advertisement


Coronavirus - the new strain XVII

Status
Not open for further replies.
Surely this is a backlog from last Saturday’s very low figure? Lots of backdating going on. Still catching up from Easter...

Still heading overall in a downwards direction when you look at the weekly deaths average and cases and hospital admissions continuing to drop.
 
gavreid said:
2589 cases today and 40 deaths. Deaths are no longer falling @flatpopely - but black is white eh? 189 admissions which, again, is somewhat stagnant.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the story goes like this.

The people dying today caught it about 4 or 5 weeks ago -- maybe from their kids when schools were opened. That group would be younger -- parents of teenagers. If they were vaccinated, chances are that the vaccines weren't effective when they caught it -- they started to vaccinate younger age groups less than eight weeks ago I think.

I expect we'll now see cases, admissions and deaths all go up, because of retail opening and the relatively small quantity of new first doses being given. I don't know how much headroom there is in the system.
 
mandryka said:
I wonder if the story goes like this.

The people dying today caught it about 4 or 5 weeks ago -- maybe from their kids when schools were opened. That group would be younger -- parents of teenagers. If they were vaccinated, chances are that the vaccines weren't effective when they caught it -- they started to vaccinate younger age groups less than eight weeks ago I think.
Click to expand...

I think there's a lot in that. Very few parents will have been vaccinated yet being under 50 in the main. My wife is 40 ish and a little bit and can't get a first dose despite being my 'carer', except she isn't called that because I try to be be independent...
 
What makes me laugh is people all pointing out to me last week’s low figures having a caveat, but they’re not pointing out the caveat in this week’s data...

It’s as obvious as anything that deaths are catching up from the artificially low figures last weekend and will settle again next week back to the downwards trend... but then that theory doesn’t fit the agenda of people who seem to revel in the idea of endless lockdowns and jump on any chance to say things are going on the wrong direction. Strange how some folk are almost wishing things to get worse. I see it on Twitter everyday...

This obsessing over figures has to stop. There has to come a point where we accept and tolerate a certain level of deaths and get back to some form of normal like we do with flu. This virus isn’t going anywhere and we need to learn to live with it. The likes of Prof Whitty are saying this and anyone else who doesn’t think we can get zero Covid...
 
Total numbers of daily new cases of Covid across the UK has fallen to as low as 1,626 according to the @Join_ZOE app...
 
Neither Lawrence Young nor Steve Griffin are epidemiologists, far from it. Their comments indicate that they are both tame radical lefties who can be relied on to regurgitate half baked drivel to beef up the Grauniad’s shameful anti-government propaganda. They probably don’t like the Queen or Prince Philip either.

Killjoy bastards they are. Should be against the law to publish that sort of nonsense. They’re no better than The Daily Mail and their microbiologist friend Simon Clarke.

https://pinkfishmedia.net/forum/threads/coronavirus-the-new-strain-xvii.252938/page-43#post-4316142
 
Stephen Griffin leads the Antivirals & Viral Oncology research group at Leeds for starters - you mustn't fall into the trap of ignoring opinion that you don't like @mandryka
 
I do wonder if the government advisors have taken the uneven (spatial and social) distribution properly into account. The problem, from the perspective of whatever doves are on the team, is that they’ve already softened the public up by telling us to expect a very large exit wave as baked in.
 
Deejay said:
What makes me laugh is people all pointing out to me last week’s low figures having a caveat, but they’re not pointing out the caveat in this week’s data...
Click to expand...

I thought that some posters on here were bored with hearing the caveats. But yes of course they still apply.

The general trend is continuing, but now that changes are being made to the rules, they need to be analysed carefully by experts to see what the real consequences, are vs their predictions, which presumably had considerable uncertainty.

With the quality of the data and a structured approach to changing the rules, the experts will be able to advise more effectively through having better validated models to predict ahead.
 
Seanm said:
I do wonder if the government advisors have taken the uneven (spatial and social) distribution properly into account. The problem, from the perspective of whatever doves are on the team, is that they’ve already softened the public up by telling us to expect a very large exit wave as baked in.
Click to expand...

Here are their four tests. Raised prevalence in Yorkshire or the Midlands won't get in the way of a move to the next stage.

  • whether vaccine deployment has continued successfully;
  • vaccines are effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths;
  • infection rates do not risk a surge that would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS;
  • the assessment of risk is not fundamentally changed by new variants of concern.
 
mandryka said:
Here are their four tests. Raised prevalence in Yorkshire or the Midlands won't get in the way of a move to the next stage.

  • whether vaccine deployment has continued successfully;
  • vaccines are effective in reducing hospitalisations and deaths;
  • infection rates do not risk a surge that would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS;
  • the assessment of risk is not fundamentally changed by new variants of concern.
Click to expand...

Even a cursory look at the cases map, with an appropriate level of zoom, shows many areas across the North with very significant levels of infection in the 100-200 per 100k range

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map
 
Could people not comment unless your epidemiologist qualified because it's really all getting on my tits. Yours respectfully me. Thank you.
 
gavreid said:
Even a cursory look at the cases map, with an appropriate level of zoom, shows many areas across the North with very significant levels of infection in the 100-200 per 100k range

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/interactive-map
Click to expand...
I think though that with the vaccine rollout, infection rate is no longer the definitive measure. I do agree with the way that third bullet point is worded:
infection rates do not risk a surge that would put unsustainable pressure on the NHS
Click to expand...

which appears to acknowledge that, vaccines being reportedly 100% effective against serious disease, there may now be a disconnect between hospitalisation/death and any surge in infections.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
I think though that with the vaccine rollout, infection rate is no longer the definitive measure. I do agree with the way that third bullet point is worded:


which appears to acknowledge that, vaccines being reportedly 100% effective against serious disease, there may now be a disconnect between hospitalisation/death and any surge in infections.
Click to expand...

The 3rd bullet point is carefully chosen. The models not not predict that the NHS is likely to be 'overwhelmed' but that says nothing about a new growth in infection and countless more deaths.
 
gavreid said:
The 3rd bullet point is carefully chosen. The models not not predict that the NHS is likely to be 'overwhelmed' but that says nothing about a new growth in infection and countless more deaths.
Click to expand...
We can’t get to a zero-tolerance position on COVID deaths, so we need to have a conversation about the level that is tolerable. Annual flu deaths would seem to be a reasonable marker for openers, not least because there’s likely to be an overlap in those who would succumb.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top