* 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht reads "1.097 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 4.020 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 1.137 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben."
* 23.12.2021 RKI Wockenbericht reads "186 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 924
waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 161 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben".
* The OA screenshots a line that reads "186 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 4.020 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 1.137 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben." Either they doctored the data, or the 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht perhaps contained an error that was since corrected and the OA panicked seeing the initial version?
One more thing. Using omicron data from 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht and vaccination data from https://impfdashboard.de/en, the omicron incidence rates don't look too good. This is difficult to do correctly in absence of data explicitly broken down by age because <18yo have significantly smaller vaccination rates (thus more "unvaccinated" at virtually no risk) compared to the adult population, but even so:
Via Google translate: "Update: The RKI made a significant change in the weekly report 4 days after publication (see below). Now there are 1097 instead of 186 unvaccinated people, so the proportion of those who have been vaccinated is significantly lower. // @world"
Similar figures from Denmark, reported as rates and broke down by age groups. Waiting for severe omicron cases stats, which may lag for a few weeks. We are in for an interesting winter...
I have a few theories of my own but it is not the point. And if you are curious, I still think everyone should get vaccinated / boosted, but I am just a random guy in the internet.
You ask if the figures take into account the fact that many people are vaccinated and the answer is yes. Draw your own conclusions. Even if you are convinced of the vaccine benefits (which I am), you shouldn't be in denial when the numbers don't match your expectations. If you do, then your reasoning is no better than that of conspiracy theorists, climate change denialists and antivaxxers.
Unboosted vaccine efficiency is negative for omicron, that's what the numbers are saying. If it contradicts your theory, then your theory is wrong and you have to find a better one. It you want to think scientifically, you have to consider the idea that vaccines can be ineffective/harmful, even if, like me, you don't believe it, because it is the most "obvious" conclusion. And only after you have accepted that possibility, you can look for confounding variables, mistakes and other effects that can disprove this idea.
This leads to 2 twitters, one for each side of the political aisle. Filter bubbles enabled by social media are already bad enough, a complete fracture of the public space along political lines is a distinctly dangerous idea.
Since you are not posting your sources, it's hard to tell what claims of Marjorie Taylor Greene you are referring to. I recently stumbled upon a site that reports on covid data from Denmark. The rate of Omicron infection in both vaccinated and unvaccinated populations >15yo is the same. This corroborates with a recent DHH post surfacing similar Denmark data. There is a distinct uncomfortable possibility that the vaccines targeting a 2 year old variant are, indeed, ineffective as a measure to limit the spread of Omicron. Unfortunately, I can't corroborate with US data because CDC is obstinate in not publishing covid data with a breakdown by date/age/vaccination status/virus variant.
Based in prior variant data, it is likely the vaccines do work to prevent severe omicron cases. Feel free to clarify what is it that the vaccines work for, and which of Marjorie Taylor Greene tweets fell afoul of that.
PS. This post is in no way an endorsement of Marjorie Taylor Greene political activities, of which I know very little other than her being a Republican Congresswoman.
(2nd attempt, realized the outlier spike is in "unvaccinated and 80+" category). Utter garbage data. Using the breakdown by age we note a huge outlier spike in unvaccinated cases in the 80+ age group, 800/100k vs. 5-10/100k. All other age groups show a decline in case rates for both vaccinated and unvaccinated, with a vaccinated case rate << unvaccinated case rate (5x-10x). I see no way to add up the breakdown by age case rate numbers into total case rate numbers showing vaccinated case rate taking over unvaccinated case rate.
Couple of related notes:
* Covid statistics without a breakdown by age / date / vaccination status are garbage. Possibly BMI and/or immunosuppressed status should also be added to the mix. The authorities failure to publish this data breakdown 2 years into the pandemic is going beyond incompetence.
* Focusing on "cases" beyond a coarse "going up or going down" is largely useless. Observed "cases" are more likely to indicate test penetration than actual case numbers, and test penetration may significantly vary between age groups, institutionalization settings, etc.
Not a big fan of nuclear because of security and waste disposal issues, but quoting 3 accidents over a span of 60 years as a reason for a blanket ban on a whole class of energy production technologies is hyper safetyism.
I err on the side of hyper safetyism when it comes to nuclear, as when it goes wrong, it can make areas permanently uninhabitable.
Not to say that I advocate for a blanket ban.
But I am concerned that a Chernobyl could happen in China, if the same human failure occurs again, in a command economy, with people afraid to speak up regarding safety issues vs targets.
People still live in the Chernobyl exclusion zone and always has as many didn't move when the disaster happened. And it gets safer every year, many work in it, nature thrives in it etc.
The parts that will be uninhabitable for the distant future is really tiny, most of it is already safer than many other parts people live in where natural disasters happens regularly. Living near a coal plant is much worse for your health than living in the Chernobyl exclusion zone.
Edit: If you don't believe me you can read about current radiation levels in Pripyat here:
Below 1 micro Sievert per hour is normal and harmless to live in, most of Pripyat is already there but some areas like the reactor and the graveyard used during clean-up are much higher. But still the town was just a few square kilometres, anything outside of that is basically safe. Just that Ukraine doesn't need this area for anything, they have no reason to open it up.
Much of the Earth's surface has always been permanently uninhabitable for reasons unrelated to nuclear accidents. Closing off a few more small areas per century is an acceptable risk.
Perhaps this Twitter thread (sorry) may help alleviate some of the fears? The author is a full professor working on computational biology at University College London and had prior to that had a stint working on infectious disease epidemiology at Imperial College London.
"Those results provide no evidence for SARS-CoV-2 being a neurotropic virus, it doesn't inform us on long-covid. SARS-CoV-2 is not expected to be commonly found in the brain of patients except in a subset of extremely severe, often lethal, infections.
3/"
Your note on misuse of VAERS data caught my attention: "deaths happening shortly after vaccinations, but not necessarily connected to it". Apparently the same kind of sleigh of hand is widespread practice in mainstream epidemiological data collection, according to recent comments by none other than Dr. Fauci.
> "But the other important thing is that if you look at the children who are hospitalized, many of them are hospitalized with COVID as opposed to because of COVID," Fauci continued. "And what we mean by that — if a child goes in the hospital, they automatically get tested for COVID. And they get counted as a COVID-hospitalized individual. When in fact, they may go in for a broken leg or appendicitis or something like that. So it’s overcounting the number of children who are, quote, 'hospitalized with COVID,' as opposed to because of COVID."
Indeed. A few more examples of fundamental systems advances since 2000: iOS, Android (intents), Chrome (multiprocess), Kubernetes, Cloudflare Durable Objects (collaboration), WASM, Rust, Typescript, Golang, Pytorch, JAX, Bitcoin, Ethereum.
* 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht reads "1.097 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 4.020 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 1.137 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben."
* 23.12.2021 RKI Wockenbericht reads "186 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 924 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 161 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben".
* The OA screenshots a line that reads "186 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 4.020 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 1.137 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben." Either they doctored the data, or the 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht perhaps contained an error that was since corrected and the OA panicked seeing the initial version?
One more thing. Using omicron data from 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht and vaccination data from https://impfdashboard.de/en, the omicron incidence rates don't look too good. This is difficult to do correctly in absence of data explicitly broken down by age because <18yo have significantly smaller vaccination rates (thus more "unvaccinated" at virtually no risk) compared to the adult population, but even so: