This appeared for me in Apple News, I don't usually look at that site https://www.news.com.au/technology/science/human-body/nsw-health-erased-data-used-in-weekly-covid-surveillance-reports/news-story/2d4e3f9622d9398267c627f4da8975cb

Anyway, I've pointed out to them that. Someone at NSW Health might want to give the author some better comments than he obtained for the article.

1. She is looking at the proportion of cases which are hospitalised. What she should be looking at is proportion of the people in the population having different vaccination status that are hospitalised. Ian Marschner who is professor of biostatistics at Sydney Uni pointed out that if everyone was vaccinated then all the cases would be in the vaccinated. Same applies to hospitalisations.

2. She ignores the fact that the age distribution is different in the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Older are likely to be vaccinated, but also more likely to be hospitalised.

3. The unknown are mainly (probably 80% or more) unvaccinated. There is a NSW report looking at this in 2022. I expect the Unknown are people who have very little contact with the health system.

4. If 95% (which is about right) of the population were vaccinated, then the number of cases, assuming the same age distribution, if the vaccination did nothing, then the number cases and hospitalisations in the vaccinated would be 19 times higher than in the unvaccinated. We have for hospitalised (554+6647) two+doses and (194+1076+2326) no dose or 1 dose or unknown. I’ve included the unknown because at least 80% of them are unvaccinated. So we have 7201 and 3596 for vaccinated and unvaccinated or a factor of about 2 compared to the 19 if the vaccine did nothing. Hospitalised is better than cases. Cases have the problem that the vaccinated are more likely to be tested, so not very useful.