I only realised how serious a threat omicron was when I looked at the South African data recently and you can see how much of a impact it's had on deaths in a largely unvaccinated population.
Even if you just compare the case numbers in South Africa to the UK (where most are double or triple vaxed) you get a good idea of how well vaccines are working.
For example, in South Africa deaths have gone from about ~15 a day before omicron to ~30 a day since the variant was first identified, which is terrifying. And in South Africa they have around 20,000 new cases a day compared to about 80,000 in the UK -- imagine how much worse it would be in the UK right now if they weren't vaccinated.
Anyone still doubting the efficacy of triple vaccination in healthy populations really needs to look at the data. The South African health authorities are wrong, omicron is a serious threat to our health and if we must fire a few people to ensure another successful Pfizer vaccine rollout, then so be it.
Apologies for the sarcasm, but as some with COVID antibodies from a prior infection which I recovered from in about a day, I am genuinely getting frustrated by how much fear and pressure the government is pushing on me to get vaccinated every few months, when the data on how effective they are at managing the pandemic (even after several doses) seems completely inconclusive. Even if this booster did prevent infection by any substantial amount, are we sure we all need them? And further, are we sure the risk justifies governments and employers pushing them on us via the rollout of various mandates and health passports?
South Africa has 20,000/day cases which is about the same they had in July, yet they peak at 30 deaths/day vs 400 deaths/day in July. To estimate the fatality rate of a variant, you need to do it within the same population. At the current rate, Omicron is literally as deadly as influenza in South Africa [1] and, as the current wave passed its peak, it might be even less deadly than that.
You can't go by cases/day though--there's a cohort problem.
In the slow growth scenario, when you are at 20,000 cases a day, the deaths on that day are from the seeds of cases that started "long" ago. When you get to 20k on the back of a growth explosion, those cases are all "brand new."
This is not to say that it won't be less deadly, just that judging it that way is very flawed.
This is true in theory but I don't think it matters in practice. Median time between symptoms onset and death is 7 days for the 2nd wave in the UK [1] which is pretty short and doesn't allow for "old seeds". The tail of distribution is also quite thin. Those number might be different for Omicron but nothing points to that as far as I know. Unless Omicron-sick people die on average 2 months after infection I don't see how it could be equally or more deadly.
- UK has most of it immunity from vaccination which was mainly targeting AC2 receptor. It's possible that natural immunity or Sinovac (attenuated virus) has better protection than mRNA vaccines - not confirmed.
I think this is definitely part of the explanation.
> A lot of immunocompromised people in SA (AIDS)
Wouldn't this mean more deaths or am I missing something? Are COVID deaths in AIDS patients attributed to AIDS not COVID?
> UK has most of it immunity from vaccination which was mainly targeting AC2 receptor. It's possible that natural immunity or Sinovac (attenuated virus) has better protection than mRNA vaccines - not confirmed.
Okay, so should we perhaps not be pushing vaccination on healthy individuals? I had a COVID infection early on in the pandemic and I've interacted with infected people since and not caught it. My sister who's younger than me (in her 20s), but was vaccinated before being infected has tested positive for it 5 times. Perhaps just a coincidence but odd that she's so much more susceptible to it.
>Wouldn't this mean more deaths or am I missing something? Are COVID deaths in AIDS patients attributed to AIDS not COVID?
I don't know about SA but many countries count any dead person who was infected with COVID as a COVID death, which is a convenient way of padding the numbers.
Yeah, this was my immediate thought. In the UK it would be counted as a COVID death, so assuming South Africa are recording numbers similarly you would expect COVID deaths to be higher in the more immunocompromised population if anything.
> Wouldn't this mean more deaths or am I missing something? Are COVID deaths in AIDS patients attributed to AIDS not COVID?
That's the thing, it's really hard to compare. There is no standardisation. You can have a person dying from AIDS counted as a COVID death. The other extreme is that someone with AIDS, in theory, could have a COVID infection for decades and be tested n times.
I think you're right overall, but that the data doesn't yet support the conclusion. Omicron got traction in the UK at least a week later than SA, probably 2 weeks, so the death rate will lag by the same margin. We need to compare the death rate in the UK now to the death rate in SA a few weeks ago.
All the early indications are that the complete data will support your conclusion when it comes in, but frustrating as it is we'll have to wait and see.
So in terms of a government response do we care about data now or are we at the point where we just restrict liberties and mandate vaccines assuming the worst possible scenario every time something changes? I guess if we're lucky when the data shows they over reacted they might give some liberties back and hopefully the vaccine rollout won't result in too many adverse side effects. Common.. This is insanity.
I honestly don't know what you're arguing for here. I don't care if people take the vaccine or what the outcome of omicron is, my issue is with the government response given the data we have. The data supporting the use of vaccines to tackle omicron is extremely questionable. And that's not even mentioning the fact that it's already questionable enough to mandate COVID vaccines on healthy individuals given recent data suggesting those vaccinated have less robust immune responses to COVID and all of its potential future variants.
>I honestly don't know what you're arguing for here.
I'm arguing for correct interpretation of the data. I didn't advocate for any particular action to be taken in my post, so somewhat surprised you inferred such.
>when the data shows they over reacted
When. You seem very sure. Almost as though you've already made up your mind about facts we don't have yet, exactly what I'm cautioning against.
OK, since you seem to want me to argue for something more I'll do so. I support the booster programme based on the same reasons it was already started long before Omicron was discovered. The risks seem extremely low, while the potential benefits seem extremely high. The vaccine rollout here in the UK has been a fantastic success that's transformed our ability to manage the effects of the virus, and I think we need to push forward with it.
With respect to comparing South Africa to UK, there’s probably a lot more going on besides vaccine availability. Presumably as a wealthier country, UK healthcare is better and not as thinly stretched as South Africa (where Omicron was first detected), for example.
I'm sure there are a number of factors worth considering here which could account for some of the data, but if vaccines were truly as efficacious as governments and pharma companies have been suggesting then given the success of the UK vaccine rollout can we honestly say this is the trend we would expect to see?
I completely accept this isn't proof that vaccines are not effective at managing the pandemic, but the fact data like this is so hard to justify within the context vaccines being highly efficacious it's a bit concerning, especially since it's not like we have much of a choice but to get it here in the UK. My partner is getting her booster today, not because she wants to or feels she needs to (also had a prior infection) but because she feels pressured by government policy. Then just last night I was out shopping and a ~30 y/o guy in the store was complaining about having chest pain since getting his booster, and I've had many similar experiences over the last few months. I hate brining up anecdotal evidence because I know it means nothing, but what I'm seeing with my own eyes in the real world and in the data right now is so hard for me to understand within the context of a safe and effective vaccine. If the data was clear then fair enough, but it's far from clear. I don't want that to be the case, but it is.
What's worse is that every time I've brought this up the response I've received has basically been dismissal, "must be some explanation, vaccines are effective".
Even if you just compare the case numbers in South Africa to the UK (where most are double or triple vaxed) you get a good idea of how well vaccines are working.
For example, in South Africa deaths have gone from about ~15 a day before omicron to ~30 a day since the variant was first identified, which is terrifying. And in South Africa they have around 20,000 new cases a day compared to about 80,000 in the UK -- imagine how much worse it would be in the UK right now if they weren't vaccinated.
Anyone still doubting the efficacy of triple vaccination in healthy populations really needs to look at the data. The South African health authorities are wrong, omicron is a serious threat to our health and if we must fire a few people to ensure another successful Pfizer vaccine rollout, then so be it.
Apologies for the sarcasm, but as some with COVID antibodies from a prior infection which I recovered from in about a day, I am genuinely getting frustrated by how much fear and pressure the government is pushing on me to get vaccinated every few months, when the data on how effective they are at managing the pandemic (even after several doses) seems completely inconclusive. Even if this booster did prevent infection by any substantial amount, are we sure we all need them? And further, are we sure the risk justifies governments and employers pushing them on us via the rollout of various mandates and health passports?