The fully vaccinated were MORE likely to get COVID in Ontario.
For the entire time period since the province began keeping statistics on cases by vaccination status.
In August, the province of Ontario began breaking cases down by vaccination status. At the time, the vaccinated were doing better, relatively speaking, than the unvaccinated, but as I have noted, we must look at any vaccine holistically. Usually, public health officials like to obscure statistics by including vaccinated cases in the unvaccinated, and excluding the partially vaccinated from the calculations. Instead, they like to only count cases in the “fully vaccinated” because that is the period of time where the vaccine offers “maximum protection” — so they claim.
Let’s play by their rules.
In the above graph, I show how the probability of the vaccinated and unvaccinated testing positive has changed over time. The orange line is the unvaccinated (and those cases in the first 14 days after the vaccine), and the blue line is the fully vaccinated (anyone with two doses or more).
The y-axis is the probability of testing positive in a “life year at risk”; that is to say, the total days that each population has lived divided by 365. In other words, take August 9th, 2021: 286 unvaccinated tested positive on that day, and the population of unvaccinated (and those in the first 14 days after the vaccine) was 4,311,637. By dividing the cases by the population/365 we get a 2.42% risk of testing positive for any given individual in a life year. After two days, the unvaccinated have lived 8,608,760 days, and 515 tested positive in total bringing the risk to 2.18% per life year at risk.
Hopefully that is clear, and obviously, this is not an ideal metric, but we are reading tea leaves based on what little data we are provided. As we are including the summer and fall “waves”, this should represent the fully vaccinated in the best possible light. We are also including the two week period of immunological suppression in the unvaccinated numbers, and (as one of my subscribers noted) many of the cases in the vaccinated cohort are being labelled “vaccination status unknown” (and not included in my numbers) due to a strange definitional technicality meant to make the vaccine look better. Despite that fact, as of January 25th, the fully vaccinated have been more likely to test positive since data collection began. Basically, the interpretation is that, over the time period from August 9th to today, the fully vaccinated could have expected to test positive 6.52% in a given year ceteris paribus.
The contrarian will question these numbers. There are differences in testing behavior, one might say. That may well be true, but one has to wonder when the last time the vaccinated were mandated to test 1-3 times a week as a condition of employment. Last I heard, that was a punishment only bestowed on the unvaccinated. One must also secretly wonder whether the most likely groups to have been unvaccinated, children, are testing at higher rates than the general vaccinated population due to the nature of close contacts at schools. Further to the point, which group is the most likely to use at-home rapid tests and never register as a case in the government statistics?
Differences in testing behavior are regional and convoluted at best. Approximations of how these differences manifest are difficult if not impossible to arrive at, and would likely not be useful across regions or time. In other words, assuming positive efficacy because of something not observed is the definition of either insanity or corruption. If we must insist that the metrics we used to justify the vaccination push are so malleable that, regardless of the outcome, they show the vaccine to be an effective tool at combating the pandemic, then we must be honest about the purpose of the metrics: they are meant to reward the compliant and destroy dissidents.
Even using the crooked definitions of the public health officials, the vaccine has done absolutely nothing to prevent transmission of COVID in Ontario for the period starting August 9th. We’ve had enough.
Great alternative way to look at the data - and damning for vaccine mandates/passports. If cases were properly counted from date of injection it would be even worse. Oh the books that will be written about this worldwide … psychosis? Fraud? Power grab?
Ever since they altered the testing policy at the start of January, they’ve been putting their thumb on the scale to try and hide the complete collapse of their entire public health policy. Even with “unknown vaccination status”, halting the testing/counting non severe cases, breaking out stats between people hospitalized with/because of COVID, and another lockdown their failure is still readily apparent.
It’s the equivalent of a child repeatedly making up the rules to a game, then changing them as soon as they’re losing.
Interesting way of visualising this.
I have a question about this strange definitional technicality you mentioned regarding the "unknown". Could you explain in more detail exactly what that is? I am interested since these unknown cases seem to pop up everywhere in the world at different times and I'm trying to figure out if there are some common causes for it.