Coronavirus (COVID-19/SARS-CoV-2) outbreak discussion

[moXJO]

The media focus on an extremely unlikely lab leak is just a continuation of the "China bad" syndrome driving the West.

China had a lab leak before and they covered it up. It's a plausible possibility considering they just happened to have the lab in the area. Scrubbing data and locking up whistle blowers didn't help.

 

[moXJO]

Singapore has decided to open everything after the vaccinations are finished and open borders. Obviously it's learn to live with it, eradication ain't happening any time soon.

 

[bellenuit]

Before I comment, I need to ensure full disclosure- I have now had both doses of the AZ Vaccination., and have had zero side effects.
Its probably not all that surprising that since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak, the language has changed significantly. First it was flatten the curve, then it was to reduce prssure on the health system because we had insufficient ventilators. Then get the vaccines out, then elimination, I wonder what the next one will be. The pushing of everyone to get vaccinated has also morphed into a new phase. When the call for vaccinations for the disease went out worldwide, it was rarely spoken openly about what exactly the vaccine would give us. Most of the general public would have thought that as with so many vaccines (rubella, whooping cough, yellow fever, tetanus heppatitus B, and maybe even the flu vaccines), it would provide a level of protection against GETTING the disease. After a while, it came out that the various vacc species were mainly aimed at reducing the symptoms rather than providing immunity. Some do it better than others, but despite spending an hour or so searching and reading various articles, I am yet to find some definitive answers.
In a slightly alarming admission in the parliament from the now sacked UK health minister, he said that about 20% of the people who are hospitalised, were fully vaccinated, and a further20% had at least one dose. So 40% of those hospitalised had at least one dose of the vacc. That is hardly a ringing endorsement.
Most of the health information state that the various vaccines also help in varying degrees to helping or even stop the spreading the disease. One of the problems is that so many of the people who test positive are completely asymptomatic. We don't know how many of these people had been vaccinated, it seems these stats are not kept. So why do they not show symptoms? Do they already have a level of immunity? Do they also have reduced rates of shedding and thus are less likely to spread the disease? Again, we don't know, although there are plenty of examples of the so called "super spreaders" who are asymptomatic. This whole thing has been a giant science experiment with few controls, and even less oversight by those who are supposed to do that job.
But the most scary thing I have heard is the new language that seems to hint that even when we have got everyone vaccinated, there may still be restrictions on travel, gatherings etc. We may still have to use QR codes to tell the authorities exactly where we are, where we have been, how long we spent there etc. The WA premier has already suggested that once everyone is vaccinated, border permits and restrictions on entry may still be required.
I may have to dust off my anti conscription, anti vietnam war posters to keep the bastards prying into my entire life.
Mick

I find your analysis completely at odds with what I have been reading on sites other than those populated by anti-vaxxers.

I am not going to go through each point, but some are obviously putting a negative spin where none is needed. Such as your description of the change in the language of the vaccine/virus. it was a new virus and the authorities were trying to understand it. Of course the language changes between the start of the outbreaks, when only a few were infected, to when large numbers were being infected and the risk to the hospital system became enormous. Later as the vaccines become developed and deployed, a different narrative was needed.

Regarding your comment on the alarming admission by the sacked Health Minister that 40% of hospital admissions had at least one jab of the vaccine, these seems at odds with what is really happening:

Hospital Covid admissions after jab 'very, very small'​

The study analysed a quarter of all hospital patients in England, Scotland and Wales between early December and early April, and is one of the first to look at the impact of vaccinations on the numbers of people subsequently admitted to hospital with Covid-19.
It suggests that around 1% of hospital admissions between December and April were of people with Covid who had already had one vaccine dose.

The study found higher numbers of Covid hospital admissions around the time of vaccination and soon after, before the jab had started to work. Admissions then tailed off as protection from the vaccine built up.

You didn't say whether the ex-Minister was referring to hospital admissions in general or to those admitted with Covid. The latter is inconsistent to the BBC report (and that is just one of many indicating the COVID admission stats in relation to those vaccinated), but if the former, then that is to be expected as the number of those who have at least received one jab in the UK is around the 40% mark, if not more.

Most of the health information state that the various vaccines also help in varying degrees to helping or even stop the spreading the disease. One of the problems is that so many of the people who test positive are completely asymptomatic. We don't know how many of these people had been vaccinated, it seems these stats are not kept.

Who told you that. They do know how many of those who test positive and are asymptomatic were vaccinated. It is a constant monitoring process and there are many studies related to the issue, such as this.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey technical article: analysis of positivity after vaccination, June 2021

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey technical article - Office for National Statistics

This analysis provides data about positivity after vaccination from the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey. This analysis has been produced in partnership with University of Oxford.

www.ons.gov.uk

The results are in. We do know the vaccines are very effective when combined with other preventative measures. UK and US results demonstrate that. Breakouts have in large been due to relaxation of the other preventative measures too soon.

I don't understand the gist of your post. Is you opening disclosure statement just there to pretend you are not an anti-vaxxer, but then you follow up by posting a lot of misleading information on the topic? Are you complaining because we don't know everything about this disease and its ability to create new variants that in turn have to be learned about. Of course mistakes will be made along the way, but that is the nature of anything that involves unknowns mixed with politics.

 

[moXJO]

I find your analysis completely at odds with what I have been reading on sites other than those populated by anti-vaxxers.

I am not going to go through each point, but some are obviously putting a negative spin where none is needed. Such as your description of the change in the language of the vaccine/virus. it was a new virus and the authorities were trying to understand it. Of course the language changes between the start of the outbreaks, when only a few were infected, to when large numbers were being infected and the risk to the hospital system became enormous. Later as the vaccines become developed and deployed, a different narrative was needed.

Regarding your comment on the alarming admission by the sacked Health Minister that 40% of hospital admissions had at least one jab of the vaccine, these seems at odds with what is really happening:

Hospital Covid admissions after jab 'very, very small'​

The study analysed a quarter of all hospital patients in England, Scotland and Wales between early December and early April, and is one of the first to look at the impact of vaccinations on the numbers of people subsequently admitted to hospital with Covid-19.
It suggests that around 1% of hospital admissions between December and April were of people with Covid who had already had one vaccine dose.

The study found higher numbers of Covid hospital admissions around the time of vaccination and soon after, before the jab had started to work. Admissions then tailed off as protection from the vaccine built up.

You didn't say whether the ex-Minister was referring to hospital admissions in general or to those admitted with Covid. The latter is inconsistent to the BBC report (and that is just one of many indicating the COVID admission stats in relation to those vaccinated), but if the former, then that is to be expected as the number of those who have at least received one jab in the UK is around the 40% mark, if not more.

Most of the health information state that the various vaccines also help in varying degrees to helping or even stop the spreading the disease. One of the problems is that so many of the people who test positive are completely asymptomatic. We don't know how many of these people had been vaccinated, it seems these stats are not kept.

Who told you that. They do know how many of those who test positive and are asymptomatic were vaccinated. It is a constant monitoring process and there are many studies related to the issue, such as this.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey technical article: analysis of positivity after vaccination, June 2021

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey technical article - Office for National Statistics

This analysis provides data about positivity after vaccination from the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey. This analysis has been produced in partnership with University of Oxford.

www.ons.gov.uk

The results are in. We do know the vaccines are very effective when combined with other preventative measures. UK and US results demonstrate that. Breakouts have in large been due to relaxation of the other preventative measures too soon.

I don't understand the gist of your post. Is you opening disclosure statement just there to pretend you are not an anti-vaxxer, but then you follow up by posting a lot of misleading information on the topic? Are you complaining because we don't know everything about this disease and its ability to create new variants that in turn have to be learned about. Of course mistakes will be made along the way, but that is the nature of anything that involves unknowns mixed with politics.

A lot of vaccines need a booster now the delta variant is running. J&J was one of them I think. All vaccines could be rendered ineffective if it mutates enough. I think there are 15-17 mutations at the moment in India. Delta plus is the one they are currently testing against vaccines (don't quote me on that).

In any case the vaccine will reduce symptoms. Better to be caught vaccinated then not. You don't want to find out that you are one of the smaller % that need hospitalisation.

I'm not one for getting vaccinations either. Covid mutations is one of those things I'd rather be prepared for.

 

[IFocus]

New COVID-19 restrictions for Perth and Peel regions​

Some of the restrictions include:

"A 30-person limit in all homes for private gatherings. Hospitality, entertainment venues including casino, retail, beauty and hairdressers, recreation centres, including gyms, Pilates, yoga, dance and swimming pools and places of worship can remain open but must comply with the two square metre rule with a maximum of 150 patrons," Mr Cook said.
"Community sport is permitted. Wedding and funerals can proceed but will be limited to a maximum of 150. Hospitals with a maximum of four visitors permitted per patient, per day.
"Mask wearing will be mandatory for staff and visitors. Anyone who enters a regional area from the Perth Peel region is required to wear a mask. Travel to remote Aboriginal communities will be restricted."

 

[The Triangle]

New COVID-19 restrictions for Perth and Peel regions​

Some of the restrictions include:

Pretty simple solution. Stop the airplanes and use the military for quarantine - not uber drivers.

 

[cynic]

Isn't pneumonia what you die from, with covid?
So if the pneumonia isn't covid related, what strain of flu is it related to?

Pneumacoccal perhaps?!

 

[mullokintyre]

I find your analysis completely at odds with what I have been reading on sites other than those populated by anti-vaxxers.

I am not going to go through each point, but some are obviously putting a negative spin where none is needed. Such as your description of the change in the language of the vaccine/virus. it was a new virus and the authorities were trying to understand it. Of course the language changes between the start of the outbreaks, when only a few were infected, to when large numbers were being infected and the risk to the hospital system became enormous. Later as the vaccines become developed and deployed, a different narrative was needed.

Regarding your comment on the alarming admission by the sacked Health Minister that 40% of hospital admissions had at least one jab of the vaccine, these seems at odds with what is really happening:

Hospital Covid admissions after jab 'very, very small'​

The study analysed a quarter of all hospital patients in England, Scotland and Wales between early December and early April, and is one of the first to look at the impact of vaccinations on the numbers of people subsequently admitted to hospital with Covid-19.
It suggests that around 1% of hospital admissions between December and April were of people with Covid who had already had one vaccine dose.

The study found higher numbers of Covid hospital admissions around the time of vaccination and soon after, before the jab had started to work. Admissions then tailed off as protection from the vaccine built up.

You didn't say whether the ex-Minister was referring to hospital admissions in general or to those admitted with Covid. The latter is inconsistent to the BBC report (and that is just one of many indicating the COVID admission stats in relation to those vaccinated), but if the former, then that is to be expected as the number of those who have at least received one jab in the UK is around the 40% mark, if not more.

Most of the health information state that the various vaccines also help in varying degrees to helping or even stop the spreading the disease. One of the problems is that so many of the people who test positive are completely asymptomatic. We don't know how many of these people had been vaccinated, it seems these stats are not kept.

Who told you that. They do know how many of those who test positive and are asymptomatic were vaccinated. It is a constant monitoring process and there are many studies related to the issue, such as this.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey technical article: analysis of positivity after vaccination, June 2021

Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey technical article - Office for National Statistics

This analysis provides data about positivity after vaccination from the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey. This analysis has been produced in partnership with University of Oxford.

www.ons.gov.uk

The results are in. We do know the vaccines are very effective when combined with other preventative measures. UK and US results demonstrate that. Breakouts have in large been due to relaxation of the other preventative measures too soon.

I don't understand the gist of your post. Is you opening disclosure statement just there to pretend you are not an anti-vaxxer, but then you follow up by posting a lot of misleading information on the topic? Are you complaining because we don't know everything about this disease and its ability to create new variants that in turn have to be learned about. Of course mistakes will be made along the way, but that is the nature of anything that involves unknowns mixed with politics.

The report I was quoting is from a video of a response by the minister to questions asked in the UK Parliament. You can see the whole video HERE . The attached report to the video distinctly states that the question relates to "covid" hospitalisations. I guess he could be lying, he is after all a politician. But I can only quote what he said. The report said the question occured on June 21 st parliamentary sitting, so I would assume the polly would be quoting most recent stats. An anti vaxxer would jump on those figures and say they were reactions to the vaccine, but if that was the case, the figures would be 100 percent. But the reading I took was that these were people who had the vaccine, either one dose or two, but still managed to get Covid and have sufficiently bad enough symptoms to require hospitalisation. If there is another way to read the statements he made, I would be happy to hear that.
Sticking pejorative names on people is a weak way to prosecute an argument.
I am not an anti vaxer, my spouse is a Pharmacist who is a qualified vaccinator, and two of my children work in allied health.
What I have learned from them is that the media are the worst source of health/medical information on earth.
Can you tell me where are the stats on the people testing positive to the disease who had one or more shots of a vax? I can't find it, but that does not mean the stats do not exist. However, how many asymptomatic people don't ever get tested? We really don't know, and will never know unless every single person is tested at least twice per week.
You state that vaccines are very effective when combined with other preventative measures. The question that is never asked is, what if there was no vaxx and they just did the preventative measures? How would the measures stack up?
As to the other points, the gist of my post is that authorities around the world seem to be using the pandemic as a means to put even greater control on our lives than there already is. You are quite entitled to disagree with that.
Mick

 

[rederob]

Can you tell me where are the stats on the people testing positive to the disease who had one or more shots of a vax?

That was tabled separately in @bellenuit's linked report.

Main points​

• The risk of identifying a new infection following vaccination was highest during the first 21 days after the first vaccination, after that the risk strongly decreased.
• Those who became infected post vaccination were less likely to have symptoms and less likely to have a high viral load compared with individuals who tested positive but have not been vaccinated.

View attachment 126714

Using this data as a base, getting the AZ jab first in Oz is about 3 times more effective until both doses are received.
After 2 doses it doesn't matter which vaccine brand as the chance of a positive test outcome is one in a thousand.

 

[mullokintyre]

That was tabled separately in @bellenuit's linked report.

Main points​

• The risk of identifying a new infection following vaccination was highest during the first 21 days after the first vaccination, after that the risk strongly decreased.
• Those who became infected post vaccination were less likely to have symptoms and less likely to have a high viral load compared with individuals who tested positive but have not been vaccinated.

View attachment 126714

Using this data as a base, getting the AZ jab first in Oz is about 3 times more effective until both doses are received.
After 2 doses it doesn't matter which vaccine brand as the chance of a positive test outcome is one in a thousand.

Thanks, the only concern I might have is that the article uses a model to show these rates of declining infection. I don't know why they just don't use actual data rather than trying to model it, but time will tell how accurate their modeling is. Lets hope its significantly better than the models used by Niall Ferguson in the very early stages of the pandemic.
Mick

 

[Joules MM1]

wenz a virus funny, never, um, but when in oz do what the whacky do

 

[wayneL]

Sitting in my truck, in a semi rural spot (outside Perth metro), doing a few texts and trolling idiots on Tw@tter...

Guy drives in, wearing a mask in his car, gets out, takes off the face nappy, and lights up a cigarette... Gets back in his car, puts the face nappy on and drives off.

wayneL starts Googling caves for sale in central Australia..,

 

[Joules MM1]

Sydney in lockdown, borders shut and hardly anyone vaccinated. How long can Australia go on like this?

In the window of a vintage shop in the Sydney suburb of Annandale, a sign expresses the frustration of many Australians with their country's pandemic strategy.

edition.cnn.com

Scovid makes CNN, onya

 

[Joules MM1]

wenz a virus funny, never, um, but when in oz do what the whacky do

best part of that vid is Joe O'brien with a frantic cut signal at the end

 

[wayneL]

Barnum and Bailey never imagined the clown world we all now live in.

Coulrophobia turns out to be quite rational.

 

[macca]

The report I was quoting is from a video of a response by the minister to questions asked in the UK Parliament. You can see the whole video HERE . The attached report to the video distinctly states that the question relates to "covid" hospitalisations. I guess he could be lying, he is after all a politician. But I can only quote what he said. The report said the question occured on June 21 st parliamentary sitting, so I would assume the polly would be quoting most recent stats. An anti vaxxer would jump on those figures and say they were reactions to the vaccine, but if that was the case, the figures would be 100 percent. But the reading I took was that these were people who had the vaccine, either one dose or two, but still managed to get Covid and have sufficiently bad enough symptoms to require hospitalisation. If there is another way to read the statements he made, I would be happy to hear that.
Sticking pejorative names on people is a weak way to prosecute an argument.
I am not an anti vaxer, my spouse is a Pharmacist who is a qualified vaccinator, and two of my children work in allied health.
What I have learned from them is that the media are the worst source of health/medical information on earth.
Can you tell me where are the stats on the people testing positive to the disease who had one or more shots of a vax? I can't find it, but that does not mean the stats do not exist. However, how many asymptomatic people don't ever get tested? We really don't know, and will never know unless every single person is tested at least twice per week.
You state that vaccines are very effective when combined with other preventative measures. The question that is never asked is, what if there was no vaxx and they just did the preventative measures? How would the measures stack up?
As to the other points, the gist of my post is that authorities around the world seem to be using the pandemic as a means to put even greater control on our lives than there already is. You are quite entitled to disagree with that.
Mick

These are the official UK figures on June 11 2021,

If you look at table 6 on page 15 it has the breakup of who was vaccinated and who was not from those attending the hospital.

If you calculate the rate of deaths as a percentage it is scary

PDF attached

 

[mullokintyre]

Two pieces of news from their ABC.
1. The birthday party where the so called "super spreader" infected24 of the 30m people who attended a party. The six who did not get infected, all had been vaccinated. Chalk a big one up for the VAX. see ABC NEWS
2. From The Australian The head of the Defence Covid-19 task force, Lt Gen JJohn Frewen said that

he expected Australians would have to live for years with restrictions being introduced in response to outbreaks.

Lieutenant Frewen said the aim was to save lives from the diseases and Australians needed to become comfortable with the prospect of public health measures being activated and deactivated.

“We will be living with Covid for many years and I think all of these measures we can expect to be activated and deactivated,” he said.

It is the second part that worries me. I do not like unelected bureaucrats making policy pronouncements, no matter how smart they are. They provide advice to elected officials, thats where their role should stop. It conveniently allows the elected ones to deflect any blame when things go pear shaped.
I find the language used most intriguing. "needing to become comfortable with the prospect of public health measures being activated and deactivated", is NOT what I want to hear. Softening the suckers up is what he is really saying.
It also reinforces my original fears that the COVID will be used to make ever more restrictive rules and regs for citizens.
Micki

 

[bellenuit]

The report I was quoting is from a video of a response by the minister to questions asked in the UK Parliament. You can see the whole video HERE . The attached report to the video distinctly states that the question relates to "covid" hospitalisations. I guess he could be lying, he is after all a politician.

I have followed your link and I do not see anywhere where he is specifically referring to COVID hospitalisations, other than the article from that Off-Guardian.org website. In fact if you go back to the parliamentary records, this is the question from Liam Fox that he is responding to:

"Can my right hon. Friend give us a little more information about the rise in hospitalisations that he mentioned?"

Coronavirus

– in the House of Commons at 3:16 pm 16 June 2021

www.theyworkforyou.com

Although it precedes the parliamentary debate by a few weeks, this is the most recent quote from Matt Hancock that address those being hospitalised due to COVID (specifically the Delta variant which accounts for 91% of cases)

Just 2 per cent of those hospitalised in England with the Delta variant of coronavirus first identified in India had received both doses of a vaccine, the government revealed on Monday.

Health secretary Matt Hancock told the House of Commons that out of 12,383 cases of the Delta variant recorded until June 3, 126 were in hospital, or just 1 per cent. Of those admitted, 83 were unvaccinated, 28 had received one jab and just three had had both doses. “The jabs are working,” Hancock said.

Subscribe to read

www.ft.com

Even if one were to say things have deteriorated in the few weeks since that statistic was put out and Hancock's speech to parliament (assuming he is taking about COVID hospitalisations), your position is quite clear from the way you phrased the results from the story: So 40% of those hospitalised had at least one dose of the vacc. That is hardly a ringing endorsement. It is a ringing endorsement. Those with one dose have to be excluded as it takes time for the vaccine to start protection and the protection from just one dose after that time is nowhere near what the vaccine can do. So your chance off needing hospitalisation after being fully vaccinate is 20%. There is nothing wrong with that. And it is not just hospitalisation, but the severity of the symptoms of those hospitalised which we know are far less for the fully vaccinated. Having 80% less hospitalised following full vaccination is a very successful outcome.

Can you tell me where are the stats on the people testing positive to the disease who had one or more shots of a vax?

Well you haven't tried very hard. I just typed this into Google: percentage of vaccinated testing positive for covid

This is just the first result presented. Continue reading the Google results for more.

COVID-19 Vaccine Breakthrough Case Investigation and Reporting​

COVID-19 Breakthrough Case Investigations and Reporting | CDC

Information and resources to help public health departments and laboratories investigate and report COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough cases.

www.cdc.gov

However, how many asymptomatic people don't ever get tested? We really don't know, and will never know unless every single person is tested at least twice per week.

That is not how it works. It is not feasible to test everyone twice a week as you should well know. That is why the CDC does both closed and open trials where a specific population of vaccinated people are tested extensively over a particular period. They then extrapolate from those results.

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Research​

COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Research | CDC

Learn about planned evaluations to assess COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness and protocols that detail the evaluation designs.

www.cdc.gov

From that site:

Such evaluations will help us understand if vaccines are performing as expected outside the more controlled setting of a clinical trial. As vaccine uptake increases nationally, we will also try to understand how well the vaccines:

Perform in specific subpopulations
Reduce the risk of infection (including infection without symptoms)
Protect against milder COVID-19 illness
Prevent more serious outcomes, including hospitalization
Prevent spread of illness (e.g., whether people who have been vaccinated can still spread COVID-19 to others)
Provide long-term protection (i.e., assess duration of protection)
Protect against changes in the virus (new variants)
Protect against COVID-19 when the vaccine is administered using a single dose or when the second dose is delayed, if these dosing regimens occur under real-world conditions


You state that vaccines are very effective when combined with other preventative measures. The question that is never asked is, what if there was no vaxx and they just did the preventative measures? How would the measures stack up?

The question is asked and the answer is known. The preventative measures (wearing masks, social distancing etc) are applied nationwide. In addition, depending on the country, an increasing number of that population is being vaccinated. So you have two distinct groups (though one is increasing and one decreasing). Group one: no vaxx but with preventative measures. Group two: vaxxed and with preventative measures. The results are in on that. Do we need to show you the figures again. Even your interpretation of the Hancock speech gives you an answer.

the gist of my post is that authorities around the world seem to be using the pandemic as a means to put even greater control on our lives than there already is.

Your post is straight out of the Off-Guardian.Org playbook.

 

[mullokintyre]

I have followed your link and I do not see anywhere where he is specifically referring to COVID hospitalisations, other than the article from that Off-Guardian.org website. In fact if you go back to the parliamentary records, this is the question from Liam Fox that he is responding to:

"Can my right hon. Friend give us a little more information about the rise in hospitalisations that he mentioned?"

Coronavirus

– in the House of Commons at 3:16 pm 16 June 2021

www.theyworkforyou.com

Although it precedes the parliamentary debate by a few weeks, this is the most recent quote from Matt Hancock that address those being hospitalised due to COVID (specifically the Delta variant which accounts for 91% of cases)

Just 2 per cent of those hospitalised in England with the Delta variant of coronavirus first identified in India had received both doses of a vaccine, the government revealed on Monday.

Health secretary Matt Hancock told the House of Commons that out of 12,383 cases of the Delta variant recorded until June 3, 126 were in hospital, or just 1 per cent. Of those admitted, 83 were unvaccinated, 28 had received one jab and just three had had both doses. “The jabs are working,” Hancock said.

Subscribe to read

www.ft.com

Even if one were to say things have deteriorated in the few weeks since that statistic was put out and Hancock's speech to parliament (assuming he is taking about COVID hospitalisations), your position is quite clear from the way you phrased the results from the story: So 40% of those hospitalised had at least one dose of the vacc. That is hardly a ringing endorsement. It is a ringing endorsement. Those with one dose have to be excluded as it takes time for the vaccine to start protection and the protection from just one dose after that time is nowhere near what the vaccine can do. So your chance off needing hospitalisation after being fully vaccinate is 20%. There is nothing wrong with that. And it is not just hospitalisation, but the severity of the symptoms of those hospitalised which we know are far less for the fully vaccinated. Having 80% less hospitalised following full vaccination is a very successful outcome.

I went looking for the official records of the UK parliament for that day, (see UK Parliament records but could not find anything At the risk of being picky, the "theyworkforyou" URL id not an official record, but that of a registered charity that may or may not be accurate. But let us assume it is. Liam Fox was responding to the opening statement of the (then) health minister. which is the very first entry.
He says

Unfortunately, there has been a significant change since we started on our journey down the road map in February. A new variant has given the virus extra legs, both because it spreads more easily and because there is some evidence that the risk of hospitalisation is higher than for the alpha variant, which was, of course, previously dominant in this country. The delta variant now accounts for 96% of new cases. The number of cases is rising and hospitalisations are starting to rise, too—they are up 48% over the past week. The number of deaths in England is thankfully not rising and remains very low, but, as I told the House on Monday, we do not yet know the extent to which the link between hospitalisations and deaths has been broken, so we propose to give the NHS a few more crucial weeks to get those remaining jabs into the arms of those who need them.

This is the statement that Liam Fox is referring to in his question. Like the author of the OFFguardian article, I interpreted the above statement to mean he is specifically referring to covid hospitalisations.
You are entitled to read a different meaning to it. What I read is that the death rate has stabilised, maybe even gone down, which is good.
As to your interpretation of whether there is nothing wrong with a 20% hospitalisation rate after being fully vaccinated , well once again its a matter of interpretation. Given the response here in OZ to the AZ vax where a very small proportion of people develop blood clots and the over the top reaction to an 8 in a million chance of getting a blood clot, if we get 20% of people getting hospitalised after a double dos eof the vax all hell will break loose.
Mick

 

[bellenuit]

if we get 20% of people getting hospitalised after a double dos eof the vax all hell will break loose.

But that is not what that figure is saying. It is not saying that 20% of people who are fully vaccinated end up hospitalised, but that of those hospitalised only 20% have been fully vaccinated. The way you are phrasing it is suggesting that 20% of the hospitalisations are caused by the vaccine, where in fact if it wasn't for the vaccine, there would be 2.2 times more hospitalised. It is like saying that if 20% of politicians are women, then 20% of women are politicians.

Using rough figures, the adult population of the UK is 54m of which 32.5m have been fully vaccinated. That is 60%. If full vaccination offered no protection against hospitalisation compared to no vaccination, then we would expect 60% of hospitalisations due to COVID to be of fully vaccinated people. But the figures (using your figures from above) show that only 20% of fully vaccinated people end up hospitalised.

So for every 100 people hospitalised, 80 of those represent 40% of the people (the unvaccinated and partially vaccinated). The other 60% are fully vaccinated, but if they too were not fully vaccinated, we would expect 120 more hospitalisations instead of the just 20 more. So that figure of 100 would be 220 if no one was fully vaccinated, 2.2 times more.

Looking at this another way, the vaccines (full) effectively reduce your chances of being hospitalised by 83% (20/120). Although these are very rough back of the envelope figures, they are in line with actual results seen to date.

The Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine is 92% effective against hospitalisation after 2 doses

Vaccines highly effective against hospitalisation from Delta variant

New analysis by PHE shows for the first time that 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccines are highly effective against hospitalisation from the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant.

www.gov.uk