Summary — while the vaccinated still appear to have some protection against severe symptomatic covid and death, it appears that they’re less likely to make it into ICU if they get seriously ill. Is this a sign of a very rapid disease progression, and if so, is it an early sign of vaccine-associated disease enhancement?
"....ICU staff are professionals interested in saving lives, and would be unlikely to want to cooperate in any Machiavellian schemes...."
I don't know what social and peer pressures are like in the US, but in Europe and the UK there has been a considerable rise in employment by multi-national companies or government bureaucracy.
A feature of work in a large hierarchy is that you have little individual autonomy and are required to function as a cog in the mechanism. You do not get to chose whose lives you will save, or even what treatment they are to be given - there are all pre-defined by the system.
People at the higher levels of the system have invested much of their life in gaining their position. And if more senior figures want to see data which supports high-level policy, it is so easy just to tweak a few directives and allocate resources differently to provide what your masters want. Conversely, if you are seen as unwilling to do this, the position you worked so hard to obtain is suddenly in jeopardy.
So do not be surprised if non-optimal policies are introduced and forced through, in spite of data showing that they may be killing people unnecessarily. There is nothing Machiavellian about this - it's simply how bureaucracies work....
I think you may be missing something important. Characteristics of the unvaccinated vs. vaccinated groups differ, yes, in that they have had the vaccine, but also in that the vaccinated group almost exclusively contains the extremely clinically vulnerable people (something like 99.9% of this group received the jab), as compared to the unvaccinated group. These extremely clinically vulnerable people (of all ages) are more likely to die from or with covid. I am speculating, but I imagine these people may deteriorate more quickly also, and thus could explain why fewer vaccinated who die make it into ICU. There may be other important related factors also, such as end of life pathway protocols. Their condition (which may be the primary cause of death, and not covid) may not warrant them being admitted to ICU.
We cannot interpret these observational data as though they are a randomised treatment and control group data, with the two groups having similar characteristics and only differing by vaccine status. That simply isn't the case.
Bartram, do you have any thoughts on Pfizer trial results of serious disease 9/162 = 5% for unvaccinated and 1/8 =12% for vaxxed. I’ve never seen this difference discussed in detail. Could it impact your analysis here? Best wishes, Kimberley
May to July was predominately low spread so “cases” and “deaths” would be mostly false positives via Bayesian voodoo math, which disfavors the vaccines. ICU admission after a positive test is a more selective criteria than “happening to die for any reason after a positive test,” so it’s less prone to false positives during low spread, that’s all.
"....ICU staff are professionals interested in saving lives, and would be unlikely to want to cooperate in any Machiavellian schemes...."
I don't know what social and peer pressures are like in the US, but in Europe and the UK there has been a considerable rise in employment by multi-national companies or government bureaucracy.
A feature of work in a large hierarchy is that you have little individual autonomy and are required to function as a cog in the mechanism. You do not get to chose whose lives you will save, or even what treatment they are to be given - there are all pre-defined by the system.
People at the higher levels of the system have invested much of their life in gaining their position. And if more senior figures want to see data which supports high-level policy, it is so easy just to tweak a few directives and allocate resources differently to provide what your masters want. Conversely, if you are seen as unwilling to do this, the position you worked so hard to obtain is suddenly in jeopardy.
So do not be surprised if non-optimal policies are introduced and forced through, in spite of data showing that they may be killing people unnecessarily. There is nothing Machiavellian about this - it's simply how bureaucracies work....
I think you may be missing something important. Characteristics of the unvaccinated vs. vaccinated groups differ, yes, in that they have had the vaccine, but also in that the vaccinated group almost exclusively contains the extremely clinically vulnerable people (something like 99.9% of this group received the jab), as compared to the unvaccinated group. These extremely clinically vulnerable people (of all ages) are more likely to die from or with covid. I am speculating, but I imagine these people may deteriorate more quickly also, and thus could explain why fewer vaccinated who die make it into ICU. There may be other important related factors also, such as end of life pathway protocols. Their condition (which may be the primary cause of death, and not covid) may not warrant them being admitted to ICU.
We cannot interpret these observational data as though they are a randomised treatment and control group data, with the two groups having similar characteristics and only differing by vaccine status. That simply isn't the case.
Bartram, do you have any thoughts on Pfizer trial results of serious disease 9/162 = 5% for unvaccinated and 1/8 =12% for vaxxed. I’ve never seen this difference discussed in detail. Could it impact your analysis here? Best wishes, Kimberley
May to July was predominately low spread so “cases” and “deaths” would be mostly false positives via Bayesian voodoo math, which disfavors the vaccines. ICU admission after a positive test is a more selective criteria than “happening to die for any reason after a positive test,” so it’s less prone to false positives during low spread, that’s all.
Excellent as always, thank you.