3 ms·
It's tempting to look at vaccinated/unvaccinated as a perfect RCT and the unvaccinated are a control group. This clearly isn't the case. There are surely many c
by TheBlight 5y ago
It's tempting to look at vaccinated/unvaccinated as a perfect RCT and the unvaccinated are a control group. This clearly isn't the case. There are surely many confounders at play.
Looking at this release's underlying report they mention:
"The age-adjusted mortality rate among unvaccinated individuals was 5.00 cases per
100,000 unvaccinated population and the age-adjusted mortality rate among
vaccinated individuals was 0.33 per 100,000 vaccinated individuals for the four-week
period ending August 28, 2021."
So the difference in mortality rate is roughly ~5 in 100,000 of the population. This is a very low number. Does it obviously override any possible confounders to indicate a strong signal? Also remember this is age-adjusted. I would imagine this difference is substantially smaller for cohorts omitting the elderly. Is there a material benefit to younger reasonably healthy people? It seems the question is muddier than is typically made out.
- tzs 5y agoGenerally when judging how some intervention does compared to not intervening, I believe you would divide the rates not subtract the rates.
- TheBlight 5y agoI guess you're unable to respond to the substance of what I'm saying. Nominal risk reduction of already insanely low risk is not compelling especially when confounders are present and cannot be accounted for.