Forum menu
Just had a team meeting on Teams including a colleague who's situated just outside New Delhi. We asked him how he and his family was, and the emotion was clear to see. They are safe for the moment, but he said they are very scared to leave the house as the streets are crowded with people panicking for food and water, but also panicking for fear of infection.
He effectively said they are almost getting to a mental survival mode, pretty much juggling with the fact that going outside is a potential death sentence.
It must be awful.
Well said Batfink.
Our version of the Indian situation would have still been pretty ugly. Once you no longer have access to healthcare because your healthcare system is overwhelmed, people here are no different to those lying in the back of their cars outside the hospitals there.
And yet those arguing against lockdowns cannot see what we were trying to avoid, and the consequences of that, both in terms of lives, and the knock-on to the economy, which would have been worse. It's not an either/or situation.
A look at the likely curve in India and the implications for surrounding countries is horrifying stuff.
I see and hear a lot of thoughts and attitudes projected on to “the young” by critics of the lockdowns on here that I don’t actually hear from “the young” I speak to.
My two turned 18 earlier this year. They've lost their grandma during this, weren't even able to hug their granddad at the funeral. Obviously there has been little to no social life, their schooling is in tatters. And yet, they have accepted what needed to be done with little complaint, because they understand the likely alternative. I'm very proud of their resilience.
Surely the situation in India now puts a line under any bleating about Lockdown being "so unfair" doesn't it? Want to see what an unchecked pandemic would've looked like...well, here it is, live on your tellybox.
Surely the situation in India now puts a line under any bleating about Lockdown being “so unfair” doesn’t it? Want to see what an unchecked pandemic would’ve looked like…well, here it is, live on your tellybox.
you’d think so! But no - read the page previous to this one
I’m fast becoming a batfink fanboi though, always well argued barely controlled rage.
It’s long distance rage! We’d like to move “home” at some point - and so would rather the place wasn’t a smouldering **** ing wreck when we do!
you’d think so! But no – read the page previous to this one
I cant remember which of the proponents it was. But going by the OBR forecast for the future unemployment rate it worked out as 1 life sacrificed for 5 jobs saved.
A thought experiment. Herd immunity implies an R sufficiently low that infections continue to reduce until the epidemic fades out. A lower R is obtained by reducing contact or by reducing transmissibility (or both). Those who have been vaccinated appear to have a lower risk of transmitting the virus. The more of the population that are vaccinated, the lower R will be and the closer we are to herd immunity. If those who are vaccinated were encouraged to mix, so that the ratio of vaccinated people mixing is enhanced compared to the ratio in the general population, do we get to herd immunity sooner?
If the answer is yes, there are still some issues before suggesting it as a policy. Even those who are vaccinated are still at some risk of infection, and were vaccinated because they were most vulnerable to serious illness. So it would only be ethical if infection rates were low enough to make that risk reasonable. There might also be a social fairness aspect - "we vaccinated them because they were vulnerable but now they're getting more freedom then we are"
More issues? Daft idea?
If those who are vaccinated were encouraged to mix, so that the ratio of vaccinated people mixing is enhanced compared to the ratio in the general population, do we get to herd immunity sooner?
Daft idea?
Not so much daft, as logically flawed.
and I don’t know any who would have sacrificed a relative in order to avoid a lockdown
That's a rather emotional way of framing it but I see your point. OTOH we drive cars and implicitly choose to sacrifice ~2,000 people per year on UK roads for that privilege.
So a couple of orders of magnitude road deaths fewer than Covid deaths with confinements, masks, pubs shut, schools shut... .
Vaccination will result in an order of magnitude fewer deaths than road deaths.
And yet it's the same people minimising the risks of Covid itself who are anti-vax because of the risk. I didn't even try to explain to my anti-vax friend, there really wasn't anything to be gained.
we drive cars and implicitly choose to sacrifice ~2,000 people per year on UK roads for that privilege.
2000 a year is unacceptable to me, but its a bit different to the 120,000 a year we lost during Covid DESPITE lockdown and all the other restrictions.
If 2,000 lives is a sacrifice, then what would we have called the 200,000+ extra lives we'd likely have lost in the last year if we hadn't made intermittent use of lockdowns?
808 billion passenger kilometres per year, and it's not 2000 its 1750 deaths per year.
That is in no way comparable in scale to what has already happened with CV19
And theres some really significant efforts to reduce those deaths too.
So a couple of orders of magnitude road deaths fewer than Covid deaths with confinements, masks, pubs shut, schools shut… .
Vaccination will result in an order of magnitude fewer deaths than road deaths.
It's the principle I'm arguing: that we already choose to sacrifice many people to lead a 'normal' life. Not all driving-related deaths are due to accidents anyway. What about - more indirectly - cancers, respiratory illnesses, micro-plastics, etc?
Suddenly with covid it's all framed personally and emotionally as choosing to sacrifice an elderly relative!? That's a disconnect.
Suddenly with covid it’s all framed personally and emotionally as choosing to sacrifice an elderly relative!?
This is odd. When it comes to speeding on country roads, or dangerous driving, or passing too closely... anything that knowingly increases the risk of causing death to others on the roads... then yes, we will frame that personally and emotionally. Especially on this forum. You are in the wrong place to argue that people are just accepting of the risk of deaths on the roads, rather than seeking to reduce them.
Looking at excess deaths versus recorded Covid deaths it's clear that the methods of recording result in significaqnt under-recording almost everywhere with the possible exception of Germany. Many deaths in care homes during the first wave were'nt recorded as Covid deaths. People died without a test and weren't recorded as such (and still may be). The 28 day limit flies in the face of average times in French ICUs before death or discharge (In April 2020: there were 11 days average from contamination to entry in ICU and 25% of patients spending more than 28 days in ICU before death or discharge - treatments have improved to reduce survival and time in ICU I realise)).
Does TiRed have an up-to-date excess death graph with a total number for us?
Not so much daft, as logically flawed
OK, but please tell me what the flaw is?
@Edukator - I recall raising this as an issue last year. In the early days, when we had little experience/testing, we were asking GPs to make a judgement call on whether or not Covid was a contributory factor in death and, if so, to add it to the death certificate. So, some cases will have been missed, but also some cases will have been incorrectly added. Things should have improved as testing became available and as GPs became more aware of the symptoms and presentation. As you say, I think only the Excess Death statistics will give us a better picture.
Edit: Scottish figures.
Within 28 days - 7,654 "This is the number of people who have died within 28 days of testing positive for the virus. This figure comes from ScotGov, and is released on a daily basis. It is the main figure referred to when people discuss deaths from the virus."
NRS Death Certificate - 10,078 "This is the number of people who have died with COVID-19 being mentioned on their death certificate as an underlying or contributory cause of death, even if no test was conducted. This figure comes from NRS, and is released on a weekly basis."
Excess Deaths - 8,017 "This is how many more deaths we've seen since March 16th 2020, (the week of the first coronavirus death in Scotland), from all causes, than we would have expected to see in a normal year during the same period."
OK, but please tell me what the flaw is?
You’re not decreasing contact with/for the unvaccinated.
we already choose to sacrifice many people
That’s incorrect. I don’t choose to sacrifice anyone to drive my car. I take many precautions to avoid anyone dying when I do. What you are talking about is an incidental outcome not a sacrificial choice which is a very different thing.
Herd immunity implies an R sufficiently low that infections continue to reduce until the epidemic fades out
There will not be herd immunity. Unfortunately, one cannot rule out the effects of waning immunity (natural and vaccine induced) and reinfections (already noted). Endemic seasonal transmission at low levels, with absence of significant morbidity and mortality is the likely outcome (like RSV). For those clinically vulnerable, some protection will therefore still be required on a continuous basis. Maintaining community protection will keep the levels of transmission low (but not zero).
Sorry 🙁
That’s a disconnect.
Because it's not the same. Normally, deaths (through accidents, illness, whatever) are largely linear, and our healthcare systems are not overwhelmed. Pandemics are different, because they're logarithmic; the scale of death keeps on increasing beyond a certain point at which healthcare just collapses. We "just about" managed this winter largely thanks to the lock-down.
Does TiRed have an up-to-date excess death graph with a total number for us?
Currently there is no excess mortality in UK. ONS now publish this information so I have chosen not to do so
That’s incorrect. I don’t choose to sacrifice anyone to drive my car. I take many precautions to avoid anyone dying when I do. What you are talking about is an incidental outcome not a sacrificial choice which is a very different thing.
You might not like to think about it but you do. Air pollution caused by road traffic is estimated to kill 5000 people a year in the UK. For air pollution overall that's somewhere around 30k deaths.
Well, that's why I always get the train into cities/towns, rather than drive, even if driving is more convenient. We all take measures, some voluntary, but some backed by laws, that are there to try and reduce deaths, including from air pollution. That's akin to what we've been doing during the pandemic. We haven't stopped our lives completely, we have had restrictions. Think of the low emissions zone in London... is it enough? No. Does it place restrictions on driving to try and save lives? Yes.
You’re not decreasing contact with/for the unvaccinated.
Thanks. As I see it, an unvaccinated person will have a reasonably fixed number of contacts, and the more of them who won't transmit infection, the better. If the number of contacts increases, I take your point. In pre-covid days, I don't think I met more people just because there were more around, I'd have the same number of passengers in my car, or people on a bike ride, or on public transport. But a more crowded pub would have more contacts. I think you're right, it's flawed. I'm actually having trouble thinking of examples, I'm so used to thinking in lockdown, minimise contact mode.
So far this year reported Covid deaths significantly exceed reported Excess Deaths.
Greybead, it's something the government are getting very right... they aren't encouraging vaccinated people to get out and mix more too early (even though arguably it is much safer for them to do so)... they are waiting for more people to be vaccinated first, and watching the levels of infection. They are doing 2021 right (well, apart from the initial one day of school in January). Perhaps if Johnson can be kept distracted they'll keep on getting this year right...
So far this year reported Covid deaths significantly exceed reported Excess Deaths.
Absolutely. But then that's all the "quick" deaths in the post xmas wave recorded. That doesn't discount that some people dying outside the 28 days are being missed. Not that it hugely matters... as long as the way of measuring the impact is kept broadly the same now, it is useful for monitoring what is happening with the UK part of the pandemic. And, currently, like all other metrics, it's going the right way for us.
That’s incorrect. I don’t choose to sacrifice anyone to drive my car. I take many precautions to avoid anyone dying when I do. What you are talking about is an incidental outcome not a sacrificial choice which is a very different thing.
By the same token, we don't choose to directly sacrifice anyone by not adhering to lockdown, the deaths are remote, indirect and statistical. Netherthlkess through, they are a consequence, just like the roughly 5,000 deaths per year from respiratory illnesses are a consequence of us all choosing to use motor vehicles.
If you are choosing to break rules/laws as regards driving that are aimed at saving lives, then that is analogous to "not adhering to lockdown". And you'd get much the same "personal" response on this forum.
That’s incorrect. I don’t choose to sacrifice anyone to drive my car
we as a population do. yes you could sell your car, cut up your licence and claim they are no longer your problem but as a nation the ability to travel in private motor vehicles, or to use the roads in general come with a risk.
Even if you never left your home, you assume your ocado delivery is not going to run over your neighbours kid. because 99.9999999% of the time, they wont. but probably, it will happen somewhere, some time. And everyone that relies on the road network to exist has to share that responsibility.
If we go on with the car analogy, since private motoring for the masses began in the 60s/70s, we've gone from hoping to be thrown clear through the windscreen as it meant you didn't get the steering column through your sternum, or die in the inevitible subsequent fire; to cars that brake themselves, have 25 airbags, etc. Rules and laws now mandate additional protections to the most vuneralble - child passengers and pedestrians.
So despite more cars, busier roads, and so on, the road deaths continue to decline, due to measures put in place by government and a general acceptance of (most) the population to follow reasonable guidance.
So despite more cars, busier roads, and so on, the road deaths continue to decline, due to measures put in place by government and a general acceptance of (most) the population to follow reasonable guidance.
As I said, there are many indirect deaths from driving due to respiratory illnesses, cancer, etc., plus the legacy of lead in petrol which is ongoing. This all adds up to several thousand deaths every year.
As I said, there are many indirect deaths from driving due to respiratory illnesses, cancer, etc., plus the legacy of lead in petrol which is ongoing. This all adds up to several thousand deaths every year.
Which are also better than they would be without rules on emissions and so on. No car manufacturer would voluntarily hinder themselves, rather they try to skirt the rules (ahem, VAG) to increase their profit.
With no rules or regs, we'd all be driving black smoking, 400hp cars with the safety standards of an austin allegro, with netflix streaming on the dashboard, while pissed.
I'm convinced. I was wrong. Because I drive a car we should never have had a lockdown, and I would have been fine with the predicted 400,000 deaths.
Not sure if thats for me, but I'm not saying that.
I'm saying lockdown and other measures = car safety.
We accept that the consequences of our actions result in some people dying, but there is some balance between saving absolutely everyone, and the practicalities of everyones continuing existence.
We could could go a bit further in either direction, and you'll find proponents of both. But some people cleverer than me; relying on research, not "feel"; have arrived at our current balance.
ONS now publish this information so I have chosen not to do so
That's pretty well done on a first read. As Mefty notes deaths this year have dropped bringing Covid deaths above excess (or even lack of) deaths. Thats gives some credence to the idea that Covid brought forward deaths and we will now enjoy a period of below average deaths if we can keep a lid on Covid.
Aren't I cheerful. 😉
I'm suprised the comparison with cars is being taken as far as it is, perhaps a better comparison is with eating sugar which no-one has to do, doesn't put others at risk if you do or don't and on the basis of recent research on heart disease is likely to kill a lot of people on this forum on the basis of contributions to threads.
I’m convinced. I was wrong. Because I drive a car we should never have had a lockdown, and I would have been fine with the predicted 400,000 deaths
Its certainly an impressive effort in straw man whataboutery. By impressive I mean sticking with it rather than technically proficient.
Thats gives some credence to the idea that Covid brought forward deaths...
Of course, every Covid death is by definition a "death brought forward", but when looking at such a short period, it's more that as well as reducing Covid deaths, measures put in place have also reduced deaths from other causes as well, especially over winter.
Thats gives some credence to the idea that Covid brought forward deaths
The phrase 'saving lives' should be discontinued. You can never save a life, just delay a death.
What are you going to call efforts to reduce infant mortality then?
What are you going to call efforts to reduce infant mortality then
Delaying death by a lot.
Nice… “I’d like to thank all the staff at the maternity hospital for delaying the inevitable death of our premature baby”. Healthcare can save lives. The language is important, because it reminds us life is precious. Take a good look at people constantly saying that “people die anyway, why put so much effort/money into delaying death” when talking about health measures, they tend to be a bit ****ty.
It’s the principle I’m arguing: that we already choose to sacrifice many people to lead a ‘normal’ life.
No. You aren't arguing a principle: If that was the case then you would be advocating that society would have no right to restrict people's activities under any circumstances, even if it led to a greater good: So you could not force one individual to stay at home in isolation for a week even if it meant releasing a virus that killed 99.9% of the world's population.
What we are argiung about is the scale of restrictions & the amount of collateral harm caused by them versus the damage caused to society as a whole by allowing the virus to spread. It isn't a black or white principle it's a judgement of what is an appropriate cost.
The reason why you aren't getting much support on here is becasue you give the impression that you are prepared to see tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people die of the virus if it means that you get to keep the well paid job you used to have.
Is the mask/distancing thing largely over now? I risked Lidl and service station today and estimated about 30% of people observing varying methods of masks, bandanas and chinstraps while the rest were seemingly going about life as before Covid, ie sans distancing, mask, bandana or even chinstrap.
Im fact a maskless delight got in front of me quite literally and wafted her stinky perfume all over me as she stood near my toes and chatted jokingly about whether I was actually in the queue or not before she got there. I was now trapped between her, the wine rack and someone behind. Then I manage to get to the checkout and the assistant is wearing his mask under his nose. Same in the service station. Some customers with masks, checkout guy no mask or gloves or antibac on counter.
‘Measures’ are pretty much over for Britain then? I say this as our town has over the last year been quite stringent compared to other towns/estates I’ve witnessed. ie just last week on making a delivery I witnessed a bunch of people putting up a bouncy castle on the communal green of a housing estate in Telford. Wonder if it was a planned suoer-spreader event like those olden-times ‘pox parties’?
It's still all maskness up here.
Near total adherence here as well.
+1 for not noticing any change in mask behaviour in Edinburgh
I am afraid that when it comes to mortality statistics, it does not have to be a zero sum game - whilst over 85 mortality is now lower than historic control, the eventual long-term outcome is not "would have died anyway", it is reduced average life expectancy. There will be a small but measurable reduction, as noted in the US already.
Measures’ are pretty much over for Britain then
Nope, round here has its fair share of idiots, but mask wearing in shops is pretty much still being universally followed, and the vast majority are doing their best to distance still as well
This popped up on the Lancet yesterday. Basically saying the 'zero-COVID' approach gives the best outcome for health, economy AND liberty. Living with COVID (it was said on yesterday's briefing) and trying to mitigate whilst keeping the economy going doesn't work.
Was wondering the other day if we went back in time to Nov 2019 with the knowledge and tools we have now, would we be able to contain it, or would it outrun us again?
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00978-8/fulltext#fig1
Arse! Last week Monday a child in my youngest son’s class at school tested positive for Corona from the twice weekly quick test. Child was isolated and sent home to quarantine until a PCR test confirmed it. Test confirmed and the whole class sent home on Thursday to quarantine for ten days. My lad started developing a sore throat at the weekend and a slight temperature so on Monday we took him to a test center and he was positive ( along with 5 other kids in his class) Then yesterday we took him for the PCR test and took our 15 yo daughter, too as a precaution and just got the results that both are positive. Myself and Mrs Stern only had our first AZ jab last week so I hope we have a little protection. 🥺
Was wondering the other day if we went back in time to Nov 2019 with the knowledge and tools we have now, would we be able to contain it, or would it outrun us again?
We could buy up any PPE we could find, close our borders and impose quarantine from mid January 2020, it would make a start.
Actually, it probably wouldn't, hindsight is great but never perfect.
Delaying death
As a medical scientist I resent that, nothing short of complete immortality is a total waste of time!
We’ll be downloading yerr consciousness into SSDs and blasting you at alpha centuri in 50 years, altered carbon style.
Was wondering the other day if we went back in time to Nov 2019 with the knowledge and tools we have now, would we be able to contain it, or would it outrun us again?
We'd certainly handle nursing homes a lot better with careful testing. And we would have taken appropriate measures earlier. And have better treatments for hospitalised patients. These alone would have mitigated some of the deaths. But in truth, the UK is rubbish at preventing ANNUAL influenza, so I am afraid we would be in a little better position with SARS-CoV-2 than we are now.
Myself and Mrs Stern only had our first AZ jab last week so I hope we have a little protection
How many days? You'll have some emergent protection that will help. May limit morbidity even if it does not prevent symptomatic infection. Hope you are all OK soon.
Not all driving-related deaths are due to accidents anyway. What about – more indirectly – cancers, respiratory illnesses, micro-plastics, etc?
If Covid had been allowed to run rampant with no lockdowns none of those people would have been getting treated anyway so excess deaths would be even higher.
How many days? You’ll have some emergent protection that will help. May limit morbidity even if it does not prevent symptomatic infection. Hope you are all OK soon.
Had the injection 8 days ago. Thanks for the well wishes TiRed. My son is already perking up and my daughter is completely asymptomatic at the moment.
despite the 'high' infection rate and R number, it's not a given that they will pass it to you. Don't treat it as inevitable, isolate them as much as you can and be rigorous yourselves with your control measures.
https://hartfordhealthcare.org/about-us/news-press/news-detail?articleId=30113&publicid=743
I know several people where a family member has had but not passed on (as well as several where they did)
I love this thread for 3 reasons:
1 - there are some genuinely well informed people contributing as best they can despite the obvious trolling
2 - the level of empathy displayed towards people experiencing significant issues, or losing loved ones really is heart warming
3 - the trolls and/or libertarian crackpots consistently out themselves so we know who all they are now
I love this thread
I haven't looked here for ages, does look good so will keep checking it.
I added a few COVID disinfo lists on Twitter this week and it's jaw-dropping. The nonsense people are pushing out on social media (some of it celebs and well know business people). Very scary, but hopefully a noisy minority.
NHS website bookings now open to those 40+.
would we
be able tocontain it, or would it outrun us again?
Assuming the same decision makers, we wouldn’t contain it. We’d be ‘able to’, but we wouldn’t do so. You only have to look at how we handled September 2020 to the first weeks of January 2021, after we had months of data from home and abroad, to see that knowledge isn’t enough… leadership is key.
Seen a few people say ages over 39 3/4 can book now, so worth a try.
We’d be ‘able to’, but we wouldn’t do so. You only have to look at how we handled September 2020 to the first weeks of January 2021, after we had months of data from home and abroad, to see that knowledge isn’t enough… leadership is key.
Yes, the key factor we've been missing from the start. Sadly, they are now gaslighting everyone with their "got vaccine done" narrative.
I think it’s if you are over the limit by the time of 2nd jab. Or something like.
I think it’s if you are over the limit by the time of 2nd jab. Or something like.
Makes sense. With the 2nd jab, do you have to work out 3 months later and book manually? My parents got offered and booked dates for both, but mine is just the 1st jab. Or does it happen automatically?
By “The French”, do you means the families of people who died after vaccination?
People die due to the side effects of drugs all the time, doesn’t mean to say there’s a case to answer for on AZ’s part - and unless there has been a manufacturing issue that could have caused these deaths (my spies tell me there hasn’t) - then any attempt at prosecuting AZ will only lead to more deaths.
But it’s not “the French”, is it… it’s a few families who have lost loved ones and hope to get some redress. I agree that I expect them to fail, and that it would be better for vaccine uptake if they didn’t resort to legal action. I’d like to think I wouldn’t respond in the same way if it was me, but it’s hard to really know how for sure. What if there are dependents left behind? Empathy only goes so far, but we can try.
With the 2nd jab, do you have to work out 3 months later and book manually? My parents got offered and booked dates for both, but mine is just the 1st jab. Or does it happen automatically?
It happens automatically with the national booking system as you're forced to book both jabs at the same time, the system offers you second jab options, you simply select one that suits after you've selected your first jab booking.
If you go the local GP booking route, as I understand it, you'll either be prompted by text to book your second appointment close to when it's due or in some cases, folk have contacted their GPs and instigated it that way.
So far I have yet to hear of private prosecutions being attempted in other countries.
My empathy doesn’t extend that far, **** them. There’s a time and place for it and that’s after the pandemic has passed.
If you go the local GP booking route, as I understand it, you’ll either be prompted by text to book your second appointment close to when it’s due or in some cases, folk have contacted their GPs and instigated it that way.
Thanks. Yes, mine I booked after a prompt from the GP via text.
My empathy doesn’t extend that far, **** them.
Charming.
If you follow the link from the gov.uk page then you book 1st and 2nd jabs. I'm 11 days on from jab #1 and have the date of#2 firmly on my mind..... But then it is my wedding anniversary!
I have a lot of sympathy and empathy, but not in favour of this rush to sue.
Nor me, and I hope I wouldn’t in that situation. But seeking legal redress for the result of any medical intervention still, thankfully, seems quite alien to me in the UK. In other countries it can be seen as the means to provide for those left behind. The purpose and workings of the legal system varies from country to country. Easy to say we have have it right because we’re used to what we have.
I find it hard to believe that AZ will not know something along these lines would happen, or indeed any of the major vaccine developers/manufacturers.
Not sure its particularly a French thing, half expecting some US case too.
AZ still hasn’t been approved in the US.
One of the reasons we started vaccinating early in the UK is that our government protected vaccine suppliers from the risk of litigation… something I think they got absolutely right.
The level of knowledge about how some side effects come up is very low in a lot of cases.
They are rare side effects that were not found in the trials, and the modelling of actions within the body is only so good. With vaccines it is even less as the immune system adds an element of random.
Auto immune diseases happen in a body without any intervention so predicting how a drug or a vaccine can interact in every way possible is far beyond science at present. It is the absolute reason for clinical trials. Fundamentally gcp and medicines and the hippocratic path is 'do no harm'
Sadly sometimes things happen that are beyond prediction. If they didn't we wouldn't need pharmacovigilance which looks at adverse events when drugs are in trials and on the market.
It is a fact of life sadly as the human body is way more complex than is able to be modeled at present
AZ still hasn’t been approved in the US.
One of the reasons we started vaccinating early in the UK is that our government protected vaccine suppliers from the risk of litigation… something I think they got absolutely right.
I'm not referring specifically to AZ, any vaccine producer.
Jansen for example
Also, any under 50s, particularly under 45s in Scotland got their appointments/jags yet?