michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,917
Likes: 2,773
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 22, 2021 13:37:10 GMT
Does anyone know if there are figures about how many people that have been hospitalised or died from C-19 had been vaccinated at least 3 weeks prior to admission?
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Mar 22, 2021 14:29:09 GMT
I arrived back into the UK a few days ago, so have the joy of being able to report on the quarantining process.
Both my wife and I now each receive a call every day from DHSC to check up on us. That sounds sort of sensible in theory, but it's really not.
We're on day 3 now, and they just read from exactly the same script each time. This makes no sense.
So my 'conversation' today was:
Caller: "Am I talking to <garbled form of surname without first name>" Me: "Um, maybe? Say that again" Caller <incredibly botched attempt at what is really not that complicated a first name> ( 3 days in a row from 3 different people) Me: "Yes, that's me" Caller: "Can you confirm you're aware of the need to quarantine?" Me: " You guys called up yesterday and the day before, so yes, I haven't forgotten overnight" Caller " Are you aware of the need to take day 2 and day 8 tests? Me: " Yes I still am, but as advised yesterday, they're late and so I won't be taking the day 2 test on time. Hopefully today if it arrives." Caller <in the one deviation from the day 2 script> " As it is day 3, can you confirm you've taken your day 2 test already" Me: "Umm..."
They are clearly not even actually listening to anything you say beyond 'yes' and 'no'. I know this isn't really surprising, and I don't blame them at all, they're just doing what they've been told to do. However, I do reserve some ire for the person who designed these call scripts.
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,252
Likes: 2,695
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 22, 2021 14:39:26 GMT
Does anyone know if there are figures about how many people that have been hospitalised or died from C-19 had been vaccinated at least 3 weeks prior to admission? It is claimed the vaccines prevent severe illness and death so hopefully very few or none.
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Mar 22, 2021 14:43:02 GMT
Does anyone know if there are figures about how many people that have been hospitalised or died from C-19 had been vaccinated at least 3 weeks prior to admission? It is claimed the vaccines prevent severe illness and death so hopefully very few or none. On this. Is my understanding correct that we get those people in the stats who've just about managed to catch a small dose of COVID and then been hit by a lorry? If that is right, then I guess we'll always see some "COVID-19 deaths", but they may well be people who died with rather than from COVID - ?
|
|
Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,252
Likes: 2,695
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Mar 22, 2021 14:47:34 GMT
It is claimed the vaccines prevent severe illness and death so hopefully very few or none. On this. Is my understanding correct that we get those people in the stats who've just about managed to catch a small dose of COVID and then been hit by a lorry? If that is right, then I guess we'll always see some "COVID-19 deaths", but they may well be people who died with rather than from COVID - ? I thought they had stopped that silliness, but perhaps not!
|
|
r00lish67
Member of DD Central
Posts: 2,691
Likes: 4,048
|
Post by r00lish67 on Mar 22, 2021 14:50:25 GMT
On this. Is my understanding correct that we get those people in the stats who've just about managed to catch a small dose of COVID and then been hit by a lorry? If that is right, then I guess we'll always see some "COVID-19 deaths", but they may well be people who died with rather than from COVID - ? I thought they had stopped that silliness, but perhaps not! They may have done, honestly not sure. What I do know is that Poland split out their report into dying of/from, and the number reported on Worldometers is the combination. Hence my (possibly incorrect) assumption.
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,902
Likes: 11,126
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 22, 2021 15:00:23 GMT
On this. Is my understanding correct that we get those people in the stats who've just about managed to catch a small dose of COVID and then been hit by a lorry? If that is right, then I guess we'll always see some "COVID-19 deaths", but they may well be people who died with rather than from COVID - ? I thought they had stopped that silliness, but perhaps not! Not really, though they might not include the really obvious ... 28 days from positive test goes down as Covid even if you test negative then die. Even people being put down for Covid even without a positive test if there was Covid cases in the care home as its a 'possibility'. Registrars know the figures are rubbish. ONS excess deaths all causes only reliable indicators.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,917
Likes: 2,773
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 22, 2021 15:02:33 GMT
Does anyone know if there are figures about how many people that have been hospitalised or died from C-19 had been vaccinated at least 3 weeks prior to admission? It is claimed the vaccines prevent severe illness and death so hopefully very few or none. You do realise I hope that that figure of "zero" comes from the few hundred or so people who catch covid in the trials and haven't been hospitalised. e.g. the latest good news from the US trial is that a 141 people caught covid and none of them were hospitalised. www.ft.com/content/7aa7f2cc-01ae-48c3-b3bf-6dee68f4d3e6It it precisviley why I asked the question if anyone knew and it seems so far that nobody does perhaps because the figures aren't released. But why not? Thousands of people in hospitals is surely a better confidence booster than a hundred people in a trial ? And yes to r00lish67 I completely agree that the figures if we had them would indeed show false covid positives but surely they should be collected? The reason I ask is not actually born about by some abstract desire to see more data. It was because if I travel to a place where there is no vaccine I was asking myself the question how well am I protected?
|
|
mrk
Posts: 807
Likes: 753
|
Post by mrk on Mar 22, 2021 15:08:10 GMT
It is claimed the vaccines prevent severe illness and death so hopefully very few or none. On this. Is my understanding correct that we get those people in the stats who've just about managed to catch a small dose of COVID and then been hit by a lorry? If that is right, then I guess we'll always see some "COVID-19 deaths", but they may well be people who died with rather than from COVID - ? Depends on which figures you look at. There are 2 different ones in the gov.uk dashboard. Somebody who tested positive and a few days later gets hit by a lorry will be counted in the "Deaths within 28 days of positive test" but not in the "Deaths with COVID-19 on the death certificate". Then there's the "excess deaths" figure by the ONS that shows the overall number of deaths by all causes compared to the 5 year average.
|
|
mrk
Posts: 807
Likes: 753
|
Post by mrk on Mar 22, 2021 15:35:48 GMT
Interesting snippet on the BBC live reporting page. No doubt we’ll hear more about this. The point of contention is not whether the UK did receive AZ doses from EU plants in the past, it's whether it should receive them in the future. From The Telegraph: EU moves to block export of AstraZeneca vaccines to Britain
|
|
jonno
Member of DD Central
nil satis nisi optimum
Posts: 2,745
Likes: 3,138
|
Post by jonno on Mar 22, 2021 15:56:03 GMT
I arrived back into the UK a few days ago, so have the joy of being able to report on the quarantining process. Both my wife and I now each receive a call every day from DHSC to check up on us. That sounds sort of sensible in theory, but it's really not. We're on day 3 now, and they just read from exactly the same script each time. This makes no sense. So my 'conversation' today was: Caller: "Am I talking to <garbled form of surname without first name>" Me: "Um, maybe? Say that again" Caller <incredibly botched attempt at what is really not that complicated a first name> ( 3 days in a row from 3 different people) Me: "Yes, that's me" Caller: "Can you confirm you're aware of the need to quarantine?" Me: " You guys called up yesterday and the day before, so yes, I haven't forgotten overnight" Caller " Are you aware of the need to take day 2 and day 8 tests? Me: " Yes I still am, but as advised yesterday, they're late and so I won't be taking the day 2 test on time. Hopefully today if it arrives." Caller <in the one deviation from the day 2 script> " As it is day 3, can you confirm you've taken your day 2 test already" Me: "Umm..." They are clearly not even actually listening to anything you say beyond 'yes' and 'no'. I know this isn't really surprising, and I don't blame them at all, they're just doing what they've been told to do. However, I do reserve some ire for the person who designed these call scripts. To be fair, Oolish67 is a quite unusual surname
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,917
Likes: 2,773
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 22, 2021 16:27:34 GMT
Does anyone know if there are figures about how many people that have been hospitalised or died from C-19 had been vaccinated at least 3 weeks prior to admission? In other words is the vaccine 99.993% effective at preventing going to hospital or 98% or something else ? Someone, somewhere must know this ?
|
|
ilmoro
Member of DD Central
'Wondering which of the bu***rs to blame, and watching for pigs on the wing.' - Pink Floyd
Posts: 10,902
Likes: 11,126
|
Post by ilmoro on Mar 22, 2021 16:49:09 GMT
Does anyone know if there are figures about how many people that have been hospitalised or died from C-19 had been vaccinated at least 3 weeks prior to admission? In other words is the vaccine 99.993% effective at preventing going to hospital or 98% or something else ? Someone, somewhere must know this ? Well the US trial has it at 100% but I suspect there will be a few anomalies so lets just say 99 followed by a decimal point and multiple 9s. I doubt it is statistically significant enough for anyone outside the regulators/manufacturers to really pay any attention so they are probably the only likely source for the data.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,917
Likes: 2,773
|
Post by michaelc on Mar 22, 2021 16:54:33 GMT
In other words is the vaccine 99.993% effective at preventing going to hospital or 98% or something else ? Someone, somewhere must know this ? Well the US trial has it at 100% but I suspect there will be a few anomalies so lets just say 99 followed by a decimal point and multiple 9s. I doubt it is statistically significant enough for anyone outside the regulators/manufacturers to really pay any attention so they are probably the only likely source for the data. But that is 100% of 144 people which isn't many ? So without getting into confidence internvals etc it could easily be say "just" 95% couldn't it ? I mean wouldn't a better and much larger (therefore more significant) data set come from real world hospital admisssions ?
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Mar 22, 2021 16:54:34 GMT
In other words is the vaccine 99.993% effective at preventing going to hospital or 98% or something else ? Someone, somewhere must know this ? Well the US trial has it at 100% but I suspect there will be a few anomalies so lets just say 99 followed by a decimal point and multiple 9s. I doubt it is statistically significant enough for anyone outside the regulators/manufacturers to really pay any attention so they are probably the only likely source for the data. yeah, but its a fair point that this is the trial data. We should now be getting data coming through from deployment. In fact I think there has been such analysis in the UK, but I couldn't immdiately find it.
|
|