Australia has a very high covid inoculation rate because of the mandates and no pre-existing immunity from the first waves of covid because it was kept out of the country for two years.
The table below came from the following state government publication: https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infec...nts/covid-19-surveillance-report-20220204.pdf
Currently the totals are thrown out by the large number of children in the unvaccinated columns and to a lesser extent by teenagers who aren't really at risk from covid. But for everyone over 20 it seems pretty clear now that the hospitalisation rate per infection is reduced by about 90-95%.
A 1 in 200 chance of ending up in ICU or dead is actually bad. If some supplement had a 0.5% risk nobody would take it, for sure. 1 in 200 definitely are not dying or being hospitalized from the vaccine. It simply has not happened. There is likewise no evidence of the hypothesised genetic changes.
I personally don't know of anyone who admitted to having side effects from it, apart from one guy who seemed a bit agitated the day after his second dose, took the following day off, and then was seemingly back to normal.
How is the vaccine not reducing serious disease when 2% of the cases in any given age group are making up about 25% of ICU cases and deaths?
The data on state-level vaccinated population by age is rather low quality but it looks like the reverse of the UK data that has been used to claim waning/negative effectiveness. Old people were vaccinated first and the government claims that <1% of them are unvaccinated, and that <1% still has 2-5% of the cases, which is the reverse of the UK "negative efficacy" claim, and 20% of serious disease.
For younger people it's a bit ambiguous -- cases are considerably below their proportion of the population. It has been supposed that they aren't reporting cases, but they had more incentive to report infections or get a PCR test in order to get a temporary vaccine exemption. But even if they caught it at the same rate they would still be overrepresented in serious disease cases.
The table below came from the following state government publication: https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infec...nts/covid-19-surveillance-report-20220204.pdf
| Three or more effective doses | | | Two effective doses | Less than two effective doses | ||||
| % severe | Severe | Total | % severe | Severe | Total | % severe | Severe | Total |
0-9 | - | - | - | | | | 0.0% | 15 | 54536 |
10-19 | 0.0% | 0 | 232 | 0.0% | 5 | 54508 | 0.0% | 6 | 15854 |
20-29 | 0.0% | 1 | 3849 | 0.0% | 22 | 128000 | 0.3% | 7 | 2692 |
30-39 | 0.1% | 2 | 3833 | 0.0% | 33 | 87486 | 0.5% | 11 | 2123 |
40-49 | 0.0% | 2 | 5125 | 0.1% | 38 | 64157 | 1.2% | 14 | 1176 |
50-59 | 0.1% | 5 | 4258 | 0.1% | 58 | 52112 | 3.2% | 22 | 687 |
60-69 | 0.3% | 10 | 2911 | 0.3% | 106 | 31310 | 6.4% | 33 | 512 |
70-79 | 0.7% | 15 | 2081 | 1.3% | 189 | 14013 | 8.7% | 33 | 379 |
80-89 | 0.8% | 8 | 1046 | 3.0% | 160 | 5373 | 17.3% | 40 | 231 |
>90 | 1.6% | 7 | 447 | 4.9% | 63 | 1296 | 17.5% | 18 | 103 |
Total | 0.2% | 50 | 23782 | 0.2% | 674 | 438255 | 0.3% | 199 | 78293 |
Currently the totals are thrown out by the large number of children in the unvaccinated columns and to a lesser extent by teenagers who aren't really at risk from covid. But for everyone over 20 it seems pretty clear now that the hospitalisation rate per infection is reduced by about 90-95%.
A 1 in 200 chance of ending up in ICU or dead is actually bad. If some supplement had a 0.5% risk nobody would take it, for sure. 1 in 200 definitely are not dying or being hospitalized from the vaccine. It simply has not happened. There is likewise no evidence of the hypothesised genetic changes.
I personally don't know of anyone who admitted to having side effects from it, apart from one guy who seemed a bit agitated the day after his second dose, took the following day off, and then was seemingly back to normal.
| | 2 doses | | >2 doses | | ||
% of cases | % of severe cases | % of cases | % of severe cases | % of cases | % of severe cases | ||
| 0-9 | 100.0% | 100.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | |
| 10-19 | 22.5% | 54.5% | 77.2% | 45.5% | 0.3% | 0.0% | |
| 20-29 | 14% | 2.0% | 23.3% | 95.1% | 73.3% | 2.9% | 3.3% |
| 30-39 | 9% | 2.3% | 23.9% | 93.6% | 71.7% | 4.1% | 4.3% |
| 40-49 | 7% | 1.7% | 25.9% | 91.1% | 70.4% | 7.3% | 3.7% |
| 50-59 | 5% | 1.2% | 25.9% | 91.3% | 68.2% | 7.5% | 5.9% |
| 60-69 | 3% | 1.5% | 22.1% | 90.1% | 71.1% | 8.4% | 6.7% |
| 70-79 | 1% | 2.3% | 13.9% | 85.1% | 79.7% | 12.6% | 6.3% |
| 80-89 | <1% | 3.5% | 19.2% | 80.8% | 76.9% | 15.7% | 3.8% |
| >90 | <1% | 5.6% | 20.5% | 70.2% | 71.6% | 24.2% | 8.0% |
How is the vaccine not reducing serious disease when 2% of the cases in any given age group are making up about 25% of ICU cases and deaths?
The data on state-level vaccinated population by age is rather low quality but it looks like the reverse of the UK data that has been used to claim waning/negative effectiveness. Old people were vaccinated first and the government claims that <1% of them are unvaccinated, and that <1% still has 2-5% of the cases, which is the reverse of the UK "negative efficacy" claim, and 20% of serious disease.
For younger people it's a bit ambiguous -- cases are considerably below their proportion of the population. It has been supposed that they aren't reporting cases, but they had more incentive to report infections or get a PCR test in order to get a temporary vaccine exemption. But even if they caught it at the same rate they would still be overrepresented in serious disease cases.
