I just checked your source and can't find anything to confirm your claim. Just take the latest vaccine surveillance report https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... and please do tell me where it confirms your claim that vaccinated people are infected at higher rates than the non-vaccinated. I am very intrigued.
At the same time I have been looking at the other columns as well. The first column shows the rate of infection in people that have just tested positive. The other three columns show how much more dangerous the virus is to people who have not been vaccinated and end up in the hospital. Way more unvaccinated people end up in the hospital than vaccinated people. At the same time, way more cases of unvaccinated people that ended up in the hospital end in death than in cases of vaccinated people. The hospitalisation rates in the unvaccinated populations are from 2 to up to 4 times higher than in vaccinated populations. The death rates even more so show this discrepancy between the cases that end up in death coming from unvaccinated vs. vaccinated people.
Besides that, there are some very important pieces of information missing in this entire story. We do not know how many people have had previous infections. Read the following comment on p24: > people who have never been vaccinated are more likely to have caught COVID-19 in the weeks or months before the period of the cases covered in the report. This gives them some natural immunity to the virus for a few months which may have contributed to a lower case rate in the past few weeks
With that being said, I give you that, you are right in the fact that there are more infections in the vaccinated population than in the unvaccinated, but at the same time the former seem to have a better time after contracting the virus than the latter (proof are the death rates).
With that being said, I do not think that the right decision is to dump the vaccination certificates/passports, rather I think the right decision would be to further implement the certificate as a requirement alongside periodic testing. It has been proven in other parts of the world that the vaccination certificate is indeed an incentive for people to get the vaccine, which in turn would help the hospitalisation rates fall. Testing is still detrimental.
What is the point of the passport if you can do effective pre-testing and the vaccine does not prevent covid in itself?
I may be misreading what you write, but are you putting together "media attention" and "scientific attention"?
In this crisis as in everything else, media have the attention span of a goldfish and considerably less attention to detail. In this crisis as in everything else, scientists, on the other hand, are working hard to obtain and study serious data, something that may very well take years.
And then there are people (not claiming you're among them) who are angry at scientists because media are not doing their work and who prefer taking the word of charlatans because - big surprise - since they don't need scientific rigor, or sometimes even real data, they can find answers to all questions.
Not a big fan of where this is all going.
I'd wager a guess that vaccinated people reported COVID to authorities more often than non-vaccinated people, because they apparently tended to comply with the recommended policy.
Unvaccinated people might have tended to treat mild COVID cases as simple colds and unless more severe symptoms developed not test or report.
First and second columns are shown per 100,000 people.
For ages 18-80 the cases per 100,000 people are the same or higher (up to 2x higher) in the fully vaccinated vs the unvaccinated.
The footnote under that table also says "Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection."
Edit: it would also be difficult to reconcile with the enormous disparity between <18 and subsequent rows.