COVID-19

comparing yesterday it is 6th October and 8th April

if it was last week the comparison would be exact same day last year and 28 September

 

Thanks Storck. Apologies for being dim but...eh?

 

Masks in the mud in a weeks time.
Let's see how the 70% poll of people continuing to wear masks holds up.

 

mid ypu look at numbers on ventilators yesterday then they are very similar to the first dates I said.

If you look at numbers on ventilators last week so when he was on TV then it is similar to the second set of dates

 

sorry just seen you said three times the amount in which case it would have been July last year or September

 

F

ah right. I've just looked it up. I think he was comparing to late May 2021 to illustrate his argument that it is ridiculous to fully ease restrictions when infections and also seriously ill cases were still increasing

 

It would certainly be a large % of how many OAP this pandemic has killed, yet the government are talking about scrapping the triple lock.

 

Am element of it is that simplistic though although clearly more longwinded than I put.

Mask wearing and social distancing only reduce the risk, not eliminate it. As do the vaccine, at some point those things cross over.

The key bit really is that we always knew that infections would rise when restrictions were eased regardless of how many people were vaccinated. Its going to happen the world over so it becomes a question of timing, do you want to do it in summer when there's more natural leeway but less vaccination or in winter when conditions are worse but vaccination coverage is improver. Its a trade off. Or, do we wait until summer 2022 to do it?

However if people are genuinely worried about it they should be comforted by the polls. If 70% of people or whatever it is are against removing restrictions then surely at least 70% of people will choose to still wear a mask and socially distance as beat they can? That's a large part of the population who will be acting as if they are still under formal restrictions.

If that isn't enough then people have the choice to exclude themselves further, if thats their free choice then that's fine but it seems utterly ridiculous to hide away from a virus you're been vaccinated against.

 

the reason for the restrictions was to stop the numbers over loading the NHS, we are still at around 10% capacity of ventilators. So yes it is going up but nowhere near like it did last time round.

last time we had this number of new cases was Christmas and there were 4 times as many people on ventilators and 7.5 times more people in hospital.

if you compare number in hospital last time there was the same number in hospital there were 4 times as many new cases each day

 

Hospitalisation and death are objective measures as to the serious risk (not) presented to children. They're key measures. I've mentioned before, 'long covid' is such a loosely and subjectively defined term for which the applicable symptoms could be attributed or caused by all manner of things. Including the stress presented by the lockdown restrictions and campaign of fear.

Anyway, nothing personal, today is about positivity of a different kind for me - all about the final! So I'll be abstaining from any further covid chat for at least today!!

 

When case numbers are relatively low, yes. But not when the numbers are exploding at the current rate and will explode further when social distancing and mask wearing amongst those most likely to be carrying the virus are removed.
A small percentage risk of those vaccinated getting seriously sick is a small risk when case numbers are low. But that small percentage becomes a much bigger risk when case numbers are extremely high.
I don't understand why you don't get that.

 

I get what you're saying but you seem to be doing your standard thing of working only in theory and ignoring reality.

Case numbers were low a month ago, but you didn't want to remove restrictions then. Whenever case numbers are at "base level" it will be because of restrictions and will therefore be a temporary situation, not a permanent state.

Case numbers rising will happen whenever restrictions are removed. Saying that they'll only be happy when cases are low and stable is basically saying don't remove restrictions in the medium term.

 

Not once the whole adult population is double jabbed and up to max immunity.
Restrictions are currently keeping numbers lower than they otherwise would be whilst the vaccination programme rolls out. Once everyone is vaxed the R number will go down massively and should remain there, because we will have achieved sufficient herd immunity through vaccinations and acquired immunity to prevent future massive spikes (unless there are variants - but I'd expect forthcoming booster jabs to deal with those pretty well).

I didn't want all restrictions removed in May because insufficient people had been jabbed to keep the numbers low. I don't want them all removed now because the numbers are already high and will go much higher until we've completed the vaccination programme.
The majority of those getting sick now are the unjabbed or those who've had only one. But the more of them there are, the greater the risk to those who've been double jabbed and for whom the vaccines don't work well. That risk will subside once everyone (barring the anti-vaxer fruit loops) is double jabbed.

 

The major risk now in opening up to early is that viruses are very adaptable and the danger is that like with antibiotics that those catching it after only one dose of vaccine will teach the virus to mutate and beat vaccines we are using, We should have waited until the majority of the nation was double vacinated and a booster plan in place in the winter to top it up.

 

The whole adult population isn't going to get double jabbed. Its another theoretical position not reflected in reality.

Check out the below graph. When the lines on the left plateau that's where the age group are choosing not to take up the vaccine - they're eligible for it but have not done so - none of them are anywhere close to 100%.



Saying only release restrictions when 100% of people are double jabbed is even worse than the previous position. That's saying don't release them in the long term!

If you're double jabbed but the vaccine isn't actually stopping you getting infected than you're likely to get the virus at some point because there will always be enough people in the population who are unprotected for it to circulate. When restrictions are released case numbers are going to go up and will not stay at base level.

Any discussion around this needs to take into account these facts. Just saying that the only time to release control is when everyone is vaccinated and case rates are low is not a medium term position in reality.

 

It is a strange conundrum where the Tories who hate benefits have increased pensions far more than Labour who pretend to be for the working classes yet do nothing in power to protect or help them, The triple lock is doomed am afraid, It may stay this year but I suspect will be bought out with a sweetner by the treasury

 

When was that graph produced? Before or after the big surge of young people getting jabbed a couple of weeks back? I know that vaccination rates amongst the young have tailed off in the last week but I think more will be tempted to get jabbed as cases continue rising in the next few weeks.
And, of course, if there are extremely high numbers of cases coming down the track, as predicted, then lots more young people will soon be getting acquired immunity, whether or not they choose to get jabbed.
So the combination of the majority of the adult population being vaccinated plus those with acquired immunity should keep cases low once everyone who wants to be has been double jabbed.

 

2 days ago. He does them every week.



I'm sorry to say that what you believe will keep cases low won't actually do so. The numbers of cases are still miles to low in comparison to the amount of people susceptible, both vaccinated and invaccinated. But that number isn't actually going to get anywhere close to 100% no matter how long we wait so shouldn't factor into the thinking.

In actual fact the current news seems to be having the opposite effect in a lot of my kids friends. They're seeing the fact that double vaccinated people are still getting it, that you still have to isolate if you're a contact, etc, etc and thinking "what's the actual point?"

 

But that will change. They won't keep having double vaxed people required to self isolate, just because they spent ten minutes on the other side of a bar from someone who subsequently tested positive.

 

I agree and that will be a benefit that might encourage them but it's also going to be incredibly difficult to administer and its questionable whether people of that mindset would be diligently isolating anyway. The only thing that would meaningfully increase uptake would be if it was actually bulletproof at stopping infection. But nothing is going to get this level of protection to the threshold required.