How well does the vaccine work against omicron? Here is the real world data.

Often we have to communicate shady ideas in a world where it’s just easier to remember black or white ideas.

And that creates a problem: most people consider themselves better wordsmiths than number crunchers. And yet, sometimes, to communicate changing or proportionate ideas, words are simply not the right tool for the task. The numbers are.

Nowhere is this more evident than in much of the public misunderstanding – accidental or otherwise – about the coronavirus. The fact that the omicron variant is “milder” than previous variants means that “omicron is mild”. The fact that masks prevent a certain amount of transmission, but not most of it, means masks don’t work. And when it is said that the vast majority of people survive the virus, many take that to mean they can live with impunity.

So when people read articles about vaccine effectiveness and see that the vaccine is “less effective” against omicron, many think that “vaccines are ineffective”. It’s just too easy to subtly alter the meaning of words and phrases, even unintentionally.

Well, I want to try to nail that. Using the actual number of cases, hospitalizations and deaths, I want to show you the effectiveness – and yes, sometimes the lack thereof – of our current omicron vaccines.

First, here’s the Utah data. These represent the weekly averages of cases, hospitalizations and deaths per 100,000 Utah residents since vaccines began. If you’re online, you can scroll your mouse or finger and see the exact numbers for each week.

The trend is clear, and it continues: vaccinated people are doing much, much better in this pandemic than unvaccinated people. Over the past 28 days, for example – which will include a mix of omicron and delta – unvaccinated people are 2.4 times more likely to be infected, 8.9 more likely to be hospitalized and 16.2 times more likely to die than vaccinated people. Even in the last few weeks, in which omicron is estimated to be around 90% of cases, we still see huge gaps.

Now, you may note that this does not take boosters into account. For the graphs above, “vaccinated” means at least one dose of Johnson & Johnson, or at least two doses of Pfizer or Moderna. Boosted people are included.

So how does getting a booster dose of the vaccine change the numbers? Well, unfortunately, we don’t have data from Utah on boosted versus unvaccinated vaccines. I don’t know why the Utah Department of Health isn’t tracking this – maybe it’s because only 22% of Utahans are boosted? Either way, I wish they would.

But we have figures from other countries, again showing real data on the increased effectiveness of vaccines.

In particular, the UK has done a very good job of collecting data throughout the pandemic. What their data shows is that, yes, omicron makes vaccines much less effective at protecting against infection. Take a look at this graph. On the left, vaccine effectiveness has dropped significantly for people who received two doses of Pfizer long ago against omicron; on the right side, how people are doing so far.

In the UK data, efficacy against symptomatic disease after receiving two doses of Pfizer over 6 months ago is close to zero – not great at all.

But there is good news: it helps considerably if you have been boosted. That number jumps to around 50-60% if you stick with Pfizer, or around 70% for those who mix and match.

There’s more to the story too. The vaccine also serves to greatly weaken infections when they occur, especially for boosted people. Data from the UK shows that getting two doses of the vaccine provides a 51% reduction in the likelihood of hospitalization, while three doses means a reduction of around 68%.

And remember: those numbers add up. This table explains the situation: boosted people are doubly protected – not only are they less likely to get sick, but if they do get sick, they are also less likely to go to hospital.

What we don’t have good data on from anywhere in the world is whether or not triply vaccines (speaking of words, is triply one of them?) Protect us against the omicron. Are those rare unfortunate souls who are boosted but end up going to the hospital due to the omicron protected from death compared to their unboosted hospitalized counterparts? Although I would like data on this, I understand that it is difficult to find the sample size for good data…after all, boosted people are simply rarely hospitalized with the disease!

But the numbers above also point to another common pitfall – the over-reliance we place on anecdotal evidence. Take that 63% effectiveness figure above, which is how long boosted people are protected from omicron disease. It’s pretty good – more effective than any flu shot over the past 15 years!

This still means that in our current environment, most people will know someone who was boosted and got sick anyway. As a result, many people will take “the vaccine didn’t work for Mary”, simplify and think “vaccines don’t work”.

So let this article serve as a balm against that type of thinking. When you see someone use an anecdotal argument to argue against vaccines in our omicron age – or worse, to say that “less effective” means “ineffective” – show them these charts. Show them these numbers.

When an argument becomes monochrome, paint by numbers.