Why more vaccinated people are dying of covid in UK than unvaccinated?

News Network
July 16, 2021

London, July 16: More vaccinated people are dying of Covid than unvaccinated people, according to a recent report from Public Health England (PHE). The report shows that 163 of the 257 people (63.4%) who died of the delta variant within 28 days of a positive Covid test between February 1 and June 21, had received at least one dose of the vaccine. At first glance, this may seem alarming, but it is exactly as would be expected.

Here’s a simple thought experiment: imagine everyone is now fully vaccinated with Covid vaccines – which are excellent but can’t save all lives. Some people who get infected with Covid will still die. All of these people will be fully vaccinated – 100%. That doesn’t mean vaccines aren’t effective at reducing death.

The risk of dying from Covid doubles roughly every seven years older a patient is. The 35-year difference between a 35-year-old and a 70-year-old means the risk of death between the two patients has doubled five times – equivalently it has increased by a factor of 32. An unvaccinated 70-year-old might be 32 times more likely to die of Covid than an unvaccinated 35-year-old.

This dramatic variation of the risk profile with age means that even excellent vaccines don’t reduce the risk of death for older people to below the risk for some younger demographics.

PHE data suggests that being double vaccinated reduces the risk of being hospitalised with the now-dominant delta variant by around 96%. Even conservatively assuming the vaccines are no more effective at preventing death than hospitalisation (actually they are likely to be more effective at preventing death) this means the risk of death for double vaccinated people has been cut to less than one-twentieth of the value for unvaccinated people with the same underlying risk profile.

However, the 20-fold decrease in risk afforded by the vaccine isn’t enough to offset the 32-fold increase in underlying risk of death of an 70-year-old over a 35-year-old.

Given the same risk of infection, we would still expect to see more double-vaccinated 70-year-olds die from Covid than unvaccinated 35-year-olds. There are caveats to that simple calculation. The risk of infection is not the same for all age groups. Currently, infections are highest in the youngest and lower in older age groups.

Think of it as ball-bearing rain

One way to imagine the risk is as a rain of differently sized ball bearings falling from the sky, where the ball bearings are the people that get infected with Covid. For simplicity’s sake, let’s assume there are roughly equal numbers of ball bearings in each age group. In each age category, there is also a variation in the size of the balls. The balls representing the older groups are smaller, representing a higher risk of death.

Now imagine there’s a sieve that catches many of the balls. Most people who get Covid will not die (most balls get caught in the sieve). But some of the smaller balls fall through. The older you are, the more likely you are to fall through the holes. The balls that make it through the first sieve are hugely skewed towards older age ranges, represented by the smaller ball bearings. Before Covid vaccines came along, the people that fell through the holes represented the people who would die of Covid. The risk was massively skewed towards older people.

Vaccination provides a second sieve underneath the first, to prevent people from dying. This time, because we haven’t vaccinated everyone, it’s the holes in the sieve that are of different sizes. For older people who’ve had both doses, the holes are smaller, so many ball-bearings are stopped. The vaccines will save many of those who would previously have died.

For younger people the holes in the vaccine sieve are currently bigger as they are less likely to have received both doses and so more likely to fall through the sieve.

If all the filtering were just done by the second sieve (with no skew in risk of death by age, represented by the first sieve), then we might expect younger unvaccinated people to account for a larger proportion of the deaths. But it isn’t. The first sieve is so hugely biased towards older people that even with vaccination, more of them slip through the second sieve than the younger unvaccinated people.

Given the UK’s vaccination strategy (vaccinate older, more vulnerable people first), you would expect high proportions of the people who die from Covid to have been vaccinated. And that is exactly what we see in the data.

The fact that more vaccinated people are dying than unvaccinated people does nothing to undermine vaccine safety or effectiveness. In fact, it’s exactly what we’d expect from the excellent vaccines, which have already saved tens of thousands of lives.

Comments

David Dunning White
 - 
Monday, 4 Apr 2022

What a load of absolute rubbish. These vaccines are neither safe or effective and have not even passed the stage 3 trials. They plainly don't prevent transmission or infection and the claims that they prevent hospitalisation are spurious and unproven and are a last resort at trying to assure the public that they are safe and effective. Beware of these gene therapy jabs unless you want heart problems ,fertility problems and a weakened and useless immune system.

Ramesh Mishra
 - 
Tuesday, 27 Jul 2021

COVID-19, VACCINE DOES NOT GIVE A GUARANTEED LIFE TO ANYONE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD: People of all ages, races, religions and colours follow the health guidelines issued by the authorities. I have studied, worked and travelled the world for over 50, years, I frequently travel around the world and I have noticed that since the declaration of the pandemic, most of the world was in denial and look at Covid-19, as a joke. The people around the world, and economy is unpredictable due to economic catastrophe and massive death caused by the Covid-19. The law-abiding, disciplined and principled countries would recover fast and the lawless countries would be doomed. The fear of Covid-19 now is in the minds of people around the world and people are afraid to breathe the fresh air. It is our faith that would keep us happy, healthy and alive. Covid-19 is curable and the death incurable.
Ramesh Mishra
Victoria, BC, CANADA

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 14,2025

PMModi.jpg

New Delhi: Prime Minister Narendra Modi launched a scathing attack on the Congress on Sunday, accusing the party of indulging in minority appeasement and vote-bank politics over its opposition to the amended Waqf Act. Speaking at the inauguration of Hisar Airport in Haryana, the Prime Minister also questioned the Congress’s commitment to the Muslim community, asking why the party had never appointed a Muslim president or reserved a significant portion of election tickets for Muslim candidates.

“Congress has appeased only a few fundamentalists while keeping the majority of Muslims poor and uneducated,” Modi said. “If the Congress truly cares for Muslims, let them make a Muslim the party president and reserve 50 per cent of their Lok Sabha tickets for Muslim candidates. But they won’t. Their only aim is to snatch away others’ rights for political gains.”

He alleged that the Congress misused the Waqf law to benefit select groups and land mafias. “Lakhs of hectares of land under Waqf have been misused. If it had been used honestly, Muslim youth wouldn’t be forced to fix bicycle punctures for a living,” Modi remarked. “With the new amendments, Waqf Boards can no longer claim land belonging to tribals or marginalized communities. This is true social justice.”

Modi linked the Waqf law controversy to what he called the Congress’s legacy of undermining Dr B.R. Ambedkar. Remembering Ambedkar on his birth anniversary, the Prime Minister accused the Congress of sidelining him during his lifetime and attempting to erase his legacy after his death.

“Babasaheb Ambedkar stood for equality, but Congress infected the nation with the virus of vote-bank politics. They made him lose elections twice and tried to keep him out of the system,” Modi said, adding that every policy of his government is inspired by Ambedkar’s ideals.

He also took aim at the Congress’s stance on the Uniform Civil Code, noting that while the Constitution recommends a common civil code, the Congress never implemented it. “Today, Uttarakhand has implemented a Uniform Civil Code, and Congress is opposing it. This shows their double standards,” he said.

In response, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge hit back, accusing the BJP of using Ambedkar’s name for political mileage while failing to implement his principles. “Dr Ambedkar emphasised education above all. What has this government done to realise his vision?” Kharge questioned. “They only speak against Congress, against Nehru, and all we have done. But what have they achieved themselves?”

Kharge also reiterated the Congress’s demand for immediate implementation of the Women’s Reservation Act, which mandates 33 per cent representation for women in Parliament and state assemblies. “When the bill was passed two years ago, we demanded SC, ST, and OBC women be included in the reservation. This remains our goal,” he said.

The exchange marks a sharp escalation in the war of words between the two national parties ahead of the upcoming general elections, with both sides invoking Ambedkar’s legacy to bolster their political narratives.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
April 22,2025

modisaudi.jpg

Prime Minister Narendra Modi is set to make a landmark visit to Saudi Arabia on Tuesday, becoming the first Indian prime minister in four decades to set foot in the port city of Jeddah.

The high-profile visit comes at the invitation of Saudi Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud and signals a renewed chapter in the India-Saudi partnership.

During the prime minister's visit, Modi and the Crown Prince will co-chair the second meeting of the India-Saudi Strategic Partnership Council, a forum established during the prime minister’s 2019 visit to institutionalize deeper engagement between the two nations.

Six pacts ready to be signed — more may follow

According to high-level sources cited by news agency PTI, India and Saudi Arabia will ink at least six key memoranda of understanding (MoUs) during Modi's visit. These will cover vital sectors including space exploration, energy, healthcare, scientific research, culture, and advanced technology.

“Negotiations were still underway late Monday to finalise additional MoUs,” a senior official confirmed, adding that over a dozen agreements were on the table — some of which may be signed at the official level even if not during the PM’s presence.

Hajj quota, pilgrim support on the agenda

In his bilateral meeting with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Modi will also raise issues related to Hajj, including India’s annual pilgrimage quota. Sources said that the prime minister aims to ensure smoother coordination and increased support for Indian pilgrims.

India’s Hajj quota for 2025 has grown to 175,025 from 136,020 in 2014, with arrangements already in place for 122,518 pilgrims. However, around 42,000 Indians are unlikely to make the journey this year due to delays by Combined Haj Group Operators in securing agreements.

Indian ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Suhel Ajaz Khan, highlighted Jeddah’s dual importance — both as a historical trade hub with India and as the primary gateway to Mecca. “Hajj is a vital aspect of our bilateral ties, and the Indian government places immense importance on ensuring a seamless pilgrimage experience,” he said.

On Wednesday, the prime minister is also scheduled to visit a factory in Jeddah that employs a large number of Indian workers — a gesture underlining the critical role of the Indian diaspora in strengthening bilateral relations.

Notably, Modi was awarded Saudi Arabia’s highest civilian honour, the King Abdulaziz Sash, in 2016 — a testament to the deepening diplomatic and personal rapport between the leadership of both nations.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 17,2025

VPcourt.jpg

In a controversial statement that has sparked alarm among legal experts and constitutional scholars, Vice-President Jagdeep Dhankhar criticized the judiciary for allegedly overstepping its bounds, particularly targeting the Supreme Court’s recent verdict that set deadlines for the President and Governors to act on Bills.

“We cannot have a situation where courts direct the President,” Mr. Dhankhar said, suggesting that the judiciary is interfering with the powers of the executive. He further described Article 142 of the Constitution — which empowers the Supreme Court to pass orders necessary to do "complete justice" — as a “nuclear missile against democratic forces, available to the judiciary 24x7.”

This incendiary metaphor has drawn backlash for implying that judicial independence — a cornerstone of democracy — is somehow hostile or dangerous. Critics argue that such rhetoric undermines public trust in the judiciary and risks damaging the careful separation of powers between branches of government.

While addressing the sixth batch of Rajya Sabha interns, the Vice President also referred to a serious incident involving a Delhi High Court judge, Yashwant Varma, from whose residence a large amount of cash was allegedly recovered in March. He questioned the delayed disclosure of the incident and criticized the absence of an FIR against the judge.

“An FIR in this country can be registered against anyone, any constitutional functionary, including the one before you... But if it is Judges, FIR cannot be straightaway registered. It has to be approved by the concerned in the Judiciary, but that is not given in the Constitution,” he argued.

He went on to question why judges, unlike the President and Governors, appear to enjoy immunity not explicitly provided in the Constitution.

“If the event had taken place at his house, the speed would have been an electronic rocket. Now it is not even a cattle cart,” he remarked, criticizing the pace of response and investigation.

Why These Remarks Are Dangerous

While scrutiny of public institutions is necessary in a democracy, the Vice President’s remarks are concerning for several reasons:

1.    Undermining Judicial Authority: By calling Article 142 a "nuclear missile," the Vice President risks portraying the judiciary as a threat rather than a guardian of constitutional rights.

2.    Challenging Separation of Powers: The suggestion that courts should not “direct” the President could erode judicial checks on executive inaction or overreach, especially when constitutional responsibilities are being delayed or ignored.

3.    Eroding Public Confidence: As the Vice President of India — also the Chairperson of the Rajya Sabha — such statements carry institutional weight. Attacks on judicial legitimacy can embolden other political actors to disregard court rulings, weakening the rule of law.

4.    Threatening Judicial Independence: Implying that judges should be more easily prosecuted, without proper due process and internal accountability, could be seen as an attempt to intimidate the judiciary.

5.    Fueling Distrust During Sensitive Times: At a moment when public trust in institutions is essential, these remarks may sow unnecessary suspicion and politicize judicial matters that require careful and independent handling.

The Vice President’s speech has ignited a vital conversation about accountability and judicial conduct. However, framing the judiciary as a rogue institution and questioning its constitutional powers without nuance is fraught with danger. Safeguarding democracy requires mutual respect and balance among all pillars of governance — executive, legislature, and judiciary. When this balance is disturbed through political rhetoric, it threatens not just institutions, but the very foundation of constitutional democracy.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.