I'm reading the headline as from the article: "Too Many People Are Dying Right Now “It’s hard to look at these indicators and feel at all optimistic,” explains scientist Eric Topol."

It feels like someone editorialized the headline to an anti-vax POV... I will unfortunately flag this..

My rough understanding/working hypothesis is that the vaccination protects you (90+%) against becoming infected. That is also the mechanism by which it prevents further transmission - you don't transmit if you're not infected.

However, once you do get infected despite vaccination, your chance of transmitting it and your chance of hospitalisation/death might not be significantly reduced (vis-a-vis no vaccination). (This would imply that the vaccination does not significantly change the IFR.)

A nicer scenario would be that the vaccination gives you 90% protection against getting infected, then, if you do get infected, 90% protection against getting hospitalised, then, if you do get hospitalised, 90% infection against death. This would imply, though, that the vaccination confers 99% protection against hospitalisation (1-(1-90%)^2), and 99.9% protection against death (1-(1-90%)^3).

It would be good to find authoritative information on these ratios; I haven't seen it.