Since the vaccine roll-out (28. Dec. 2020), rates of hospitalisation, ICU admission, and deaths among 'all-cause' vaccinated are at least (!) ten (!) times higher than for the 'unvaccinated'
1. PCR positivity rates: without separate PCR positivity rates broken down by vaccine status, it is very difficult to draw firm conclusions from comparisons of infection incidences across vaccine statuses. And yet they do!
Example: (all other things being equal - note: they are not, likely higher incidences of asymptomatic in vaxxed))
Consider infection rate/100k in vaxxed 1/3 of rate in unvaxxed BUT unvaxxed were tested 3x as often...?
If positivity rates are equal then we could infer "true" infection rates are also similar
If positivity rates are not equal then we "true" infection rates of vaxxed and unvaxxed could diverge or converge from to reported rates
2. Cohort composition and selection bias: without more detailed information about the unvaccinated population vs vaccinated, it is very difficult to draw firm conclusions from comparisons of hospitalisation/ICU/death incidences. And yet they try!
E.g. as you point out, we may assume the oldest, sickest, weakest, and most immune compromised are all to be found in the unvaccinated cohort. Previous studies also point to flu shot uptake being greater among the more health conscious and conversely lower among the more vulnerable. Cohorts are thus highly UNmatched! And then there is the issue of vary behaviour due to perceived protection/vulnerability.
3. Variants: how to compare infection/hospitalisation/ICU/death rates within vaxxed/unvaxxed cohorts across variants? Has treatment improved, is variant less virulent, is there selection bias within cohorts (as discussed in 2.)?
I think your approach is at least moving in this direction by comparing percentage increases within vax/unvax cohorts across time. Thank you!
4. Recovered Status: anothe issue is that there is no separate category for recovered thus they may confound vax effectivity calculations - some seem to assume this away with an equal distribution of recovered across unvaxxed/vaxxed but how can one know?
I personally tend to suspect there are disproportionaltely more in the unvaxxed group.
Re 1: I stayed away from 'cases' (i.e., testing) because this is an entirely different shitshow: the gov't changed its testing regime in autumn and moved to rapid tests, thereby totally screwing up any of this. Since the CT values remain unknown to the public (but they quite certainly changed as per WHO guidelines, which changed about a year ago), there's no use/need to get into the entire testing issue, methinks.
And that is on top of you, correctly, pointing out that 'unvaccinated' (and hypochondriacs) are quite likely to be overrepresented in the sample.
Re 2: the cohort/selection bias is so bad by now, it's hardly worth pointing it out--but it's necessary, as you're right about this, too.
Re 3: I'm glad you like this approach here; it's not mine, but I'm hopeful that 'someone' will soon look at these data in this way, too. I mean, these are all 'official numbers' (i.e., I doubt that they are 'true'), but even if they are 'tidied up a bit', they paint a more than clear image of the utter failure of vaccines 5+ months out (2 jabs, there's too little data available to assess the boosters* yet): if I'd be a politician now, it's well past time to talk damage control.
Re 4: judging from personal experiences and acqaintances, I'd bet you're correct about this, even though Omicron (being a/the vaccine escape variant) might complicate matters here.
*And now for the anecdotal bruaahahahaha: the triple-jabbed father of one of my elder daughter's classmates also came down with Covid a few days ago. His wife texted me that 'he's fine. The three shots of vaccine is [sic] helding, as it looks [like]'.
Imagine the mind-blowing realisation that the elephant in the room is actually: three jabs aren't offering much, if any, protection, are they? While I don't know when my neighbour got the 3rd jab, since he's in his mid-40s, I'd say sometime in late November/early December--and that makes vaccine failure obvious something that occurs, potentially, about a month after the 3rd jab.
Let's see how fast the rest of the pack abandons the remainder of their self-esteem and attack the public health authorities to divert from their own (utter) failure.
I read these same pieces, and I'm utterly disgusted (but certainly not surprised).
Entirely expectable, if beyond anything: Norwegians should probably do the exact opposite of what the former PM (who's also quite obese, by the way, while consuming unhealthy food and having red wine) has to say about 'health advice'.
It's revelatory, though, in a different way: maybe there will be Covid Passports, maybe there won't be (I hope not, but they will probably introduce them, but it's not for 'public health' reasons), but the key take-away is this:
Today it will be Covid Passports, tomorrow it will be 'Climate Passports', with everyone's room for maneouver curtailed according to one's CO2 emissions or otherwise.
Hence, resistance to Covid Passports is paramount.
We see a similar pattern in Australia, and elsewhere. Naturally, we would expect that since they follow the same script writers.
The Australian state of Victoria, or Wutoria, issued a rare "code brown" alert over hospitalisation, supposedly, because of omibud. So a TV crew went to film a hospital from a outside a door. As a camera zoomed in, it saw a female nurse strutting her stuff! She did not have enough practice like those Jerusalema dances in 2020.
"Long story short: shall we discuss the one remaining sales pitch for the vaccines in terms of ‘individual-level protection’ against hospitalisation, severe disease (ICU admission), and death now?"
Oh wow, a 'code brown', really? As in: brown-shirts, brown-out, and brown-nosing? Excellent. I frequently wonder these days who, exactly, are the PR and policy geniuses behind these amazing names.
I'm terribly sorry about the crazy place your country has turned into. From one metaphorical sailor to another, we're all in the same boat here, and I don't think you're holding back telling everyone.
I also saw the mass protests last weekend. Keep them up.
"The Victorian government will issue a statewide Code Brown for its health service, which may postpone leave for thousands of staff and defer non-essential services.
It is the first time that the emergency setting has been activated in multiple hospitals across the state.
A Code Brown is usually reserved for external emergencies such as natural disasters and mass casualty events.
"We've reached a point in our healthcare system where it's juggling extreme workforce shortages … alongside a vast number of patients with COVID-19 who require hospitalisation, alongside that an extraordinary workforce that are absolutely exhausted."
Around 4,000 health staff are currently unavailable because of COVID-19 infections."
I'll have some more thoughts on the 'new' materials later today or tomorrow.
As to the numbers per 100k people, I don't do them, and I don't do it for the following reason(s): they are meaningless (yeah, I know, most, if not all of these numbers are, but hear me out), and in a country such as Norway with this totally lopsided population distribution, they are doubly so. I mean, South-East Norway (i.e., the Oslo metro area) has 5x the hospitalisation rate compared to, say, Northern Norway; for a second example, let's talk about Vestland, home to Norway's second-largest city, Bergen, which has twice the number of hospitalisations compared to North Norway, which corresponds to slightly less than 40% of the Oslo metro area.
I don't see how these these numbers would be helpful in any way, shape, or form. I mean: there's this or that nuber of hospitalised in any given area, but if that's not put into perspective, these numbers along won't tell you anything. Just one example, Vestland has almost 640,000 inhabitants and less than 2,000 hospitalisations right now (source: that tool from the Helsedirektoratet)--yet, about half of these people live in/around Bergen, hence if you live, say, east of Voss, what would that number mean to you?
As to the above comment on 'streamlining' our healthcare system, this situation is squarely the result of 30+ years of (for want of a better term) 'neo-liberalisation'. It follows that we should have a serious national conversation about what we want as a society (ain't gonna happen), and as From Norway correctly says, Covid is simply the symptom; if there was, say, a large mudslide or an airplane crash, it would be the same result.
As to the quip about the median age of those affected, well, same here: you're right about the absurdities in the media. As to the related issue of co-morbidities, well, that's the last puzzle piece that's still missing.
By now we learned that 40% of those hospitalised 'for' Covid are actually in the hospital 'with' Covid. Now, I'd love to learn how many of the remaining 60% are there with serious underlying conditions. (My guess is: almost all of them.)
Who's calling out whom? LOL
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/
Ha, this is awesome--I enjoy a good prank as much as anyone.
Did you yell back?
Loudly
Excellent.
A couple of points:
1. PCR positivity rates: without separate PCR positivity rates broken down by vaccine status, it is very difficult to draw firm conclusions from comparisons of infection incidences across vaccine statuses. And yet they do!
Example: (all other things being equal - note: they are not, likely higher incidences of asymptomatic in vaxxed))
Consider infection rate/100k in vaxxed 1/3 of rate in unvaxxed BUT unvaxxed were tested 3x as often...?
If positivity rates are equal then we could infer "true" infection rates are also similar
If positivity rates are not equal then we "true" infection rates of vaxxed and unvaxxed could diverge or converge from to reported rates
2. Cohort composition and selection bias: without more detailed information about the unvaccinated population vs vaccinated, it is very difficult to draw firm conclusions from comparisons of hospitalisation/ICU/death incidences. And yet they try!
E.g. as you point out, we may assume the oldest, sickest, weakest, and most immune compromised are all to be found in the unvaccinated cohort. Previous studies also point to flu shot uptake being greater among the more health conscious and conversely lower among the more vulnerable. Cohorts are thus highly UNmatched! And then there is the issue of vary behaviour due to perceived protection/vulnerability.
3. Variants: how to compare infection/hospitalisation/ICU/death rates within vaxxed/unvaxxed cohorts across variants? Has treatment improved, is variant less virulent, is there selection bias within cohorts (as discussed in 2.)?
I think your approach is at least moving in this direction by comparing percentage increases within vax/unvax cohorts across time. Thank you!
4. Recovered Status: anothe issue is that there is no separate category for recovered thus they may confound vax effectivity calculations - some seem to assume this away with an equal distribution of recovered across unvaxxed/vaxxed but how can one know?
I personally tend to suspect there are disproportionaltely more in the unvaxxed group.
Re 1: I stayed away from 'cases' (i.e., testing) because this is an entirely different shitshow: the gov't changed its testing regime in autumn and moved to rapid tests, thereby totally screwing up any of this. Since the CT values remain unknown to the public (but they quite certainly changed as per WHO guidelines, which changed about a year ago), there's no use/need to get into the entire testing issue, methinks.
And that is on top of you, correctly, pointing out that 'unvaccinated' (and hypochondriacs) are quite likely to be overrepresented in the sample.
Re 2: the cohort/selection bias is so bad by now, it's hardly worth pointing it out--but it's necessary, as you're right about this, too.
Re 3: I'm glad you like this approach here; it's not mine, but I'm hopeful that 'someone' will soon look at these data in this way, too. I mean, these are all 'official numbers' (i.e., I doubt that they are 'true'), but even if they are 'tidied up a bit', they paint a more than clear image of the utter failure of vaccines 5+ months out (2 jabs, there's too little data available to assess the boosters* yet): if I'd be a politician now, it's well past time to talk damage control.
Re 4: judging from personal experiences and acqaintances, I'd bet you're correct about this, even though Omicron (being a/the vaccine escape variant) might complicate matters here.
*And now for the anecdotal bruaahahahaha: the triple-jabbed father of one of my elder daughter's classmates also came down with Covid a few days ago. His wife texted me that 'he's fine. The three shots of vaccine is [sic] helding, as it looks [like]'.
Imagine the mind-blowing realisation that the elephant in the room is actually: three jabs aren't offering much, if any, protection, are they? While I don't know when my neighbour got the 3rd jab, since he's in his mid-40s, I'd say sometime in late November/early December--and that makes vaccine failure obvious something that occurs, potentially, about a month after the 3rd jab.
Might even be inside the two weeks window. Maybe in the big cities is different, but in smaller places it was offered earliest in romjula.
The media start to react. See vg here: https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/bGdqqd/nye-grafer-saa-hoey-har-belastningen-vaert-paa-sykehusene?utm_source=vgfront&utm_content=hovedlopet_row1_pos1
I could have written it.
Ha, good one.
Let's see how fast the rest of the pack abandons the remainder of their self-esteem and attack the public health authorities to divert from their own (utter) failure.
I read these same pieces, and I'm utterly disgusted (but certainly not surprised).
I am not certain your view is shared by everyone. https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/9K0Bpd/solberg-vil-presse-frem-debatt-om-uvaksinerte
Oh, wow, this is something.
Entirely expectable, if beyond anything: Norwegians should probably do the exact opposite of what the former PM (who's also quite obese, by the way, while consuming unhealthy food and having red wine) has to say about 'health advice'.
It's revelatory, though, in a different way: maybe there will be Covid Passports, maybe there won't be (I hope not, but they will probably introduce them, but it's not for 'public health' reasons), but the key take-away is this:
Today it will be Covid Passports, tomorrow it will be 'Climate Passports', with everyone's room for maneouver curtailed according to one's CO2 emissions or otherwise.
Hence, resistance to Covid Passports is paramount.
And now Støre. I guess nobody is saving us from the corona pass. https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/rE3Vle/strammet-inn-coronapass-regler-i-berlin-naa-er-det-for-strengt
Not even when Eugyppius has already showed that having two vaccines is worse for deaths and hospitalizations than having none.
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/unboostered-brits-infected-and-dying
And now FHI loose gun. "The moment of freedom approaches". For once l agree.
https://www.vg.no/nyheter/innenriks/i/47G0Lg/fhi-topp-preben-aavitsland-frihetens-oeyeblikk-naermer-seg
Thanks, Fackel, for mentioning me.
What a pleasant surprise to wake up and read it.
We see a similar pattern in Australia, and elsewhere. Naturally, we would expect that since they follow the same script writers.
The Australian state of Victoria, or Wutoria, issued a rare "code brown" alert over hospitalisation, supposedly, because of omibud. So a TV crew went to film a hospital from a outside a door. As a camera zoomed in, it saw a female nurse strutting her stuff! She did not have enough practice like those Jerusalema dances in 2020.
See the video in a reply to https://t.me/AdamsEconomics/120
"Long story short: shall we discuss the one remaining sales pitch for the vaccines in terms of ‘individual-level protection’ against hospitalisation, severe disease (ICU admission), and death now?"
YES, please.
Oh wow, a 'code brown', really? As in: brown-shirts, brown-out, and brown-nosing? Excellent. I frequently wonder these days who, exactly, are the PR and policy geniuses behind these amazing names.
I'm terribly sorry about the crazy place your country has turned into. From one metaphorical sailor to another, we're all in the same boat here, and I don't think you're holding back telling everyone.
I also saw the mass protests last weekend. Keep them up.
"The Victorian government will issue a statewide Code Brown for its health service, which may postpone leave for thousands of staff and defer non-essential services.
It is the first time that the emergency setting has been activated in multiple hospitals across the state.
A Code Brown is usually reserved for external emergencies such as natural disasters and mass casualty events.
"We've reached a point in our healthcare system where it's juggling extreme workforce shortages … alongside a vast number of patients with COVID-19 who require hospitalisation, alongside that an extraordinary workforce that are absolutely exhausted."
Around 4,000 health staff are currently unavailable because of COVID-19 infections."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-01-18/victoria-records-more-covid-19-deaths-hospitalisations-and-cases/100762978
Hi PolarNinja, and welcome to my substack!
I'll have some more thoughts on the 'new' materials later today or tomorrow.
As to the numbers per 100k people, I don't do them, and I don't do it for the following reason(s): they are meaningless (yeah, I know, most, if not all of these numbers are, but hear me out), and in a country such as Norway with this totally lopsided population distribution, they are doubly so. I mean, South-East Norway (i.e., the Oslo metro area) has 5x the hospitalisation rate compared to, say, Northern Norway; for a second example, let's talk about Vestland, home to Norway's second-largest city, Bergen, which has twice the number of hospitalisations compared to North Norway, which corresponds to slightly less than 40% of the Oslo metro area.
I don't see how these these numbers would be helpful in any way, shape, or form. I mean: there's this or that nuber of hospitalised in any given area, but if that's not put into perspective, these numbers along won't tell you anything. Just one example, Vestland has almost 640,000 inhabitants and less than 2,000 hospitalisations right now (source: that tool from the Helsedirektoratet)--yet, about half of these people live in/around Bergen, hence if you live, say, east of Voss, what would that number mean to you?
A bad bus accident and the health system collapses. And it is not a joke.
Likewise, the pleasure is mine.
As to the above comment on 'streamlining' our healthcare system, this situation is squarely the result of 30+ years of (for want of a better term) 'neo-liberalisation'. It follows that we should have a serious national conversation about what we want as a society (ain't gonna happen), and as From Norway correctly says, Covid is simply the symptom; if there was, say, a large mudslide or an airplane crash, it would be the same result.
As to the quip about the median age of those affected, well, same here: you're right about the absurdities in the media. As to the related issue of co-morbidities, well, that's the last puzzle piece that's still missing.
By now we learned that 40% of those hospitalised 'for' Covid are actually in the hospital 'with' Covid. Now, I'd love to learn how many of the remaining 60% are there with serious underlying conditions. (My guess is: almost all of them.)
Nice to meet you.