>>13520364>why are you taking in count the general population when the sample and it's ratio with the deaths is solid in the study?It's only solid if we can assume they're tracking cases accurately in each group (vaccinated and unvaccinated). I'll come back to this.
>this study took samples not all of the UK,This is wrong. It's for all confirmed delta cases.
Okay, let's go back to the first point. You've been tracking the data from Israel that shows the vaccines are only 40% protective against becoming infected by the delta variant, yeah? Do you believe the vaccines are now not doing much to prevent infections? If so, look at the total cases in OP's chart. The unvaccinated had 150k cases, the fully vaccinated only 47k cases. 60% of England's population is fully vaccinated. So that leads us to a problem, either Israel's data is way off and the vaccines are still very efficacious, or the vaccinated cases are seriously undercounted. The most likely scenario is that the majority of vaccinated infections are so mild that the person doesn't realize they're sick so they never get tested, compounded by the unvaccinated probably getting tested more due to restrictions that require it based on their vaccination status.
So we have two possibilities. 1. The vaccines are still very effective, preventing the majority of infections, or 2. the cases are being undercounted. If it's the latter, then based on Israel's data, the vaccinated cases are probably at 200k+, which suddenly makes the CFR drop like a rock. The chart is clearly showing that being fully vaccinated dramatically reduces risk of death from COVID-19. If cases are accurate, then vaccination may slightly increase risk of death if infected while vaccinated, but risk of infection drops so much that overall risk is still substantially reduced. If cases are inaccurate, then the CFR for the vaccinated group is much lower than the unvaccinated group. Either way, the vaccinated group is at lower risk.
