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
February 1,2026

Bengaluru: The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash an investigation against a WhatsApp group administrator accused of allowing the circulation of obscene and offensive images depicting Hindutva politicians and idols in 2021.

Justice M Nagaprasanna observed that, prima facie, the ingredients of the offence under Section 295A of the Indian Penal Code were made out. “The offence under Section 295A of the IPC is met to every word of its ingredient, albeit prima facie,” the judge said.

The petitioner, Sirajuddin, a resident of Belthangady taluk in Dakshina Kannada district, had challenged the FIR registered against him at the CEN (Cyber, Economics and Narcotics) police station, Mangaluru, for offences under Section 295A of the IPC and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. Section 295A relates to punishment for deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage the religious feelings of any class of citizens.

According to the complaint filed by K Jayaraj Salian, also a resident of Belthangady taluk, he received a WhatsApp group link from an unknown source and was added to the group after accessing it. The group reportedly had six administrators and around 250 participants, where obscene and offensive images depicting Hindu deities and certain political figures were allegedly circulated repeatedly.

Sirajuddin was arrested in connection with the case and later released on bail on February 16, 2021. He argued before the court that he was being selectively targeted, while other administrators—including the creator of the group—were neither arrested nor investigated. He also contended that the Magistrate could not have taken cognisance of the offence under Section 295A without prior sanction under Section 196(1) of the CrPC.

Rejecting the argument, Justice Nagaprasanna held that prior sanction is required only at the stage of taking cognisance, and not at the stage of registration of the crime or during investigation.

The judge noted that the State had produced the entire investigation material before the court. “A perusal of the material reveals depictions of Hindu deities in an extraordinarily obscene, demeaning and profane manner. The content is such that its reproduction in a judicial order would itself be inappropriate,” the court said, adding that the material, on its face, had the tendency to outrage religious feelings and disturb communal harmony.

Observing that the case was still at the investigation stage, the court said it could not interdict the probe at this juncture. However, it expressed concern that the investigating officer appeared to have not proceeded uniformly against all administrators. The court clarified that if the investigation revealed the active involvement of any member in permitting the circulation of such content, they must also be proceeded against.

“At this investigative stage, any further observation by this Court would be unnecessary,” the order concluded.

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
February 1,2026

US President Donald Trump on Saturday claimed that the government of India led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi has made a deal to buy Venezuelan oil, as opposed to purchasing it from Iran.

"We've already made that deal, the concept of the deal," he told reporters on Air Force One.

Trump had imposed 25% tariffs on countries buying Venezuelan oil, including India, in March 2025. He had also hit India with tariffs for buying Russian oil, saying it was "funding" President Vladimir Putin's war against Ukraine.

Trump has said that the US has taken control of the oil-rich Venezuela after capturing former President Nicolas Maduro in January.

A fleet of 18 ships loaded with crude oil bound for refineries in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi in January, the most since December 2024, according to a report by the news agency Bloomberg.

Combined crude deliveries to the US will reach about 2,75,000 barrels a day, more than doubling volumes seen in December last year. Shipments to China, which averaged 4,00,000 barrels a day last year, fell to zero in January.

PM Modi, Venezuelan President Agree To Expand Ties

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Venezuela's acting President Delcy Rodriguez spoke on Friday and agreed to take the bilateral relations to "new heights" in the years ahead.

It was the first phone call between the two leaders since the capture of Maduro and his wife by the US on January 3.

"Spoke with Acting President of Venezuela, Ms. Delcy Rodriguez. We agreed to further deepen and expand our bilateral partnership in all areas, with a shared vision of taking India-Venezuela relations to new heights in the years ahead," PM Modi said in a post on X.

A statement from Prime Minister Modi's office said the two leaders agreed to further expand and deepen the India-Venezuela partnership in all areas, including trade and investment, energy, digital technology, health, agriculture, and people-to-people ties.

They exchanged views on various regional and global issues of mutual interest and underscored the importance of their close cooperation for the Global South, the statement said.

Rodriguez also said that they discussed partnerships in the fields of agriculture, science and technology, mining, and tourism, as well as the pharmaceutical and automotive industries.

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
February 1,2026

Bengaluru: Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Sunday criticised the Union Budget presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, claiming it offered no tangible benefit to the state.

Though he said he was yet to study the budget in detail, Shivakumar asserted that Karnataka had gained little from it. “There is no benefit for our state from the central budget. I was observing it. They have now named a programme after Mahatma Gandhi, after repealing the MGNREGA Act that was named after him,” he said.

Speaking to reporters here, the Deputy Chief Minister demanded the restoration of MGNREGA, and made it clear that the newly enacted rural employment scheme — VB-G RAM G — which proposes a 60:40 fund-sharing formula between the Centre and the states, would not be implemented in Karnataka.

“I don’t see any major share for our state in this budget,” he added.

Shivakumar, who also holds charge of Bengaluru development, said there were high expectations for the city from the Union Budget. “The Prime Minister calls Bengaluru a ‘global city’, but what has the Centre done for it?” he asked.

He also drew attention to the problems faced by sugar factories, particularly those in the cooperative sector, alleging a lack of timely decisions and support from the central government.

Noting that the Centre has the authority to fix the minimum support price (MSP) for agricultural produce, Shivakumar said the Union government must take concrete steps to protect farmers’ interests.

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.