Did now see the latest news published in Science Magazine? [url]https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/08/grim-warning-israel-vaccination-blunts-does-not-defeat-delta[/url]
看看英国的数据吧，转自Zerohedge.com 86.19% of “cases” are in the Vaccinated?Where's the eff'en “95% efficacy”?/////August 6, 2021 - Public Health England - Technical Briefing 20The Delta Variant in Those Over Age 50 ~20,000,000 people in the UK over age of 50 ~80% of the that population is vaccinated ~16,000,000 vaccinated and 4,000,000 unvaccinated Cases: 21,472 in the “vaccinated” = .13% case rate in the vaccinated population 3,440 in the “unvaccinated” = .089% in the unvaccinated 0.041% higher case rate in the vaccinated 86.19% of all "cases" are vaccinated Emergency Care that required an overnight stay (ONS): 1,131 in the “fully vaccinated” = .007% ONS rate in the vaccinated population 670 in the “unvaccinated” = .017% in the unvaccinated 0.01% higher overnight hospitalization rate for the unvaccinated 63% of all ONS hospitalizations are "vaccinated" Deaths 389 in the “fully vaccinated” = .002% death rate in the vaccinated population 205 in the “unvaccinated” = .005% in the unvaccinated 0.003% higher death rate for the unvaccinated65.49% of all deaths occurred in the "vaccinated"! Hear that "in the news"?A total of 20,000,000 people, 80% are vaccinated leaving 4,000,000 unvaccinated and your TOTAL death count is 594 people? Seriously, how many of that number would have died from old age or bad can of beans? The majority of Covid deaths in the UK occurred in those over 75 years old!C'mon man, these vaccines, the whole "Pandemic" BS is A JOKE!
看看英国的数据吧，转自Zerohedge.com 86.19% of “cases” are in the Vaccinated?Where's the eff'en “95% efficacy”?/////August 6, 2021 - Public Health England - Technical Briefing 20The Delta Variant in Those Over Age 50 ~20,000,000 people in the UK over age of 50 ~80% of the that population is vaccinated ~16,000,000 vaccinated and 4,000,000 unvaccinated Cases: 21,472 in the “vaccinated” = .13% case rate in the vaccinated population 3,440 in the “unvaccinated” = .089% in the unvaccinated 0.041% higher case rate in the vaccinated 86.19% of all "cases" are vaccinated Emergency Care that required an overnight stay (ONS): 1,131 in the “fully vaccinated” = .007% ONS rate in the vaccinated population 670 in the “unvaccinated” = .017% in the unvaccinated 0.01% higher overnight hospitalization rate for the unvaccinated 63% of all ONS hospitalizations are "vaccinated" Deaths 389 in the “fully vaccinated” = .002% death rate in the vaccinated population 205 in the “unvaccinated” = .005% in the unvaccinated 0.003% higher death rate for the unvaccinated65.49% of all deaths occurred in the "vaccinated"! Hear that "in the news"?A total of 20,000,000 people, 80% are vaccinated leaving 4,000,000 unvaccinated and your TOTAL death count is 594 people? Seriously, how many of that number would have died from old age or bad can of beans? The majority of Covid deaths in the UK occurred in those over 75 years old!C'mon man, these vaccines, the whole "Pandemic" BS is A JOKE!
dreamwalk 发表于 2021-08-18 22:24
你提供的解释显示了大众的无知。显示了为什么科技人员对无知的大众那么摇头叹气。 理解一下数据是怎么分析的。既然大家都知道COVID对不同年龄的人的危险性是很不一样的，那么分析之中最基本的是把各个age groups分开，用打了疫苗和没打疫苗相同的age groups来比。第二，不能只看总数而是看病例率（# per 100k)。 我的中文有限，所以请大家看这个科普解释： https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated （a) 只看总数的错误结论：214比301，疫苗无效。 其实“In particular, the key factors here that contribute to this confusion are: High vaccination rates in the country (nearly 80% of all residents >12yr) Age disparity in vaccinations, including Nearly all older people being vaccinated (>90% of residents >50yr) and The vast majority of unvaccinated being younger people (>85% of unvaccinated <50yr) Older people are orders of magnitude more likely to be hospitalized with a respiratory virus than young people (residents >50yr are >20x more likely to have hospitalized serious infections than residents <50yr, and residents 90+ are >1600x more likely to have hospitalized serious infections than residents 12-15yr) After accounting for the vaccination rates and stratifying by age groups, from these same data we can see that the vaccines retain high efficacy (85-95%) vs. severe disease, showing that when it comes to preventing severe disease, the Pfizer vaccine is still performing very well vs. Delta, even in Israel from whence the most concerning data have arisen.” （2）不看比率的错误：没打疫苗的人口小，大部分是打了疫苗的。所以要以各分为每100K人口得病率才能相同比较。 这样相同比率来比较的话突然打疫苗从完全无效变成了67.5%有效。但还不完全是apple to apple的数据分析。 The interpretation of this number is that the vaccines are preventing >2/3 of the serious infections leading to hospitalization that would have occurred sans vaccination. Note that this is considerably lower than the >95% efficacy vs. severe disease that has been previously touted. This number makes it seem like the vaccine efficacy vs. severe disease has substantially waned over time with this Delta variant. However, this number is also misleading because of previously mentioned confounding of age with vaccination status and risk of disease, i.e. that older people are more likely to be vaccinated and inherently at higher risk of severe disease. We have to be careful, as I will now explain. （3）不分age groups的错误： 如果把同年龄groups来比较，才正真的显示出疫苗的效果。 以色列数据显示疫苗防重病对50岁一下的人有91.8%的效率，对50岁以上有85.2%的效率。 并且每个age group都很有效。 当然会有人问怎么每个age group有效率都高，但全人口加起来才67.5%有效？这叫Simpon‘s Paradox。This is an example of Simpson's Paradox, a well-known phenomenon in which misleading results can sometimes be obtained from observational data in the presence of confounding factors. 因为老年人打疫苗的比率和得重病的比率都最高（绝大部分老人打了疫苗，绝大部分得重病的人也是老人）， 导致如果把疫苗比率和病例高的老人和打疫苗比率低和少数得重病得年轻人加在一起会导致总比率变低了。 In the case of vaccine efficacy vs. severe disease, it is the fact that both vaccination status and risk of severe disease are systematically higher in the older age group that makes overall efficacy numbers if estimated without stratifying by age misleading, producing a paradoxical result that the overall efficacy (67.5%) is much lower than the efficacy for either of the age groups (91.8% and 85.2%). 这个YouTube来帮助理解。 系统提示：若遇到视频无法播放请点击下方链接 https://www.youtube.com/embed/ebEkn-BiW5k?showinfo=0
康州的Covid数据证明疫苗保护率很好 康州目前 fully vaccination rate 是 64.7%, 七月份这个fully vaccination rate大概是 62%。 最新Covid 感染，住院，死亡数据见下面的图表。 来算一算疫苗的各项保护率。 七月份： 对感染的保护： Risk ratio of infection = 17%， Vaccine efficiency against infection 对感染保护率= 83% 对住院的保护: Risk ratio of Hospitalization= 12%, Vaccine efficiency against Hospitalization 住院保护率=88% 对死亡的保护： Risk ratio of death = 14%， Vaccine efficiency against death 对死亡保护率= 86% 八月份： 对感染的保护： Risk ratio of infection = 16%， Vaccine efficiency against infection 对感染的保护率= 84% 对住院的保护: Risk ratio of Hospitalization= 8%， Vaccine efficiency against Hospitalization 住院保护率=92% 对死亡的保护： Risk ratio of death = 24%， Vaccine efficiency against death 对死亡保护率= 76% 结论： 1） 疫苗对于感染，住院，死亡皆有很好的保护，保护率在 75% 至 90% 之间。 2）奇怪的一点：疫苗对死亡的保护率并不比对感染或住院的保护率高。尤其是八月的数据，对死亡的保护率比对住院的保护率低不少。
虽然疫苗效率在下降是肯定的, 对delta的效率也肯定比原变种要低一些，但今天以色列发布的两个图显示了目前疫苗还是很明显很明显的有效。
[url]https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/israel-covid-graphs-prove-vaccines-works-delta-pfizer-1.10101640[/url]
打了疫苗和没打疫苗人里得重病(住院的)比率差在年轻人里面看不太出(因为大部分年轻人不得重病)，但到了40-50岁后就太明显了。
这也符合我天天在医院里看的到的。德州现在医院里绝大部分都是没打疫苗的。ICU一个多星期之前就满了。这样下去不久就连普通床位都会没空。我们天天把事实告诉社会上的人，但反疫苗的人就是不信，给他们看照片，叫他们来亲眼看看，不肯来看只会说是这些病人都是假的。真不知道这种思路是怎么来的。
（也许是更多人走出家门的缘故吧， 也许是太多人没打疫苗的缘故吧， 也许是 delta 更加猖狂的缘故吧， only god knows).
大概要看 11 月份的数据如何。
[url]https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/08/grim-warning-israel-vaccination-blunts-does-not-defeat-delta[/url]
86.19% of “cases” are in the Vaccinated? Where's the eff'en “95% efficacy”? ///// August 6, 2021 - Public Health England - Technical Briefing 20 The Delta Variant in Those Over Age 50 ~20,000,000 people in the UK over age of 50 ~80% of the that population is vaccinated ~16,000,000 vaccinated and 4,000,000 unvaccinated
Cases: 21,472 in the “vaccinated” = .13% case rate in the vaccinated population 3,440 in the “unvaccinated” = .089% in the unvaccinated 0.041% higher case rate in the vaccinated 86.19% of all "cases" are vaccinated Emergency Care that required an overnight stay (ONS): 1,131 in the “fully vaccinated” = .007% ONS rate in the vaccinated population 670 in the “unvaccinated” = .017% in the unvaccinated 0.01% higher overnight hospitalization rate for the unvaccinated 63% of all ONS hospitalizations are "vaccinated"
Deaths 389 in the “fully vaccinated” = .002% death rate in the vaccinated population 205 in the “unvaccinated” = .005% in the unvaccinated 0.003% higher death rate for the unvaccinated 65.49% of all deaths occurred in the "vaccinated"! Hear that "in the news"? A total of 20,000,000 people, 80% are vaccinated leaving 4,000,000 unvaccinated and your TOTAL death count is 594 people? Seriously, how many of that number would have died from old age or bad can of beans? The majority of Covid deaths in the UK occurred in those over 75 years old! C'mon man, these vaccines, the whole "Pandemic" BS is A JOKE!
你提供的解释显示了大众的无知。显示了为什么科技人员对无知的大众那么摇头叹气。
理解一下数据是怎么分析的。既然大家都知道COVID对不同年龄的人的危险性是很不一样的，那么分析之中最基本的是把各个age groups分开，用打了疫苗和没打疫苗相同的age groups来比。第二，不能只看总数而是看病例率（# per 100k)。
我的中文有限，所以请大家看这个科普解释： https://www.covid-datascience.com/post/israeli-data-how-can-efficacy-vs-severe-disease-be-strong-when-60-of-hospitalized-are-vaccinated
（a) 只看总数的错误结论：214比301，疫苗无效。
其实“In particular, the key factors here that contribute to this confusion are: High vaccination rates in the country (nearly 80% of all residents >12yr) Age disparity in vaccinations, including Nearly all older people being vaccinated (>90% of residents >50yr) and The vast majority of unvaccinated being younger people (>85% of unvaccinated <50yr) Older people are orders of magnitude more likely to be hospitalized with a respiratory virus than young people (residents >50yr are >20x more likely to have hospitalized serious infections than residents <50yr, and residents 90+ are >1600x more likely to have hospitalized serious infections than residents 12-15yr) After accounting for the vaccination rates and stratifying by age groups, from these same data we can see that the vaccines retain high efficacy (85-95%) vs. severe disease, showing that when it comes to preventing severe disease, the Pfizer vaccine is still performing very well vs. Delta, even in Israel from whence the most concerning data have arisen.”
（2）不看比率的错误：没打疫苗的人口小，大部分是打了疫苗的。所以要以各分为每100K人口得病率才能相同比较。
The interpretation of this number is that the vaccines are preventing >2/3 of the serious infections leading to hospitalization that would have occurred sans vaccination.
Note that this is considerably lower than the >95% efficacy vs. severe disease that has been previously touted. This number makes it seem like the vaccine efficacy vs. severe disease has substantially waned over time with this Delta variant.
However, this number is also misleading because of previously mentioned confounding of age with vaccination status and risk of disease, i.e. that older people are more likely to be vaccinated and inherently at higher risk of severe disease. We have to be careful, as I will now explain.
（3）不分age groups的错误： 如果把同年龄groups来比较，才正真的显示出疫苗的效果。
当然会有人问怎么每个age group有效率都高，但全人口加起来才67.5%有效？这叫Simpon‘s Paradox。This is an example of Simpson's Paradox, a well-known phenomenon in which misleading results can sometimes be obtained from observational data in the presence of confounding factors.
因为老年人打疫苗的比率和得重病的比率都最高（绝大部分老人打了疫苗，绝大部分得重病的人也是老人）， 导致如果把疫苗比率和病例高的老人和打疫苗比率低和少数得重病得年轻人加在一起会导致总比率变低了。 In the case of vaccine efficacy vs. severe disease, it is the fact that both vaccination status and risk of severe disease are systematically higher in the older age group that makes overall efficacy numbers if estimated without stratifying by age misleading, producing a paradoxical result that the overall efficacy (67.5%) is much lower than the efficacy for either of the age groups (91.8% and 85.2%).
这个YouTube来帮助理解。
系统提示：若遇到视频无法播放请点击下方链接
https://www.youtube.com/embed/ebEkn-BiW5k?showinfo=0
来算一算疫苗的各项保护率。
七月份： 对感染的保护： Risk ratio of infection = 17%， Vaccine efficiency against infection 对感染保护率= 83% 对住院的保护: Risk ratio of Hospitalization= 12%, Vaccine efficiency against Hospitalization 住院保护率=88% 对死亡的保护： Risk ratio of death = 14%， Vaccine efficiency against death 对死亡保护率= 86%
八月份： 对感染的保护： Risk ratio of infection = 16%， Vaccine efficiency against infection 对感染的保护率= 84% 对住院的保护: Risk ratio of Hospitalization= 8%， Vaccine efficiency against Hospitalization 住院保护率=92% 对死亡的保护： Risk ratio of death = 24%， Vaccine efficiency against death 对死亡保护率= 76%
结论： 1） 疫苗对于感染，住院，死亡皆有很好的保护，保护率在 75% 至 90% 之间。 2）奇怪的一点：疫苗对死亡的保护率并不比对感染或住院的保护率高。尤其是八月的数据，对死亡的保护率比对住院的保护率低不少。