Bank of Canada Rate Decision December 2021 | Page 6 | General financial discussion | Discussion forum

No kidding unboosted vaccination is not effective in resisting infection, currently hardly any difference in infection rates compared to unvaxed group. When you look at those who then progress to hospitalization or to ICU that's where you see some benefit. I haven't seen much data re how effective and for how long these boosters are good for in terms of resisting infection, seems like they just made it up on the fly when it became clear double vaxing isn't doing much any more - let's give 'em another half dose and see what happens.

Bill said
… I haven't seen much data re how effective and for how long these boosters are good for in terms of resisting infection, seems like they just made it up on the fly when it became clear double vaxing isn't doing much any more - let's give 'em another half dose and see what happens.

Pfizer did some lab measurements.

Blood serum from double Pfizer vaccinated people took out only 1/25 of amount of Omicron virus compared to the amount of other variants.

Blood serum, from people one month after their booster third Pfizer dose, took out the same amount of Omicron virus as the blood serum of double Pfizer vaccinated people did of other variants.

Vatox said

Could be, I think it’s more likely that vaccinated people are taking more risks and government restrictions have allowed vaccinated people into the riskier situations and not the unvaccinated. Restaurants, gatherings, events have all required vaccination proof to enter and that’s the exposure.  

I would add to that those who are fully vaxxed are more likely to be on the "lets be careful" group, and get tested whenever symptoms surface. The un-vaxxed crowd are more unlikely to get a test even with symptoms, as their belief is their immune system can handle it, whether covid or not.

As I have reported before, people who had the second dose more than 3 months ago but who have not had the booster are no longer well protected. There is no surprise here.

How did this thread loose its focus? Time to delete it?

Worried about today's virus? DuckDuckGo for yourself, if life insurance rates are up, as those companies' profits come from the premiums, which have to cover all payouts, plus profit.

The few unvaxxed I know or know of are the type to ignore the whole thing, including getting tested. So maybe there's really lots more of them getting it.

Kidd said

Loonie, even if the vaccines are waning, the vaxxed numbers should NOT be surpassing the Unvaxxed. This is just wrong.

.  

I took a look at the page you cited. My vision is not good enough to pore over all the number, but I assume you did your own calculations, which I can't verify.

The issue may be in the per 100,000 calculation
Did you mean per 100,000 of population? I assumed so. Given that the numbers of vaxed and non-vaxed are widely disproportionate, it is reasonable that there could be more vaxed people getting covid per 100,000. There are at least four times as many of them to begin with.

Kidd said
Hi Loonie.

On the web link I provided. First, select the "date field", you have a choice ascending or descending. The latest data is from Dec 23rd 2021. Expand the field headings, Ontario health gave the numbers without any calculations required by me.

UNvaccinated in Ontario, 34.86 per 100,000 tested positive.
Vaccinated in Ontario, 38.79 per 100,000 tested positive.  

1. One day is a small sample. In December per 100K 465 unvaxxed and 288 vaxxed tested positive.

2. We already know that double vaccination does not protect from contracting Omicron. That’s why we need boosters.

3. Unvaxxed probably won’t be tested unless they are in a bad way. The numbers only reflect the fraction of people with Covid who got tested.

4. Hospitalization and ICU numbers are the ones that matter

Sorry to be so picky, but does this mean X% of those who were tested or of those who tested positive? I'm assuming the former because the latter would leave too big a group of "unknown status".

In that case, then, I think it's very difficult to draw conclusions. I"m not sure whether they are talking about the quick test or the lab test and i don't know what the criteria are for getting said test. The answers to these questions would determine the populations being considered. The characteristics of those populations would matter in interpreting the percentages.

I think we'd need more data on how long ago the vaxed ones had dose two. It could be that most of the positives had vax 2 quite a while ago, thus tilting the result , as I would expect that group to not have a lot of resistance.

It would be very helpful if they also recorded the number who'd had vax 3. Perhaps there are none - yet!

I can't deal with the chart, but if you are only looking at one date on the calendar, that would not be statistically reliable in itself. One would need to look at a broader time period, perhaps a month.

I will admit my head is getting a bit fuzzy now and I may be off track, but I do think there is more to this than meets the eye, i.e. more factors. I was much sharper when younger - say, last week! LOL