(08-03-2021, 01:25 AM)LP link Wrote:There is nothing in the data tables linked in the original document that supports Flyboy's conclusions, readers can investigate this on their own if they really want to take it further.

Flyboy has confused lethality with virulence.

Some of the figures Flyboy wants to misuse are percentages of percentages, and have to be judged relative to the duration/appearance of both the original and Delta strains. In effect Flyboy has published conclusions without regard to the underlying meaning of the figures.

The 2nd Burnet document is a simulation/model of what Long Term COVID might be like under high vaccination rates and various other mitigation schemes. The proportion of cases has to be measured relative to the percentage of the population, in this case if as many as 75% of people were vaccinated and 25% of people were not! When that consideration is made the simulation/model figures suggest the exact opposite of Flyboy's conclusions. Flyboy's conclusions of course contradict the documents own conclusions which are summarised on the very first page.

Severe COVID-19 is severe COVID-19, vaccination reduces your chance of getting severe COVID-19, but if you get severe COVID-19 it may not matter whether you have been vaccinated or not, you could just be misfortunate enough to be in the group the vaccines do not really work for. The true measure of this simulation/model is relative to the expected populations of people in each selected category.

As an aside;
Death and infection rates are a consequence of many factors, simple surveys and head counts that do not offer age or social demographics do not paint the full picture. It looks like with the spread of Delta reinfection rates are rising, the original strain is not providing strong immunity to the Delta strain, but you can't kill the vulnerable twice!

However, Delta is proving lethal in younger demographics.

Many vulnerable, even some who are double vaccinated and vulnerable, or perhaps those who become complacent will continue succumb to both the original strain and Delta. Why? Because vaccination does provide 100% immunity, nobody claimed vaccination had 100% efficacy, nobody has ever claimed that it's only a criticism levelled by those wishing to create certain uncertainty.

(08-03-2021, 02:48 AM)dodge link Wrote:The summary page from Fly's post probably covers the issues.

The risk assessment linked in the summary (attached) - is to be read in conjunction.  The information isn't static and will change as more information is known.

There is high confidence in two measures and low confidence in another two.

(08-03-2021, 02:48 AM)dodge date Wrote:The summary page from Fly's post probably covers the issues.

The risk assessment linked in the summary (attached) - is to be read in conjunction.  The information isn't static and will change as more information is known.

There is high confidence in two measures and low confidence in another two.

(08-03-2021, 02:55 AM)flyboy77 date Wrote:Just because I didn't highlight the hospitalisation numbers doesn't mean I don't get the difference between mortality and virulence.

(08-03-2021, 03:56 AM)Thryleon date Wrote:I think we are all a bit fatigued.  I dont worry about the ranting and raving.  For the most part, no one is listening overly to what goes on in a football forum anyway.

(08-03-2021, 04:02 AM)LP link Wrote:I understand [member=105]Thryleon[/member]‍

But I will always respond, simply because forums like this one, Facebook, Instagram or Twitter can through there influence kill or maim people with disinformation or misrepresented data.

It is not and never will be an innocent or trivial debate free of consequences.

Quote: “I don’t want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal-food-trough wiper. I fart in your general direction.“