View Single Post
Old 12-06-2021, 03:13 PM   #5146
blankall
Ate 100 Treadmills
 
blankall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by opendoor View Post
I'm looking at the rates for 16-39 year olds which makes up the vast majority of the data for unvaccinated people:

Recovered: 0.179% of reinfection cases were severe

Vaccinated: 0.05% of breakthrough cases were severe

Yes the rates are low, but that's not my point. What I'm saying is that there's no reason (outside of different testing behaviors/access) that breakthrough infections would see severe cases at just over 1/4 the rate that reinfections do. You would expect them to be higher among the vaccinated group if anything, since the more vulnerable people (who are more prone to severe disease) are much more likely to be vaccinated.

Given that, the numbers imply that reinfections aren't being caught in that data at the same rate as breakthrough cases which would overstate the differences in effectiveness. Which makes sense, since the demographics that make up that group would tend to be lower income and have less interaction with the health system. At a similar severe-to-overall case ratio, you would have about 3x as many reinfections given their # of severe cases, which would triple their risk ratio.
You had a total of 6 severe infections in the recovered aged 16-39 group. It could be a statistical error. It could also be a function of X percentage of the population being prone to severe infection due to a co-morbidity. You're looking at the ration of severe infection to infection, not severe infection to total cohort. So if you have x people in that group who are likely to have severe infection, regardless of previous infection/vaccination, the ratio will be higher if there are fewer overall infections in the cohort.
blankall is online now