Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

VDH Data: Vaccinated Improve Odds by 20 to 1

—

by

Steve Haner
in

Virginia Department of Health

According to the Virginia Department of Health’s count, just more than 400 fully-vaccinated patients have ended up in a Virginia hospital with a case of COVID-19, and 83 have died. This was the count for the period of January 17 to August 14 and represented five percent or less of the total hospital cases and deaths in that period. The percentages are even smaller when compared to the pool of 4.7 million fully vaccinated people.

So. being vaccinated is safer than being unvaccinated by a factor of about 20. Your odds of staying out of the hospital or morgue improve 20 to one. Out of every 100,000 vaccinated Virginians, nine ended up in the hospital and two died. Among the millions of unvaccinated and partially vaccinated, 164 per 100,000 went to the hospital and 55 died. Partial vaccination is not that useful.

The website is proving glitchy today, probably swamped with visitors. VDH had promised an update for this data set last Friday, but then delayed the release to today. As it is it is still a week behind, but weekly updates are promised. Death stats in particular are slow to arrive. Apparently, they are cross referencing with the state database of vaccinated individuals, and a previous Bacon’s Rebellion post raised other issues about that.

Changing minds on this is proving futile. Even the recent stories where the sick or dying express regret at refusing the vaccines are not moving the needle, with fewer than 15,000 shots per day being administered in Virginia. The unvaccinated are going to stay that way. Most will be fine, but far too many will be hospitalized or even die, and some will spread this to others who will die. At this point, about 95 percent of those deaths will now be classed as having been preventable.

VDH has no data showing on how many in any of the three categories suffered a previous COVID-19 infection. A conspiracy, I’m sure many will think.

— Steve Haner

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

32 responses to “VDH Data: Vaccinated Improve Odds by 20 to 1”

  1. Anne Avatar
    Anne

    The ongoing tragedy is the failure of our medical elites to make early treatments both known and available. There are a variety of drug combinations that are hugely preventative of serious Covid illness, but having access to them in this country is challenging. One of those best kept secrets. CRIMINAL is the word for it.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Yeah. Good plan. Get sick first, then use a monoclonal antibody that is also an EUA drug, or a cocktail of off-label drugs in hopes they work.

      The word for that is STUPID.

      1. ARL Avatar
        ARL

        Seriously. I love the logic that a drug used for deworming animals is ok as an off label use but the vaccine is not safe.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          It’s truly Alice in Wonderland with the skeptics and anti.

          But it’s been interesting watching some of the Conservatives in BR move from their initial positions to vaccine believers even as they have “questions”. 😉

  2. vicnicholls Avatar
    vicnicholls

    “VDH has no data showing on how many in any of the three categories
    suffered a previous COVID-19 infection. A conspiracy, I’m sure many
    will think.”

    More like more gross mismanagement of an already inept bureau. There’s a slew of that. These are same type of folks that gave us Tuskegee, thalidomide, Vioxx, etc. There’s a line between conspiracy and cluelessness that doesn’t learn from history.

  3. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    Nobody doubts that the vaccines are effective, at least at first. However, nobody looking at Los Angeles or Israel should doubt that the effectiveness drops fast.

    By your rough logic there should be no surge in Israel and 30% of COVID infections in Los Angeles should not be coming from vaccinated people.

    A vaccine needs to be safe, effective and necessary. Two of the three can certainly be argued. The vaccines are nowhere as effective as we thought in preventing infection over time. Healthy young people can argue that their odds of dying are so low that the vaccines are unnecessary for them.

    However, all this pales when considered against safety.

    Are these vaccines safe?

    My understanding is that no tests were performed with more than two shots per person.

    Now it’s becoming more and more obvious that multiple shots will be needed to achieve enduring effectiveness. I have yet to hear anybody credibly explain why one booster shot will be all that is needed.

    Has a regime of continuous COVID vaccinations been tested for safety over the log haul?

    If not, concerns about the safety of continuous vaccination seem somewhat reasonable.

    1. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      It’s about to be. I suppose, they couuld select 30,000 twice-vaccinated and run placebos again, Phase III B. But, that’s what Israel is good for. If any adverse effects are to be had, they’ll show up there.

  4. Seth Tandett Avatar
    Seth Tandett

    At what percentage do we stop tracking cases, deaths and vaccines?

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      When they all reach 100 percent, look for no new data….

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Meh, maybe another variant will do it?
        https://www.fingerlakes1.com/2021/08/23/experts-say-covid-22-will-be-the-deadliest-variant-yet-delta-gamma-and-beta-variants-will-combine-to-create-a-super-strain-of-coronavirus/

        “Immunologist Professor Doctor Sai Reddy who works at ETH Zurich in the Department of Biosystems Science & Engineering in Switzerland, says the Delta variant is simply a precursor for an even worse strain of what’s to come.

        According to Reddy, everyone needs to prepare for COVID-22 to be worse than what we’re witnessing right now and that this was inevitable with current variants circulating. They will combine to create even deadlier strains.”

        That’s right, Baconites… it’s GLOBAL CORONAVIRUS CHANGE! Coming soon to a cable news channel near you, media hosts without intellectual integrity, let alone a shred of intellectual ability, will argue the validity of scientific studies versus chicken bone suppositories in the battle against vaccines.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Conservative’s favorite on-air personality, Anthony Fauci, said pretty much the same thing. That if we don’t get a much higher level of vaccinated between now and January, he won’t be surprised of an emergence of a new variant.

          FEAR PORN!

          And yes, we can also expect the same usual cast of suspects will then argue that Fauci, the CDC and other “science”lies and fli-flops and should not be trusted, and instead we should be listening to “smart people” who
          are better thinkers even if they lack
          basic immunology training and knowledge. You can trust them precisely because they are not “elites” that lie and obsfuscate.

          https://www.thewrap.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/tucker-carlson-rages-against-fauci-again-for-agreeing-with-trump.jpg

          Welcome to the enlightenment of the 21st cemtury world of knowledge!

          😉

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            After writing it, I had pause. I’m now thinking about how to spread the “chicken bone suppository” cure on a wider screen. It would be funny to learn that people are showing up in ERs with self-inserted drumsticks.

            Not with a bang, but with an “ugh, arrgh, oooh, ooh,..”

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/a87851a0e2113294a1783f459b64ed5360ac757c406909f5be75ffe8e9648dfc.jpg

          3. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            A down vote. Mostly likely from a dissatisfied customer. Probably from the only person here who would try it.

        2. WayneS Avatar
          WayneS

          That’s some covid, that Covid-22…

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            They’re looking to make a Covid-30-06 too.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      When COVID is no more dangerous than the seasonal flu.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        when Covid is no more dangerous than Polio and Smallpox?

  5. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Well now, says it all, now don’t it?

    A picture is worth a thousand words, but I — for one — appreciate your redundancy.

    Even the FDA approval won’t move the needle, Steve. Those that won’t vaccinate will just find another reason. “Pfizer? Really, it’s spelled “P-f”? Can’t trust ’em.”

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Give Bacon his point for argument’s sake. Assume that a previous infection provides at least as much protection as the vaccine. That means this fourth wave is really raging in an even smaller pool of those both unvaccinated and never infected. If you are neither you are really over a barrel.

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        But my question… many only suspect they have had Covid. Should they be jabbed with a needle for an antibody test, or just start the vaccine? What’s the objective? Minimize jabs?

        Plus, the reports are that Delta and Delta-plus are infecting previously infected. But, in the end, getting sick isn’t that bad so far. It’s the hospital stay, and the gift shop in the morgue you want to avoid.

        1. Stephen Haner Avatar
          Stephen Haner

          Belt + suspenders…the other thing about this new data set, once it doesn’t take 2 minutes to load each page, it should show whether the vaccines really are waning in protection with the week to week numbers.

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Assuming constant exposure rates.

  6. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    Thank you, Steve, for highlighting data that informs the debate. I hadn’t seen the data presented this way, and I think it is useful. Getting vaccinated does not reduce your chances of getting hospitalized from COVID to zero. Of course, no one ever promised such a thing. But it does improve your odds by 20 times over someone who is not vaccinated. I need no more persuasion than that.

    As you acknowledge in your final line, though, the VDH data does not distinguish between unvaccinated people who survived COVID and those who had never been infected — which is the debate we’ve been having on this blog.

    The “not vaccinated” numbers are a composite of those who survived COVID and those who didn’t. Although we can debate the degree to which COVID survivors are protected by the virus, I think we can all agree that they have some resistance.

    Now, think of this: If vaccinated people are 1/20th as likely to be hospitalized as unvaccinated people overall, how much less likely are they to be hospitalized than the never-infected sub-set of unvaccinated people? Perhaps 1/30th to 1/40th as likely. That tells me that. relatively speaking, you are extremely high risk from the Delta variant if you fall into the never vaccinated/never infected camp.

    1. dick dyas Avatar
      dick dyas

      Wife and I getting shot three today. I look forward to the fourth shot. ( I am a Pfizer junky!)

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      You need better than 20:1? Then have I got a horse for you right here! His name is Paul Revere. Can do. The horse can do.

      It’s the last verse that counts
      But look at Epitaph,
      He wins it by a half,
      According to this here in the Telegraph,
      Big threat,
      Big threat,
      This guy calls the horse big threat.
      If he calls the horse big threat,
      Big threat
      Big threat.
      And just a minute boys,
      I’ve got the feed box noise,
      It says the great grandfather was Equipoise.
      Shows class,
      Shows class,
      This guy says the horse shows class,
      If he says the horse shows class,
      Shows class,
      Shows class.
      So make it Epitaph,
      He wins it by a half,
      According to this here in the Telegraph.
      Epitaph
      I got the horse right here.

    3. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      No schist, Sherlock. (Oh, wait, we have a Sherlock….).

      I don’t doubt that previous infection provides some protection. But with the vaccines readily available and having in general extremely low risk, I’d take the shot. Just read another column by a doc out of Hawaii who is pretty gloomy on many points about the vaccines, but his advice on this question was get at least the first shot.

      He made a point often missed (except by Nancy Boy). The virus may be far more likely than the vaccines to have some nasty surprises lurking in the years to come, like cervical cancer or a shingles type outbreak….then that previous infection might not seem such an advantage.

      1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
        Eric the half a troll

        “No schist, Sherlock.”

        Gneiss…. real gneiss…

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          That’s REALLY bad. Thank you! 😉

  7. handstowork Avatar
    handstowork

    Not if one uses Ivermectin or Hydroxychloroquine, but I guess even you are blocking this info.

  8. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Low IQ heat map. 65+ not vaccinated.

    https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2021/07/20/virus-global/1f84d0454897648d1efc5dc15b7af07701082a0b/top_maps-Artboard_2.png

  9. Correction: Vaccination Advantage Exaggerated (By Me) | Bacon's Rebellion

    […] Twenty to one?  Where did that math challenged fellow get that?  Oh, wait, I am the math challenged fellow and I have to offer a big correction to my post from yesterday.  Yes, the advantage to being vaccinated is evident in that new data set on the Virginia Department of Health dashboard, but the advantage is not that large. […]

Leave a Reply

Read More