
Wouldn't the more difficult cases be unvaccinated?
Wouldn't these be deemed hopeless?
Does the chart make boosters look good to you?
I refuse to draw conclusions about boosters from this chart, because it is
• a small data set
• with unknown confounders.

Please draw conclusions about boosters from the UK data I have just posted, it's bigger and better.
 

NorCal Dave

Senior Member.
I'd expect boosted patients on ventilators to be extremely immunocompromised or old, but half of them aren't, and for that matter, half of vaccinated patients on ventilators aren't, versus only one third of unvaccinated patients on ventilators.
But at this point, with this graph, it's one (1) person right? One guy under 65 without the identified underlying issues. If, as Mendel suggested in #1129, obesity is not listed as an underlying issue, than this one guy could be fully vaxed and boosted and over 400lbs. (28.5 stone). Or it 's just a clerical error, and this guy is really 85. Or, it's one guy that just is genetically unlucky and very susceptible COVID.

Maybe I'm missing it, but isn't this the same person:
1642696055647.png
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
Then why post it?
I thought the comparison to a month ago is interesting.
I didn't expect that me writing "this graph does not indicate booster efficiency" would prompt you to go ahead and abuse it like that anyway. :confused:
Don't blame this on me.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
Maybe I'm missing it, but isn't this the same person:
Yes. The accompanying text clearly states, "Total patients hospitalized: 123".

Maybe the vaccination "didn't take" for them. Over here, we've had criminal cases of "vaccinations" done without vaccine on unsuspecting people.
 
Last edited:

Agent K

Senior Member
properly fitted [surgical or n95] masks are more important than boosters for that. Everyone needs to assume they might be contagious at any time.
Which non-symptomatic person would you rather sit next to, someone not boosted but wearing a surgical mask, or boosted but without a mask, or -bonus choice- not boosted or masked but with a negative rapid antigen test?

I wouldn't want to sit next to any of them without wearing an N-95 respirator myself. Now, if they're boosted and wearing a mask, or not boosted but wearing an N-95 respirator, or they had a negative PCR test earlier that day, or they recovered from the omicron variant, then I'd sit next to them.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
Which non-symptomatic person would you rather sit next to, someone not boosted but wearing a surgical mask, or boosted but without a mask, or -bonus choice- not boosted or masked but with a negative rapid antigen test?
boosted plus mask, negative test is a bonus

none of the options you list are legal where I live

and this is our hospitalisation rate (per 100,000 over 7 days) for the past month (was deep in the orange in December)
SmartSelect_20220120-211909_Samsung Internet.jpg
 
Last edited:

Agent K

Senior Member
i was specific in my original comment that they need to be worn and fitted properly.
But you have little control over that, and the above screenshot shows that medical masks don't form a tight seal even when worn properly, which is why the CDC advised double-masking or using a brace. What's the point of having a nice meltblown electrostatic filter if there are gaps big enough to drive a truck through?
 
Last edited:

deirdre

Senior Member.
medical masks don't form a tight seal even when worn properly,
he isnt wearing it properly.
and yeah if someone was blowing through their mask or coughing through their mask, i would certainly move.

*i do though want to give a thumbs up to the kids in Connecticut. all ages, i dont know if they are being taught in school but even the vast majority (90-95%) of high schoolers i see walking around with masks have them fitted as properly as possible.
Adults here for the most part (75-80% wear them right IF they wear them at all), but i'm impressed with the kids.
 

Agent K

Senior Member
he isnt wearing it properly.
He isn't? You can see how he puts it on in the video and says, "These have all been kind of fitted to my face already just to make sure I was ready with the best seal possible."
Source: https://youtu.be/almtH9kipl0?t=90

I have the same problem with medical masks, like fogging up my shades.

*i do though want to give a thumbs up to the kids in Connecticut. all ages, i dont know if they are being taught in school but even the vast majority (90-95%) of high schoolers i see walking around with masks have them fitted as properly as possible.
Adults here for the most part (75-80% wear them right IF they wear them at all), but i'm impressed with the kids.
I noticed this too. People think children don't have the discipline to wear facemasks properly, but in my experience they do it better than adults.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
"These have all been kind of fitted to my face already just to make sure I was ready with the best seal possible."
its hanging like half an inch below his chin and his sides are a big hole.

i tie my elastics to shorter loops and fold then staple my mask under my chin. this also makes the sides lie flat.
my mom staples her sides so they are flat, but she has that underchin fat, so her mask is more snug under there.

I have the same problem with medical masks, like fogging up my shades.
this lady has a good cure
Source: https://youtu.be/s3Y26UGulrI?t=56
 

Agent K

Senior Member
its hanging like half an inch below his chin and his sides are a big hole.

i tie my elastics to shorter loops and fold then staple my mask under my chin. this also makes the sides lie flat.
my mom staples her sides so they are flat, but she has that underchin fat, so her mask is more snug under there.

this lady has a good cure
You can do hacks to improve the fit, but then you're the one deviating from the "proper" way the mask was designed to be worn. The CDC recommends the knot-and-tuck method as well, but when the mask gets untucked, it still has holes on the sides. Why couldn't the mask be designed properly in the first place?
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
I'm just disappointed because I did the work to read and excerpt data from the UK that came out today, and then that gets absolutely buried in squabbles over worse data, and surgical masks 2 years into the pandemic on a "current events" thread (just wear N95/FFP2, the price has come way down). Your opinion on what is better is not a current event, it's chitchat.
 

Agent K

Senior Member
Article:
U.S. to distribute 400 million free N95 masks at CVS, Walgreens in COVID fight

The U.S. government will make 400 million non-surgical "N95" masks from its strategic national stockpile available for free to the public starting next week, a White House official said, as the Biden administration tries to curb the COVID-19 pandemic.

The move comes after President Joe Biden and his team faced criticism for not doing enough to foster masking or bolster testing as the Omicron variant rages across the country, and hospitalizations hit a new record.
The administration also made free rapid home tests available via a website that launched officially on Wednesday.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
Nope, you can't use Estonian data to help you interpret Michegan data. I thought I had made that clear when I first proffered it.
you didnt make it clear this second time you proffered it either. :)

i think the Michigan data makes the boosters look good. I'm ok with people disagreeing with me.
 

deirdre

Senior Member.
I'm just disappointed because I did the work to read and excerpt data from the UK that came out today, and then that gets absolutely buried in squabbles
so repost it. you didn't say why you were posting it. looks the same as everything else you post, and everything we already knew.

and i personally didnt feel like digging into a large report to try and figure out how you got "about a quarter of the UK population has been infected with Covid" from a graph of blood donors.

we're done with our talk on masks vs boosters as they relate to Omicron now, repost it.
 

Mendel

Senior Member.
Well, it's updated data about Omicron; I did not know that vaccine uptake among the immunosuppressed is 95% in England, common appeals are "we must protect the immunosuppressed"; and the data on pregnancy and vaccination appears to be new.
and i personally didnt feel like digging into a large report to try and figure out how you got "about a quarter of the UK population has been infected with Covid" from a graph of blood donors.
You could always ask a question instead.
Excerpts:
Article:
SmartSelect_20220120-164504_Samsung Notes.jpg

The last graph shows that about a quarter of the UK population has been infected with Covid. Thus varies by age and region; for young Londoners, it's more than a third.
The red curve indicates donors that had a Covid infection in the past, and most recently that value has gone up to ~25% = a quarter. If the infection risk for blood donors in England is similar to the infection risk in the overall UK population, then about a quarter of the UK population has been exposed to Covid in the past.

Not-so-obviously, this number is probably outdated now, as the UK has managed to add a million confirmed cases in the first week of January alone (population: 67 million). For comparison, it took the UK almost until November 2020 to reach its first million confirmed cases.
 
Last edited:
Top