Coronavirus: General discussion (see opening post for rules)

[paulkerton]

It would also be illegal, under the Public Health (Control of Diseases) Act 1984 the Government cannot force people to be vaccinated.

If only there was a way of changing laws...

[StevieM]

Don't need to anyway, just say "when 99% of people get vaccinated, you can go to the pub", and peer pressure would fix the problem bring people onto the streets in civil disobedience and the country would burn.

FTFY

 

Honestly, I always thought the lifting of restrictions would feel like a weight off my shoulders, like a victory--but instead I feel more anxious than I have for a year, like we're sleepwalking into another disaster, and that we're yet again failing to learn the lessons and will end up with both a fourth wave and another severe lockdown once it's all out of hand because we didn't take the small, sensible steps at the right time but buried our heads in the sand and pretended it was all okay.

Bang on target! I'm concerned that this is going to be a case of history repeating itself. I'm really pleased that some restrictions are being eased and that the hospitalisation/death rate is still low relative to infection rate. However, opening everything up, removing all social distancing/mask wearing restrictions, lowering the isolation threshold, easing travel restrictions etc. at the start of the summer holidays is going to have a similar impact to the 'Travel around the country, mix with loads of different people and we'll even give you £10 off every time you go and eat in a crowded McDonald's before returning to school in September' strategy of last year.

 

We can keep on easing restrictions - just in smaller steps. I hope I'm wrong, though.

[LeMarchand]

Unfortunately it seems as if the members here are, yet again, in the minority. Apparently flight ticket sites saw a huge uptick with the relaxation of the rules.

[Garacesh]

Unfortunately it seems as if the members here are, yet again, in the minority. Apparently flight ticket sites saw a huge uptick with the relaxation of the rules.

 

To be fair, most destinations still require you to get tested before you fly, and then quarantine and test after you land.

Then you still have to do contact tracing and a test upon return to the UK.

And airlines/ports are still making you wear facemasks.

 

I'll admit to being one of the people that booked a flight yesterday, because I haven't seen my partner in almost a year. Do I think there are risks? Absolutely. Is it a little bit selfish? Yeah, probably.

I did, however, leave enough time on the return journey to quarantine at home should I need to, and I'll be wearing my masks as normal, and getting regular tests. And I've had both jabs (which I know doesn't make me immune, but still, it helps). So I accept the risks and have plans to mitigate them should the worst happen.

 

So I feel that's a reasonable compromise. And I (no doubt in vain) hope that other travellers will be taking the same precautions.

But we all know most of them wont. Most people are burnt out and have stopped caring. They're sick to the back teeth of restrictions (which, whilst the restrictions are reasonable, being sick of them is understandable) and simply don't have the capacity to care about COVID any more. Is it justifiable? No, I wouldn't say so. But is it understandable? Absolutely.

 

As much as lockdown has been easy for me, since I'm a introverted hermit who has no social life beyond the internet, I do need to keep reminding myself that I'm not everybody else. People keep bringing mental health into the discussion, but I don't think that's being fairly applied. Extroverts (that have stuck to the rules) have probably had it hell for the past year, and I do sympathise with them.

It's a fine balancing act, because there are people who legitimately can't be vaccinated who this virus still poses a huge risk to, and of course the more people with the virus the more chance there is of a mutation. That's why I think masks ought to still be mandatory, and why I'm glad they're still enforcing quarantines for the unvaccinated. But then again, I also think those that were CEV and shielding should still be allowed to do so, that provision should've never gone away.

 

I'm not really sure where I'm going with this ramble. Just a thought-dump I guess.

[LeMarchand]

I'll admit to being one of the people that booked a flight yesterday, because I haven't seen my partner in almost a year.

 

Sorry to hear that.

 

It's not your sort of scenario that annoys me though, it's the way that holidays are seen as some sort of human right that has to be taken by many.

 

Like you I'm quite happy at home, which might colour my view!

[mavhc]

the country would burn

 

Hey, worked for London in 1666 (Note: this is not true)

 

I'll up the offer then: When 99% of people are vaccinated, you can go to the pub, and get a free beer.

 

Good news: almost 80 million doses delivered. Bad news, 133 million half people in uk, so 60% done.

 

Bad news: now back to mid dec levels of infections and still doubling every 2 weeks

 

People admitted to hospital doubling every 2 weeks also

 

People in hospital doubling every 3 weeks

 

People on mechanical ventilation doubling every 3 weeks

 

Deaths doubling every 3 weeks

[mavhc]

Latest R range for England

1.2 to 1.5

 

Latest growth rate range for England

+3% to +7%

 

up from 1.1-1.3 last week, it's getting worse. And by it, I mean the rate at which it's getting worse is getting worse

[sonofsanta]

Cases up 50% in the last week according to the radio news bulletin.

 

That we are choosing this moment to relax restrictions is unfathomable.

[Ditto]

Hey, worked for London in 1666 (Note: this is not true)

 

I'll up the offer then: When 99% of people are vaccinated, you can go to the pub, and get a free beer.

 

Good news: almost 80 million doses delivered. Bad news, 133 million half people in uk, so 60% done.

 

Bad news: now back to mid dec levels of infections and still doubling every 2 weeks

 

People admitted to hospital doubling every 2 weeks also

 

People in hospital doubling every 3 weeks

 

People on mechanical ventilation doubling every 3 weeks

 

Deaths doubling every 3 weeks

I, like many here, am concerned about the explosion in cases and the consequences that brings and a less complete unlocking would seem to fit a more 'cautious' approach. However, the data you quote is a skewed presentation of where we are at. None of it is on a standalone basis incorrect, but it doesn't reflect the vaccine programme impact, the relative level of serious illness and death, the fact that many of those infected now are younger and at considerably lower risk. Sometimes quoting percentages is better replaced with absolute values, especially when the absolutes are low as in the case of deaths. Perhaps you could present hospital admissions, hospital patient numbers, numbers on mechanical ventilation comparative to case numbers for each of the three waves, both in absolute numbers and percentages. Of course, it'll take a bit of extra work on case number you'll need to take account that levels of testing varies of that time, but there will be data for approximate expected levels of infection.

Edited July 10, 2021 by Ditto

[Ditto]

I've posted a 14 day average vaccination rate a few times, so here is an update - the level is at a low point and behind the numbers, first jabs have dropped significantly. Clearly, it's going to be a tough job pushing towards 95%+ - a level that is need for the highly infections disease measles, the vaccine which is thought to give at least 20 years protection. There are some that now think due to variants and potentially short lived protection, true herd immunity is unachievable.

 

[sigma]

I, like many here, am concerned about the explosion in cases and the consequences that brings and a less complete unlocking would seem to fit a more 'cautious' approach. However, the data you quote is a skewed presentation of where we are at. None of it is on a standalone basis incorrect, but it doesn't reflect the vaccine programme impact, the relative level of serious illness and death, the fact that many of those infected now are younger and at considerably lower risk. Sometimes quoting percentages is better replaced with absolute values, especially when the absolutes are low as in the case of deaths. Perhaps you could present hospital admissions, hospital patient numbers, numbers on mechanical ventilation comparative to case numbers for each of the three waves, both in absolute numbers and percentages. Of course, it'll take a bit of extra work on case number you'll need to take account that levels of testing varies of that time, but there will be data for approximate expected levels of infection.

 

I'm going to butt in here. This has been a decent ROT so far:

 

Ratio of cases 2 weeks ago to today ago and apply that that to current level of hospitalisations to predict hospitalisations in 2 weeks time. (Assumes that the % of cases needing hospitalisation says the same)

 

Ratio of cases 4 weeks ago to today ago and apply that that to current level of deaths to predict deaths in 4 weeks time. (Caveat: current treatments are extending the time it takes to die, so not all are beng counted in the "had a positive test within 28 days" figure and same about ratios).

 

So,

 

Cases by specimen date 23rd June 17907 7th July 34446 (Back of a fag packet for simplicity, lets say it doubled)

 

Hospitalisations (admissions) on 7th July 610 (6th July the latest available but going up at around 50 per day now) predicts ~ 1200 per day by 21st July etc.

 

deaths on 7th July ~ 20 per day gives ~ 40 per day by 4th August etc.

 

These numbers are baked in from people who are already infected.

 

"If we do nothing", and maintain the current trajectory to get to Javid's 100,000 cases per day with conservativly saying that cases are doubling every 2 weeks, we would get to ~64000 cases per day by 21st July and ~ 120000 cases by about 4th August. If you extapolate the hospitalisation and death figures that does not put us in a good place.

 

However the government says that it is planning to turbocharge this on the the 19th July and again on the 16th August.

 

Remember, whatever number of infections you allow to happen, the number of hospitalisations is baked in for the following 2 weeks and deaths for the following 4 weeks. Although more people are being vaccinated, you are not fully vaccinated until at least 2 weeks after the second dose.

What about Long Covid?

 

(Declaration of interest: I live in a shielding house).

[mavhc]

Right, that's the point, if you do nothing everyone gets infected. Did we learn nothing from Aḥmad bin Muḥammad bin Ibrāhīm Abu ’l-ʿAbbās S̲h̲ams al-Dīn al-Barmakī al-Irbilī al-S̲h̲āfiʿī, ibn Khallikān's 1256 story of the grains of wheat on a chess board doubling on each square?

[sonofsanta]

Well the Dutch removed their restrictions on indoor socialising on June 26; they had "only" 806 new cases recorded on July 1. Since then, this is what has happened to their infection rate:

 

 

They're now reinstating restrictions, given the number on that last data point is 9,398

 

Whelp

[tg12]

They're now reinstating restrictions, given the number on that last data point is 9,398

 

Whelp

 

Meanwhile, in Britain... *cuts to scenes in Leicester Square yesterday*

[Rob_D]

But what's the Dutch vaccination rate?

 

As I understand it, the idea is that vaccination of the at-risk groups is supposed to break the link between infection rate > hospitalization rate > mortality rate.

The theory being that the % chance of someone getting seriously/fatally ill stays low because the people who's risk of getting ill is climbing have a much lower chance of needing hospital treatment.

 

Of course I'm sure someone can quote some numbers and show me a graph of why this is hokum.

[mavhc]

So 50% of people currently have had enough vaccine for it to be effective, and the vaccine is 95% effective.

 

Then you have people who can't get the vaccine because of their health.

 

So of the currently vaccinated, 5% can get ill, and some percentage might die, let's say 1%, so that's 33 million * 5% * 1%, or 16500 vaccinated people who could die.

 

Then you have the 1% of people who can't get vaccinated for health reasons, and they're much more likely to die, so that's probably at least 10% of 1%, so that's 67000 people

 

Next you have the 13% of over 18s who've had no vaccine doses at all, that'll be about 50% average people, and 50% young people, so let's say 1% for average people, and 0.1% for young people, so that's 43000 and 4300, so 47000 total.

 

So when everyone gets infected that's about doubled the current number of deaths.

 

Then you have all the health effects of getting it but not dying, including brain damage.

 

Or my radical suggestion is: don't do nothing when cases are rising

[sonofsanta]

But what's the Dutch vaccination rate?

 

As I understand it, the idea is that vaccination of the at-risk groups is supposed to break the link between infection rate > hospitalization rate > mortality rate.

The theory being that the % chance of someone getting seriously/fatally ill stays low because the people who's risk of getting ill is climbing have a much lower chance of needing hospital treatment.

 

Of course I'm sure someone can quote some numbers and show me a graph of why this is hokum.

 

 

17.7 million doses delivered in an adult population of 13.9 million. Not sure of the breakdown of 1 vs 2 doses, but by contrast, we've delivered 80m doses against an adult population of 53.9 million. So we've delivered around 1.48 doses per adult, they've done 1.27. So they're behind, but not that big a difference given how scary that chart is.

 

And I understand the theory breaking the link, but regardless of hospitalisation etc. every case is still a chance for a mutation, and in a part-vaccinated population that will select for vaccine-resistant variants, and so we're taking a massive gamble for the whole world, here, having already gifted them the Alpha variant. And, of course, there's Long Covid.

 

The right time to ease restrictions is soon, given the vaccination rates, but with the Delta variant and the rising numbers and the unfinished rollout, it's not sensible for it to be now. Remember when we were promised these easings would be based on data not dates?

[LeMarchand]

Then you have all the health effects of getting it but not dying, including brain damage.

 

 

I was going to mention this - it's all very well claiming that fewer people are getting seriously ill or dying, but there appears that there might be long term effects to consider.

 

 

Remember when we were promised these easings would be based on data not dates?

 

 

The data is in: Powerful people/corporations aren't making as much money as they want, so back it's to work, proles.

 

 

I really don't see the slightest bit of sense in removing the mask rule. I guess they're hoping to promote herd immunity again - but TPTB are the farmers and the rest of us are the herd.

[elsiegee40]

Mr gee40 woke to find he has to self isolate until midnight on Saturday according to the app.

 

I haven’t had the notification which makes our trip to Wimbledon on Monday less likely as the source; it looks like his trip to the gym on Tuesday may be to blame.

[Boredguy]

Mr gee40 woke to find he has to self isolate until midnight on Saturday according to the app.

 

I haven’t had the notification which males our trip to Wimbledon on Monday less likely as the source; it looks like his trip to the gym on Tuesday may be to blame.

 

Assuming the app is correct of course, since there is no requirement to follow it's advice as it might have picked up the handshake from a nearby locker if the phone was kept in it.

[Ditto]

I'm going to butt in here. This has been a decent ROT so far:

Might be showing my age here, but could you let me know what 'ROT' is an acronym for - thanks!

[Boredguy]

Rate of Transmission maybe?

[Ditto]

So 50% of people currently have had enough vaccine for it to be effective, and the vaccine is 95% effective.

 

Then you have people who can't get the vaccine because of their health.

 

So of the currently vaccinated, 5% can get ill, and some percentage might die, let's say 1%, so that's 33 million * 5% * 1%, or 16500 vaccinated people who could die.

 

Then you have the 1% of people who can't get vaccinated for health reasons, and they're much more likely to die, so that's probably at least 10% of 1%, so that's 67000 people

 

Next you have the 13% of over 18s who've had no vaccine doses at all, that'll be about 50% average people, and 50% young people, so let's say 1% for average people, and 0.1% for young people, so that's 43000 and 4300, so 47000 total.

 

So when everyone gets infected that's about doubled the current number of deaths.

 

Then you have all the health effects of getting it but not dying, including brain damage.

 

Or my radical suggestion is: don't do nothing when cases are rising

I'm not sure the assumed death rates you use of 10%, 1% and 0.1% are reasonable in the current circumstances - do you have a source? We also need to consider the unvaccinated under 18's, of which there are about 12 million. However, to avoid making things look even more grim than they are, the absolute risk of death due to covid for children (at least according to one piece of research), is about 0.0002%, or 2 in a million (source https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2021/jul/covid-19-risks-severe-illness-children-shown-be-very-low). Don't get me wrong, I'm unnerved but the full unlocking and it feels unnecessarily risky, but I accept I could be wrong. Using figures that paint the picture as accurately as possible is my preference, and avoid 'assumed' numbers.

[Ditto]

Mr gee40 woke to find he has to self isolate until midnight on Saturday according to the app.

 

I haven’t had the notification which makes our trip to Wimbledon on Monday less likely as the source; it looks like his trip to the gym on Tuesday may be to blame.

Sorry to hear this. I've just heard about 'several' cases at my boys school in year 8 (they're Y7 and Y8) plus a Y10 teacher possibly with Covid. I fear a lot of early summer holiday's will scuppered due to the current rates of transmission in schools. I've also heard anecdotally that some are uninstalling the NHS app and others pulling their kids from school before the end of term. The former is just not right, but I can sympathise with the latter decision.

[mavhc]

I'm not sure the assumed death rates you use of 10%, 1% and 0.1% are reasonable in the current circumstances - do you have a source? We also need to consider the unvaccinated under 18's, of which there are about 12 million. However, to avoid making things look even more grim than they are, the absolute risk of death due to covid for children (at least according to one piece of research), is about 0.0002%, or 2 in a million (source https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/2021/jul/covid-19-risks-severe-illness-children-shown-be-very-low). Don't get me wrong, I'm unnerved but the full unlocking and it feels unnecessarily risky, but I accept I could be wrong. Using figures that paint the picture as accurately as possible is my preference, and avoid 'assumed' numbers.

 

I didn't include children at all, although there are things like https://www.cdc.gov/mis/mis-c.html

 

Existing death rate is about 2%, so I halved that to get 1% given increases in knowledge of treatment.

 

In 2020 2% of deaths were 20-49 year olds, the 50% of people who are old dominate that 20-100 sector, so the 1% of deaths for those people is fair. Young people are the 18-40 group, but that's only 4300 so doesn't move the number much.

 

I assume if you're immunocompromised you have a far higher chance of death, and that 1% of people are immunocompromised. Couldn't find much data on that, although https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/998309/Greenbook_chapter_14a_1July2021.pdf does say that they should be vaccinated, and there are very few people who shouldn't be, no numbers, but unlikely to be as high as 1%.

 

So mostly it's people who have chosen not to be vaccinated, and those yet to be vaccinated. And then people for whom the vaccine is not effective.