Which is?
I'm honestly not sure. Historical data of some kind, although I don't know how they factor in the people with antibodies from previous infections.
Quotes in a signature is annoying, as it comes across as an independent post.
It says on the bottom it’s based on rates of hospitalization from COVID-NET as of May 22.
Now they’re peddling the idea that mixing up the Pfizer and Astra shots is the way to go. The whole vaccine situation is as confusing as COVID itself.
Yes, but hospitalization rate is contingent on knowing the number of infections. How are they calculating how many infections there would have been to come up with how many hospitalizations were avoided?
Good question. Actual infections in the population reduced by 95%?
That number fluctuates constantly, based on waves/seasons. It also doesn't calculate reduced risks of infection due to prior infection.
Why uh oh? This is what we need in order to attempt to keep things under control. Arguably what was missing before all the other waves.
Whatever unvaccinated number in the population was infected during that time x19 (obviously rolling as the vaccinated numbers increased). As far as prior infection, if the same amount of people with prior infection exist in the unvaccinated community as the vaccinated (my money is actually on more in the unvaxxed) then there’s no need to adjust the calculation.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-57636356
Lead investigator Prof Matthew Snape, from the University of Oxford, said the findings did not undermine the UK policy of giving people the same jab twice:
Need a hospitalization chart transposed on above data