The Covid infection rate in Scotland is 50% higher than it is in England, the latest ONS data show. According to the latest figures, 5.9% of Scots would test positive for COVID-19 in the week ending June 30th, compared to 4.0% of the English.
This outcome may surprise health authorities as Scotland has a higher vaccination rate than England. Scotland has delivered 12.9 million doses to a population of 5.5 million, giving a rate of 235 doses per 100 population. England has delivered 125.7 million doses to a population of 56.0 million, giving a rate of 224 doses per 100 population. On top of these figures, Scotland’s spring booster campaign is reported to have reached 90% of the country’s over-75s, whereas England’s has only reached 75%. Adding on these doses (450,000 in Scotland and 4 million in England) gives 243 doses per 100 in Scotland versus 232 doses per 100 in England.
Health authorities need to explain why infections are higher in the more highly vaccinated part of the U.K.
Note that the ONS charts this week (see above) have for some reason missed off the data point from last week. That gives the impression that the current wave is accelerating whereas in fact it has slowed in the past week, as the following charts indicate.
Here is last week’s for England.
Here is this week’s – where’s last week’s data point gone?
Here I’ve added it in, showing the slowdown this week:
I assume this was an innocent mistake, but with how politicised Covid data have become, who knows? After all, the Government no longer publishes data by vaccination status, presumably because the data were not favourable to the vaccines. That’s why we now have to look at proxy measures, such as comparing Scotland and England. Given the Government continues to approve vaccines and encourage take-up of additional doses, it is a scandal that it no longer publishes data showing the infection, disease and death rates by vaccination status. In light of the latest worrying data from Scotland, this important element of Government transparency should be restored without delay.
Stop Press: The UKHSA has said infections are currently rising fastest in the over-80s, with the “largest increases in hospitalisations and ICU admissions in those aged 75 and older”. This is the very age group that has just been given a spring booster. UKHSA chief Mary Ramsay says that 80% of over-75s have received a booster in the last six months, yet blames “waning immunity in older people who have not taken up the booster on schedule” for the increase in infections and disease – despite her agency refusing to publish the data that would show whether the rise is primarily in the less vaccinated. So the solution is yet more doses: “Vaccination remains the best defence against severe disease and we urge anyone who’s eligible for the spring booster to take it up.”
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
It does seem strange. But not to worry, the BBC have commissioned a documentary called Unvaccinated, wherein seven impressionable victims of online misinformation, like that from the ONS referenced in this article, will be put in a room and gaslighted by some experts, in the hope they will change their anti-thescience ways and submit to untested gene therapy like sensible people. That should iron out any remaining doubts we may be harbouring.
Blimey. I thought you were joking
The BBC has turned into a terrorist organisation. Raze it to the ground.
They despise the people who pay their wages.
The BBC documentary will have “unvaccinated participants” (chosen by the BBC) debating with “leading experts” – not experts debating with experts.
Extremely insulting and patronising blurb there. Speculating on what the unvaccinated participants will have “learned” by the end of the process, implying that in some way we are uninformed.
Hosted by a mathematician FFS!
As somebody else said the other day, rather than moderating their stance as it becomes clear to more and more people that these shots are useless at best and very bad news at worst, these clowns are relentlessly doubling down.
despitebecause ofIt beggars belief that medical professionals are badgering people to get vaccinated with the same old vaccines after so long. My friend had 5 doses now and (minor) arguments end with “the doctor said…”
All of this would be hilarious were it not for the effect it has had on the public finances.
All the more reason for the next leader of the country to be not just a brexiteer but a lockdown sceptic.
If Sir Desmond Swayne (Lockdown Legend) is supporting Suella Braverman, then that is good enough for me.
Steve Baker has withdrawn and is also now supporting Suella Braverman.
Bugger, I wanted Baker…
But maybe she’s a Braver Man
Assuming Sars-CoV2 infections were randomly distributed and static among the population, the actual Sars-CoV2 infection rate could be approximated by testing random subsets of said population and combining the results. This would – over time – eliminate the unknown individual errors (ie difference from the actual rate) of each individual test result. As ONS doesn’t do that, the only thing that’s certain about the result a round of tests is that it’s going to be off by an unknown amount.
As Sars-CoV2 infections are neither randomly distributed nor static, testing a random subset of the population for Sars-CoV2 RNA is not representative of anything.
Knowing whether Sars-CoV2 RNA is or isn’t present in the body of healthy indivduals is not anyhow useful information.
A bit more generally worded: If the circumstances were such that these ONS surveys would make sense, they would useless as they are being conducted in the wrong way. Since the circumstances are different, their outcome cannot ever have any meaning. If the necessary preconditions would hold and the surveys were being done correctly, the result wouldn’t be interesting.
This is nothing but a taxpayer paid population bullshitting in the hope to advance the case for more kowtowing in front of the almighty Corona virus.
And don’t forget that the technique used for testing has it’s own problems. The accuracy is not very good, but they keep silent about what it is. If they had to say that it’s (say) 50%, the whole thing is meaningless.
The vaccines are safe and effective and I am a liar
Could you put that in Gaelic, please?
In the meantime, perhaps this will tempt RedHotScot into donating:
Tha na banachdachan sàbhailte agus èifeachdach, agus tha mi breugach.
No idea what you are saying but given your inherent common sense it’s a yes from me.
It looks like I have my own personal troll. I am seriously impressed. Clearly some of my comments are striking home. Many thanks.
Firkin downticker has gone to bed. Lazy ars*hole.
On what do they base their figures? Is there a sample of the population that are being studied and the modelling is based on that? Are people still testing and reporting positive results? If so, to whom?
Precisely.
The only way to gauge whether or not the jabs are “safe and effective”, lol, is to measure the health outcomes of similar cohorts of jabbed v. unjabbed.
And the chance of that being done at all (and released) , let alone honestly and accurately is…..
The computer equivalent of tearing pages from a phonebook and throwing darts at them.