progree
progree's JournalLinks to data series with graphs. Note: the *CORE* CPI is +0.4% in March
(it's a 4.7% annualized rate when calculated with the actual index values) and its rolling 3 month average is 5.1% annualized. This 3 month average was 5.2% annualized in February. So RECENT CORE inflation still seems stuck at around 5%. (Reminder: the Fed uses core measures to predict future inflation, whether we like it or not, although specifically they target the core PCE, not the core CPI https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143053501#post5 )
CPI news release: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm
CPI time series: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0
Monthly increases: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0&output_view=pct_1mth
CORE CPI: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0L1E
Monthly increases: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0L1E&output_view=pct_1mth
CPI excluding shelter - https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUUR0000SA0L2
FRED: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUUR0000SA0L2
Core CPI excluding shelter - I sure would like this time series, but apparently I haven't found one yet. It's said to be a Fed favorite.
Table 3 has CPI ex shelter, as well as Core ex shelter https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.t03.htm
Rent (SA) https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SEHA
Fred: (SA) Rent of Primary Residence in U.S. City Average https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CUSR0000SEHA
(NSA) CUUR0000SEHA
SA is seasonally adjusted. NSA is Not seasonally adjusted
Real average hourly earnings of production and non-supervisory workers
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000032
private workers: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000013
In all of the BLS ones, one can change/add 1 month, 2 month, 3 month, 6 month and 12 month rolling averages by clicking "More Formatting Options" at the top right and checking the appropriate check boxes
Yup, they sure were serious about meeting the 2% target
Below is a graph of the Federal Reserve's target interest rate and the CPI from 4/1998 to 12/2001
# CPI: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0
(In "More Formatting Options" at the upper right one can change/add 2 month, 3 month, 6 month, and 12 month rolling averages, as well as show the 1 month changes. All with graphs.
# Fed Funds Target Rate (until 2008) -- https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DFEDTAR
(Context: it spent most of late 94 to late fall 98 at above 5%),
Per the NBER, the recession began March 2001.
I suspect likewise that nowadays the Fed is serious about the 2% target, but mindful of not crashing the banks. Core PCE is well over 4% on a rolling averages basis. https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143053501#post5
I'm frankly surprised that so many think the Fed is going to let inflation sit at more than twice their target rate, and that the 2% target is just for shits and giggles.
A 3.5% inflation rate (the peak plateau level shown in the above graph) may not be red-hot, but it's enough to cut the purchasing power of the dollar in half in about 20 years, and down to a quarter in 40 years.
Graphs - latest PCE, CPI, PPI (both regular and core). And rolling 3 mo, 6 mo, 12 mo of core PCE
From the news release, http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/pinewsrelease.htm
From the preceding month, the PCE price index for February increased 0.3 percent (table 9). Prices for goods increased 0.2 percent and prices for services increased 0.3 percent. Food prices increased 0.2 percent and energy prices decreased 0.4 percent. Excluding food and energy, the PCE price index increased 0.3 percent. Detailed monthly PCE price indexes are presented on Table 2.4.4U
From the same month one year ago, the PCE price index for February increased 5.0 percent (table 11). Prices for goods increased 3.6 percent and prices for services increased 5.7 percent. Food prices increased 9.7 percent and energy prices increased 5.1 percent. Excluding food and energy, the PCE price index increased 4.6 percent from one year ago.
And they show the last 5 months. I found the latest 12 months (and way beyond) at FRED:
PCE: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEPI
CORE PCE: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEPILFE
PCE Inflation (just came out today, March 31):
What a difference a month makes. Before today's report, when the last bar was January, it looked like a rewarming of core PCE inflation. With February's 0.3% number, it looks quite a bit better, maybe roughly a flat-lining with with wiggles.
PCE, rolling 3 month averages, annualized
7.25% 7.42% 6.17% 4.75% 2.10% 4.21% 3.81% 3.22% 3.85% 4.23%
CORE PCE, rolling 3 month averages, annualized
4.30% 5.39% 4.40% 5.13% 4.45% 5.45% 4.08% 3.71% 4.56% 4.88%
Consumer Price Index (CPI)
CPI - https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0&output_view=pct_1mth
CORE CPI - http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0L1E&output_view=pct_1mth
(Choose "More Formatting Options" at the upper right of the page for other views such as rolling averages of past 12 months, past 6 months, past 3 months)
Updated 4/12/23 to include March:
Producer Price Index (PPI)
OLD CORE PPI - Producer Price Index, seasonally adjusted - Final demand goods less foods and energy -
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/WPSFD413?output_view=pct_1mth
CORE PPI - Producer Price Index, seasonally adjusted - Final demand less foods. energy. and trade services - This is the core measure that the BLS features, so I will follow their lead
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/WPSFD49116?output_view=pct_1mth
(Choose "More Formatting Options" at the upper right of the page for other views such as rolling averages of past 12 months, past 6 months, past 3 months)
Why the Fed thinks core is better for forecasting future inflation: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143025190#post10
3 months annualized: Core CPI: 5.11%, Core PCE: 4.88%, Core PPI (wholesale prices): 3.74%
(Core CPI above updated 4/12/23 to include the March data)
I chose 3 months for its recency, but that it's still a longer period than one month, so less likely that one can dismiss it as a "one off", as some try to do when the last month is bad (and make it THE only data when the last month is good)
Back to the CORE PCE 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months rolling averages (all are annualized rates)
Looking at 3 month and 6 month rolling average, it looks like a flat-lining with wiggles for several months -- we're at the same place we were several months ago. The 12 month shows only the slightest decline.
Edited to add 405 PM ET on seeing some comments
The Fed has long targeted 2%. Did people really expect they'd just declare that the target was always there just for shits and giggles and they were content now with inflation rates more than twice as high as that, and were just going to sit on their rusty dusties and "wait" for inflation to come down when it has been essentially flat on a rolling 3 month and 6 month basis; when they made their last rate hike decision March 21, the recent trend of those had been going up). My big song and dance about what I think of using the rolling 12 month inflation to gauge RECENT or CURRENT inflation: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143045881#post6 .
My harangue about not only was Powell renominated by President Biden, but the vast majority of Democratic senators voted for his confirmation. And that it's not just Powell, but the rest of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) that is voting unaminously for rate hikes. And a reminder that last June, when inflation was 8.9%, continuing at that rate would cut the purchasing power of the dollar in half in just 8.1 years, and down to a quarter in 16.2 years. And that historically, in relatively high inflation periods, wages don't keep up with prices. And the purchasing power of savings and investments tend to be devastated (as opposed to the nominal dollar figure, which might actually look pretty good - fool's gold). https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143049684#post7
At the core PCE inflation rate of 4.88% (3 month average, annualized), the purchasing power of the dollar is halved in 14.5 years, and quartered in 29 years. That isn't OK with me.
Edited 529p ET- Stocks, Treasury yields, and more (the S&P 500 closed up 1.4%, and a scroll through the financial headlines credits the tamer-than-expected PCE inflation report. The S&P 500 has now had two positive quarters in a row, but is still 14.3% below its 1/3/22 all-time high) : https://finance.yahoo.com/
"Vegas slot machine ... a tiny 'I told you so.'"
Yes, the market periodically goes down, some times very steeply. To take the 3 steepest pullbacks since WWII: In '73-'74 we had a 48% drop from peak-to-trough, and it took 7.5 years to recover from that and reach a new high. In the Dotcom bust we had a 49% drop and a 7.2 year recovery time. In the Housing Bubble bust it fell 57% and took 5.5 year to recover.
I guarantee plunges of this depth will happen again. Crashes happen and will continue to happen. I too will join you in telling anyone who doesn't think a crash will ever happen again, "I told you so".
I don't think predicting a crash is any more insightful than predicting that some day there will be a solar eclipse. I don't know anyone who thinks a crash will never happen. Everyone knows it will happen. Personally I think stock valuations are way high and we're plenty ripe for one.
But even after a 50% or 60% plunge, I will still have a bigger nest egg as a long-time buy and hold equity investor. Why? Because after 2 or 3 doublings (meaning a 4 fold or 8 fold increase), a 50% plunge still leaves me with a 2 fold or 4 fold increase.
Nothing holds up as well in the face of withdrawals and inflation than does equities, except perhaps real estate. In other words, it's an even bigger gamble to not have a sizable proportion in equities.
Over the past 20 years, it has grown 6.37 fold, an average annual increase of 9.7%/year
(had the market crashed 60% in 2022 -- a worst crash than any of the post WWII crashes -- then it would have still grown 3.11 fold, an increase of 5.8%/year)
Over the past 50 years, it has grown 131 fold, an average annual increase of 10.2%/year
(had the market crashed 60% in 2022, then it would have still grown 64 fold, an increase of 8.7%/year)
and so on. I'd go to Vegas a lot if I could average these kinds of returns.
This is from the below link, which also has similar for bonds, Treasury bills, and gold. These don't come close to matching the increase in equities.
http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/histretSP.html
And I'm not just cherry-picking the boom periods. The above is inclusive of all periods, down, up, flat.
And when the market recovers and goes on to set yet more new all time highs, I will say "I told you so" to anyone who thinks it will never recover.
The market periodically sets new all time highs. It has never set an all-time low.
Yes it goes up and down and up and down and ... but the pattern is that new lows are higher than the previous lows and new highs are higher than the previous highs.
What really matters as far as risk is the risk of running out of money in retirement, and that risk is much higher for people who don't have any equities and only rely on "safe" fixed income investments, which don't even keep up with inflation. Innumerable historical simulations in innumerable studies have shown that. IOW its a bigger gamble not to be in the market. I don't wish to take that gamble.
I hate to see my fellow progressives misled by anti-equity JackPineRadicals-style "progressive" malarkey and end up having to live a very financially constrained old age, not to mention having very little or nothing to give to Democratic candidates or progressive causes. And by default having to accept the minuscule interest that the banks usually dole out in savings and CDs and so on.
Only a fool gambles with their retirement security -- And it makes DU investors out to be fools because only a fool would wager their retirement security on a Vegas slot machine. We are not fools. In the face of inflation and withdrawals, it's an even bigger gamble to NOT have a sizable proportion in equities.
Yes, a lot of people. 58% of American adults own stock according to a Gallup Survey, 3/5/23 https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/savingandinvesting/only-15-of-american-families-directly-own-stock-and-that-s-okay/ar-AA188NL7
pointing to the detailed report at https://www.fool.com/research/how-many-americans-own-stock/
And if the big crash happens on President Biden's watch, it will be super-painful for everyone to the left of Attila The Hun come the next election and the 4 years after.
Edited to add 1205pm ET: I wish someone could tell me which "Indian casino" gives its clients on average a 223% cumulative return over 10 years, a 537% cumulative return over 20 years, a 1,444% cumulative return over 30 years, a 6,759% cumulative return over 40 years, a 13,016% cumulative return over 50 years, a 33,400% cumulative return over 60 years, and a 120,090% cumulative return over 70 years, because I sure would like to "gamble" there. The equity market is AN INVESTMENT.
What drives the market is earnings (not "luck" or the pull of a slot machine handle ). This from Peter Lynch in 2001:
GRAPHS - Core PCE - Rolling 3 month, 6 month, and 12 month averages thru January 2023
It all points to a Core PCE that is a bit more than double the Fed's target. Before January's number, one could argue there's been a very slow downward tilt over the last 6-8 months. With January's number, it's more like a flatlining.
Some may say that January is an anomalous "one off" on the high side. Others may say that December is an anomalous "one off" on the low side that January corrects.
There's a lot of chatter about the "no landing" scenario -- that inflation continues to stay elevated like in the graphs. I think with just a quarter percent rate hike on March 22, and another quarter point increase on May 3, that will likely continue to be the case for a long time.
With the hawkish noises from several FOMC members since the mid-month CPI and PPI reports, and more since yesterday, I think a half percent rate hike in March is a better bet. Note that before the March 22 FOMC meeting, new CPI and PPI reports will be released. (The next PCE report is March 31).
GRAPHS: The "x" axis is the month of the year, where the "1" is January 2022, "12" is December 2022, and "13" is January 2023.
All of the percentage increases are annualized numbers
On the rolling 3 month one can say its been flatlined since April 2022 at around 4.5%, with wiggles
The rolling 6 month - one can say its been flatlined since January 2022 at close to 5%, with wiggles
The rolling 12 month average has basically flatlined since July to about 4.7%.
I've always been a severe critic of 12 month inflation numbers when assessing RECENT or CURRENT inflation, but provide it for comparative purposes.
CORE PCE, which is shown in the above graphs: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEPILFE
(PCE is at: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEPI )
Percentages are calculated from the actual index numbers, not on averaging one-significant-digit numbers.
At 4.5% inflation, the value of a dollar drops to 50 cents in just 16 years.
Extra funding does little to increase dental care for Medical Assistance recipients (MN)
MPR, February 24, 2023
But Sundve, who lives in Litchfield, Minn., said getting her foster kids in to see a dentist was hard. It's because they're on Medical Assistance — or Medicaid, as it's more commonly known outside Minnesota — and don’t see a dentist regularly.
You call and call and call and ask people if they have any new patients’ availability. And the answer often is ‘No.’"
. . . In 2021, state legislators tried to fix the problem by nearly doubling the amount of money MA pays dentists for each appointment. They set goals for the number of visits MA enrollees should have annually.
But based on data from the state and from health insurance companies that manage most MA enrollees, the changes haven’t made much of a difference.
For years, low reimbursement rates were to blame for Minnesota’s notably low access to dental care for MA enrollees, Liebling said. Rates were based on decades old dental costs.
“Kind of famously, those rates are really low. Another complaint we would hear is that dentists weren't even told what they would be paid until after they provided the service,” she said.
MORE: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2023/02/24/extra-funding-does-little-to-increase-dental-care-for-ma-recipients
Reimbursement rates are still way low even after doubling, compared to regular commercial insurance reimbursement rates or prevailing rates
And there is a big shortage of dental assistants and hygienists.
See also:
About 655,000 Minnesota children were enrolled in Medicaid, but only 36 percent of them received dental services included in their coverage, according to 2017 statistics. That puts Minnesota noticeably below the national average.
The number of dentists who see children in public programs declined from 2,906 in 2015 to about 2,253 last year, according to the Department of Human Services.
More: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2018/11/28/low-income-minnesota-families-struggle-to-get-dental-care
Last 12 months monthly changes. And Graphs! And rolling 3 month averages
From the news release, http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/pi/pinewsrelease.htm
From the preceding month, the PCE price index for January increased 0.6 percent (table 9). Prices for goods and services both increased 0.6 percent as well. Food prices increased 0.4 percent and energy prices increased 2.0 percent. Excluding food and energy, the PCE price index also increased 0.6 percent. Detailed monthly PCE price indexes can be found on Table 2.4.4U.
From the same month one year ago, the PCE price index for January increased 5.4 percent (table 11). Prices for goods increased 4.7 percent and prices for services increased 5.7 percent. Food prices increased 11.1 percent and energy prices increased 9.6 percent. Excluding food and energy, the PCE price index increased 4.7 percent from one year ago.
And they show the last 5 months. I found the latest 12 months (and way beyond) at FRED:
PCE: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEPI
CORE PCE: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/PCEPILFE
PCE Inflation (just came out today, February 24):
PCE, rolling 3 month averages, annualized
7.2% 7.3% 7.4% 6.2% 4.8% 2.1% 4.2% 3.8% 3.2% 4.0%
CORE PCE, rolling 3 month averages, annualized
4.3% 4.3% 5.4% 4.4% 5.1% 4.5% 5.4% 4.0% 3.6% 4.7%
Consumer Price Index (CPI)
CPI - https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0&output_view=pct_1mth
CORE CPI - http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CUSR0000SA0L1E&output_view=pct_1mth
(Choose "More Formatting Options" at the upper right of the page for other views such as rolling averages of past 12 months, past 6 months, past 3 months)
Producer Price Index (PPI)
OLD CORE PPI - Producer Price Index, seasonally adjusted - Final demand goods less foods and energy -
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/WPSFD413?output_view=pct_1mth
CORE PPI - Producer Price Index, seasonally adjusted - Final demand less foods. energy. and trade services - This is the core measure that the BLS features, so I will follow their lead
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/WPSFD49116?output_view=pct_1mth
(Choose "More Formatting Options" at the upper right of the page for other views such as rolling averages of past 12 months, past 6 months, past 3 months)
Why the Fed thinks core is better for forecasting future inflation: https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143025190#post10
3 months annualized: Core CPI: 4.58%, Core PPI: 4.63%, Core PCE: 4.75%
I chose 3 months for its recency, but that it's still a longer period than one month, so less likely that one can dismiss it as a "one off", as some are trying to do.
To me, there's no way to look at any of these graphs without getting the impression that while inflation is down from the first half of 2022, the last 6 months are showing, at best, a consolidation at more than double the Fed's 2% target. Slightly less optimistically, inflation has been rewarming in the past 6 months.
The latest one-month numbers -- January numbers as reported mid-February (Feb 24 for PCE) -- aren't good either:
Core CPI: 5.06%, Core PPI: 7.27%, Core PCE: 7.07%
CPI: 6.38%, PPI: 8.18%, PCE: 7.69% annualized rates using the actual index numbers
Stocks, Treasury yields, and more (OMG!) : https://finance.yahoo.com/
Fed minutes: 'Ongoing' rate hikes needed, 2 officials wanted 50-point hike
Yahoo Finance, 2/22/23
This is in regard to the January 31 - February 1 Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting, whose meeting minutes came out today, Feb 22. These are the people that vote on interest rate hikes
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fed-minutes-ongoing-rate-hikes-needed-2-officials-wanted-50-point-hike-195355428.html
Instead, officials appeared to remain steadfast in their commitment to raising interest rates to beat inflation, according to minutes from the central bank's latest policy meeting released Wednesday.
Fed officials felt inflation is still “unacceptably high” and that while inflation data received over the past three months showed a welcome drop in the pace of monthly price increases, officials felt that substantially more evidence of progress across a broader range of prices would be required to be confident that inflation was coming down.
The minutes also said that "a few" participants favored raising the federal funds rate by 50 basis points at the Feb. 1 policy meeting, noting that a larger increase would more quickly bring the target range close to the levels they believed would achieve a sufficiently restrictive stance.
Still, several participants noted the possibility that as consumers become more price sensitive, businesses might accept lower profit margins in an effort to maintain market share, which could reduce inflation temporarily. And nearly all members favored slowing the pace of rate hikes to evaluate the impact that existing hikes have had on the economy.
And that was back when inflation looked like it was on a definite cool-down trend (I thought so too back then).
This January 31 - February 1 FOMC meeting (discussed above whose minutes came out today) was before:
* the very hot jobs report that came out February 3 with 517,000 new payroll jobs
* the hot CPI and PPI (wholesale prices) inflation reports below that came out in mid February
* the 3% (in just one month) retail sales sales increase in January (the report came out February 15).
Lately, particulary since the mid-February CPI and PPI and retail sales reports, all I have been reading are bullish (meaning pushing for larger interest rate increases) from various members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) that vote on rate hikes,
As for the meme that interest rate rises won't affect the current inflation, because it's is a global phenomenon caused by supply chain disruptions, Ukraine/Russia, etc., that may be true, but I should note that none of the FOMC or other Federal Reserve people talk that way, and neither, FWIW, does anyone in the administration that I've heard of. Paul Volcker would also disagree (however, the price we paid was a double-dip recession). As for globally, other central banks (except Turkey) have been pushing up their interest rates too.
So expect at least a 0.5% rate increase at the next FOMC meeting March 21-22. Don't be fooled by anything "dovish" that you read in the Jan 31 - Feb 1 meeting minutes above.
On the inflation front:
3 months annualized: Core CPI: 4.58%, Core PPI: 4.63%,
I chose 3 months for its recency, but that it's still a longer period than one month, so less likely that one can dismiss it as a "one off". (The latest one-month numbers -- January numbers as reported mid-February -- aren't good either: Core CPI: 5.06%, Core PPI: 7.27%, CPI: 6.38%, PPI: 8.18% annualized rates using the actual index numbers)
I thought they were on their way down before the mid-February reports of January inflation.
More on the graphs of monthly CPI, PPI, Core CPI, PPI, and why the Fed and I think core is better for predicting future inflation
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10143034894#post1
At 4.5% inflation, the purchasing power of the dollar drops by half in just 16 years.
I'm not looking for the stock market to bail me out either - its valuations are way way high on a historic basis. That was justified back when interest rates were trivial (so there was no real competition to stocks - "TINA - There Is No Alternative" ), but not so much anymore.
Fossil Fuel Consumption Subsidies Soared to Record Heights in 2022
per IEA (International Energy Agency) report. More than double the 2021 amount, to more than $1 trillion in 2022.
usonian thread in General Discussion with big excerpt and link to the report -
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100217666383
Vaccines are great but I'd caution that they are not absolute protection
and that each variant that gains dominance is more infectious than the last, both for the unvaxxed and for the vaxxed. I keep that in mind when I do have to go out grocery shopping or whatever -- being fully vaxxed/boosted I'm maybe 3X lower risk of infection than the unvaxxed, but OTOH this thing keeps getting more and more infectious, so I don't really know what my risk of infection is compared to the early (pre-vax) days, but my guess is that it's not much different. Only that the consequences of an infection are much less than in the early days.
As an over-65 year old with at least one additional risk factor, I do worry about the consequences. If I was middle-aged or younger and healthy, I'd probably be a lot less worried.
NY Times U.S. page, as viewed 1/28/23
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html
Scroll to the "Rates for vaccinated and unvaccinated" section with the average daily cases and average daily deaths graph
CASES: latest is Dec 18-24: Unvaxxed has 3X (2.76X if one does the math with the incidence rates that pop up) the risk as fully vaxxed. (For much of 2022 it ranged from 2X to 3X in rounded numbers)
DEATHS: latest is Nov 27-Dec 3, unvaxxed have 5x (5.2X if one does the math) the risk as fully vaxxed
Number in ()'s are the ratios I calculated at the end point from the pop-up that pops up.
See below for the CDC covid-data-tracker page --
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
CDC Covid tracker rates by vaccine status - https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status - as viewed 1/28/23
Scroll down to the graph. Realize that on the left side are two radio buttons where one can choose "deaths" or "cases"
The incidence rates below (CDC) are WEEKLY rates (i.e. cases per 100,000 per WEEK), in contrast to the NY Times numbers which are average DAILY rates. Whichever is used doesn't affect the relative risk of vaxxed vs. unvaxxed etc., but when looking at the incidence rates per 100k, the CDC numbers look much higher than the NY Times. This is why).
LATEST ON CASES (age 5 and older) is 12/18/22: Incidence per 100,000 population: Unvaxxed 271, Vaxxed w/o updated booster: 98, Vaxxed with updated booster: 82. So relative to vaxxed with updated booster: Unvaxxed: 3.30 X, Vaxxed w/o updated booster: 1.20 X.
LATEST ON DEATHS (age 5 and older) is 11/27/22: Incidence per 100,000 population Unvaxxed 1.79, Vaxxed w/o updated booster: 0.35, Vaxxed with updated booster: 0.16. So relative to vaxxed with updated booster: Unvaxxed: 11.2 X, Vaxxed w/o updated booster: 2.20 X (so get that bivalent booster -progree).
The box below the graph says: In November 2022, people ages 5 and older and vaccinated with an updated (bivalent) booster had:
12.7X lower risk of dying from COVID-19 compared to unvaxxed people and 2.4X lower risk of dying from COVID-19 compared to people vaxxed without the updated (bivalent) booster.
Profile Information
Gender: MaleHometown: Minnesota
Member since: Sat Jan 1, 2005, 04:45 AM
Number of posts: 12,013