Cornell University - Vaccination not Preventing Infection

[whatbogsends]

I'm sorry that I can't quite make out all the information and how it's presented but this isn't comparing the data from Sept 2020 with data from Sept 2021 right?
Because that TRULY doesn't seem like an apt comparison.

Or is it comparing a 0% vaccination at Itheca in 2021 with a 96% vaccination at Cornell

It was Sept 2020 vs. Sept 2021 at Cornell. They were in person both scenarios. The social distancing and masking rules were the same in both scenarios. There was (marginally) more testing done in 2020 vs. 2021.

Cornell is plowing ahead with in-person classes, tuition increase, contrary to other Ivy League schools

https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2020/09/cornell-opens-fall-2020-semester

What has changed:

1) Delta being prevalent strain instead of alpha.

2) Population (students and faculty) 96% vaccinated instead of 0% vaccinated.

Case rate up over 500% in 2021 with delta and 96% vaccination rate.

What about the comparison "TRULY" doesn't seem apt?

 

[whatbogsends]

Here's a graph of the infection numbers in NSW (a state of ~ 6 million people), with vaccination rates and the point at which the lockdown ended and the case numbers continued to fall.

Clearly the vaccine is very effective at preventing infection.

Ahh, cherry picked data, is there anything it cannot do?

Talk about cherry picked data. You graphed one wave of Covid. The numbers go down at the end of every wave.

If you don't like the Cornell comparison, look at the UK. Look at the Spain. Look at Israel. They are all highly vaccinated countries and their highest rates of infection in the pandemic were after a high percentage of their population was vaccinated.

United Kingdom COVID: 8,497,868 Cases and 138,629 Deaths - Worldometer

Spain COVID: 4,988,878 Cases and 87,030 Deaths - Worldometer

Israel COVID: 1,317,758 Cases and 8,010 Deaths - Worldometer

There's been little correlation between vaccination rates and infection rates.

 

[Sparagmos]

This is only getting reported on far right sites, but instead of linking to far right sites reporting on it, i thought i'd link to the data directly.

Cornell had a vaccine mandate this year. 96% of the on-campus population of the university is fully vaccinated. The first week of classes this year had 322 confirmed Covid cases vs. 59 confirmed cases the first week of classes in 2020. More tests were administered in 2020 (28,951) than in 2021 (27,103)

2020

View attachment 307351

View attachment 307355



2021

View attachment 307352

View attachment 307354

COVID-19 Tracking Dashboard

Academic Calendar 2020-2021 | Cornell University Registrar

Academic Calendar 2021-2022 | Cornell University Registrar


If 96% of the students are vaccinated (vs. 0% in 2020) and more testing was done (just by a little) in 2020, and vaccines greatly (this is what you folks keep telling me) reduce the rate of infection, how is it that there were more than 5x the number of cases in such a highly vaccinated population?

The numbers in the subsequent weeks after classes started were also higher in 2021 vs. 2020.

The data doesn't jive with the claims of vaccines being effective at preventing infection.

Where is the 2020 data? Unless I’m mistaken, you’re only showing two weeks of data from 2020, and classes had just started. Nevertheless, delta is FAR more contagious.

 

[ThisIsMe123]

We can safely say that herd immunity from these vaccines is a myth with delta if we get 5x the infections in a 96% vaccinated population compared to an entirely unvaccinated population with the alpha variant.

Moreover, it's nonsensical to force vaccinations in the name of preventing the spread of Covid when extremely highly vaccinated populations spread the virus this much.

It doesn't mean they won't keep trying to (and succeeding) in coercing people to get vaccinated in the name of the public good, but the evidence is clear that it will neither end the pandemic or protect the most vulnerable.

You're right, it doesn't prevent infection. Not sure what would you think otherwise? It's a NON-sterilizing vaccination. It'll be endemic for years to come. The vaccine is to decrease the severity of the illness, nothing more.

Which would you rather be severely ill and/or dead? Or just get infected?

 

[Job 33:6]

People who are having heavy social contact are putting others at risk and are increasing the chances of mutation.

vaccinated are much less likely to become infected. Vaccines range from 60-80% effective at preventing infection depending on which vaccine you choose (meaning the virus will spread slower). Further, vaccinated shed the virus faster, meaning a further decreased likelyhood of spreading infection.

 

[Job 33:6]

I hope I'm not trying to tell you anything. But >

The vaccination does not stop infection. What it does, if it works, is to prepare the body's immune system so it is more ready to fight an infection.

No. Vaccination does stop infection. It ranges from 60-80% against Delta at preventing infection, depending on the vaccine.

Please stop spreading misinformation.

 

[tall73]

The spread in a vaccinated population is much slower than in a non vaccinated population, this puts much less strain on the public health system and results is 11 times less people eventually going to hospitals.

Reports I have seen still show some protective effect against infection despite waning antibodies and mutations (with better protection against hospitalization and death). However, it is still not clear that spread is much slower in a vaccinated population vs a non-vaccinated population.

Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States

We investigate the relationship between the percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases across 68 countries and across 2947 counties in the US.

Across the US counties too, the median new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people in the last 7 days is largely similar across the categories of percent population fully vaccinated (Fig. 2). Notably there is also substantial county variation in new COVID-19 cases within categories of percentage population fully vaccinated. There also appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-19 cases decreasing with higher percentages of population fully vaccinated

The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants. Other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions may need to be put in place alongside increasing vaccination rates. Such course correction, especially with regards to the policy narrative, becomes paramount with emerging scientific evidence on real world effectiveness of the vaccines.

(Note, the authors of the study are not anti-vaccine. They note that other strategies need to be employed in addition to increased vaccination).

 

[stevil]

(Note, the authors of the study are not anti-vaccine. They note that other strategies need to be employed in addition to increased vaccination).

Sure we can do more than just get vaccinated.

 

[Tanj]

Talk about cherry picked data.

Well, yes, yes I did.

You graphed one wave of Covid. The numbers go down at the end of every wave.

That's not in anyway applicable to the data I provided, which doesn't make it any less cherry picked, ironically enough.

If you don't like the Cornell comparison, look at the UK. Look at the Spain. Look at Israel. They are all highly vaccinated countries and their highest rates of infection in the pandemic were after a high percentage of their population was vaccinated.

If I don't like cherry pick 1 you have provided 2, 3 and 4 for me? Well gee, thanks.

There's been little correlation between vaccination rates and infection rates.

That's wholly inaccurate (no surprise there), but the waining efficacy is very well known...well, to most of us, anyway. Any other news from months ago you are only just now hearing that you'd like to share?

Here's an actual study, you know, an actual study, not rando graph from where ever from 2 weeks ago:

DEFINE_ME

Here's another from 1 month ago
COVID vaccine immunity is waning — how much does that matter?

The only person that thinks vaccine's waning efficacy against infection is brand new news is you.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Obviously the Delta variant being more transmissible is a factor, but it's not the only factor.

I can't speak for Cornell's practices in 2020 vs. 2021.

But, what was their schedule like for 2020 vs. 2021 with regards to remote learning vs. in-person learning?

https://cornellsun.com/2020/11/06/m...ience-first-years-reflect-on-remote-learning/

If it's anything like the colleges around here, large chunks of 2020 were remote learning. Combined with the fact that NY (like most states) still had some stricter requirements in place for public places in general.


If you have an environment in 2020 where most things are shut down, and there's mostly remote learning taking place, vs. 2021, where everyone comes back to in-person learning, and all of the bars and restaurants have reopened...I would expect higher case loads.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

We can safely say that herd immunity from these vaccines is a myth with delta if we get 5x the infections in a 96% vaccinated population compared to an entirely unvaccinated population with the alpha variant.

Moreover, it's nonsensical to force vaccinations in the name of preventing the spread of Covid when extremely highly vaccinated populations spread the virus this much.

It doesn't mean they won't keep trying to (and succeeding) in coercing people to get vaccinated in the name of the public good, but the evidence is clear that it will neither end the pandemic or protect the most vulnerable.

I think nuance is key here.

Is the vaccine preventing all infection? No, obviously not.

Is it mitigating some of the most severe outcomes and preventing some of the infection? Yes, without a doubt.

If you recall, the original "hope" for the vaccines was never sterilizing immunity. Early on, all of the experts were saying "if we can reduce 90% of the hospitalizations and deaths, and have a prevention rate of 40% (on par with the flu shot) we'll be happy with that"

When the vaccines outperformed the original expectations, people lost sight of the original goal, and went into panic mode the moment the transmission prevention fell below 70% (despite the hospitalization/death prevention remaining strong).


What I don't think is productive, is this appeal to futility fallacy where because it's not 100%, people portray it as if it's a waste of time to try to get other people vaccinated.

 

[Tanj]

So the CDC is now reporting on COVID by vaccination status.

COVID Data Tracker

Well worth a look, there's a few buttons that let you drill down a bit.

In August, you were 6x more likely to get infected and 11x more likely to die if you were not vaccinated.

 

[That Guy 11200]

Talk about cherry picked data. You graphed one wave of Covid. The numbers go down at the end of every wave.

If you don't like the Cornell comparison, look at the UK. Look at the Spain. Look at Israel. They are all highly vaccinated countries and their highest rates of infection in the pandemic were after a high percentage of their population was vaccinated.

United Kingdom COVID: 8,497,868 Cases and 138,629 Deaths - Worldometer

Spain COVID: 4,988,878 Cases and 87,030 Deaths - Worldometer

Israel COVID: 1,317,758 Cases and 8,010 Deaths - Worldometer

There's been little correlation between vaccination rates and infection rates.

I'm a commuter in London. Before the vaccines, there were fewer people commuting to work and more people wearing masks and socially distancing. Now the trains are packed full of people not wearing masks, not trying to distance and a lot of them don't even cover their filfthy mouths when they cough (this last one is absolutely disgusting behaviour, even at the best of times).

 

[stevil]

So the CDC is now reporting on COVID by vaccination status.

COVID Data Tracker

From that site

• COVID-19 vaccines protect people from getting infected and severely ill, and significantly reduce the likelihood of hospitalization and death.
• Getting vaccinated is the best way to slow the spread of COVID-19 and to prevent infection by Delta or other variants.
• Most people who get COVID-19 are unvaccinated. However, since vaccines are not 100% effective at preventing infection, some people who are fully vaccinated will still get COVID-19

Studies so far show vaccinated people are

• 8 times less likely to be infected
• 25 times less likely to experience hospitalization or death.

People who are immunocompromised may not always build adequate levels of protection after an initial 2-dose primary mRNA COVID-19 vaccine series. They should continue to take all precautions recommended for unvaccinated people

 

[KCfromNC]

It was Sept 2020 vs. Sept 2021 at Cornell. They were in person both scenarios.

Not exactly - https://cornellsun.com/2020/09/06/two-thirds-of-cornell-classes-are-online-despite-hybrid-semester/

A Sun review of the class roster revealed that about two-thirds of Cornell courses are held fully online this fall. Less than 1 percent of the classes in each undergraduate college are entirely in-person, running on campus for seven weeks and ending before Thanksgiving break.​

 

[KCfromNC]

Reports I have seen still show some protective effect against infection despite waning antibodies and mutations (with better protection against hospitalization and death). However, it is still not clear that spread is much slower in a vaccinated population vs a non-vaccinated population.

Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States

Figure 2 in this paper shows a pretty clear relationship between increased vaccination rates and decreased case counts. As does the supplemental info linked from the end of their Methods section.

 

[rambot]

That's your choice also. See how that works,? You don't get to tell other people how to make their decisions.

Well that's not true.
I am TOTALLY free to tell people intelligent ways to make decisions.

Personally, I don't get to FORCE them to do anything but I can CERTAINLY tell them smart and useful ways to do things.

 

[rambot]

Not exactly - https://cornellsun.com/2020/09/06/two-thirds-of-cornell-classes-are-online-despite-hybrid-semester/

A Sun review of the class roster revealed that about two-thirds of Cornell courses are held fully online this fall. Less than 1 percent of the classes in each undergraduate college are entirely in-person, running on campus for seven weeks and ending before Thanksgiving break.​

Well there you go. It seems as if the entire argument in the OP is now moot.

Could we assume that the right wing media sources who posted this initially will take it down?

 

[rambot]

Reports I have seen still show some protective effect against infection despite waning antibodies and mutations (with better protection against hospitalization and death). However, it is still not clear that spread is much slower in a vaccinated population vs a non-vaccinated population.**

Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States

We investigate the relationship between the percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases across 68 countries and across 2947 counties in the US.

Across the US counties too, the median new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people in the last 7 days is largely similar across the categories of percent population fully vaccinated (Fig. 2). Notably there is also substantial county variation in new COVID-19 cases within categories of percentage population fully vaccinated. There also appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-19 cases decreasing with higher percentages of population fully vaccinated

The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants. Other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions may need to be put in place alongside increasing vaccination rates. Such course correction, especially with regards to the policy narrative, becomes paramount with emerging scientific evidence on real world effectiveness of the vaccines.

(Note, the authors of the study are not anti-vaccine. They note that other strategies need to be employed in addition to increased vaccination).

[my highlight...at the end]
This article was put up previously and I don't think it was used appropriately that time either.

The "levels of vaccination" across countries aren't going to affect COVID unless those numbers are really closer to 100%.

EG: In the US there is still an unvaccinated population of 10s of millions so of course COVID is able to spread through those populations. So long as there are large populations of unvaccinated people, why would the rates significantly change?

Look at the populations in the hospitalizations, this is where you can see the impact of vaccinations.


The reason why I highlighted that piece at the start is that you are suggesting there is no difference in spread between "vaccinated and nonvaccinated population". To do a proper comparison for THAT you would need to compare vaccinated populations with nonvaccinated populations. This study compares MIXED populations in different countries with different vaccination rates.

In my province we have 78% fully vaxed but up until recently, our province was a disaster (then we locked down and things improved). If you look at who was in our hospitals, it was 80-90% unvaccinated people....DESPITE them only being about 12% of the population.

 

[renniks]

Well that's not true.
I am TOTALLY free to tell people intelligent ways to make decisions.

Personally, I don't get to FORCE them to do anything but I can CERTAINLY tell them smart and useful ways to do things.

What is smart and useful according to you may be nonsense to someone else.