Forum menu
To add a bit of light-heartedness to this thread for a few seconds I have a wee little story:
Went to my parent's house to help out with moving my dad's bed etc from the 2nd floor down to the 1st so that he didn't have to walk up so many stairs. Got chatting to one of the neighbours while I was leaving (socially distanced, over the fence) and we were discussing the projections for how bad it would be through the winter etc. This neighbour is one who likes to read everything online and has a habit of believing crackpot theories etc, you know the type, but is otherwise a sound person and has been invaluable in helping me keep an eye on my parents while I've been unable to visit due to restrictions, work etc. Anyway, I mentioned that I read this incredibly informative thread on here and it had given me a good understanding of the bigger picture due to the expertise shown on here from a few posters. He tried to shoot me down saying that no-one on a silly bike forum would have a clue and that I should seek out the reports produced by X,Y and Z people, they knew what was really happening. He was rather shocked when I told him that expert Y was TiRed on here! He's probably reading this thread right now so all I'll write is "Hi John!".
Made me giggle anyway and right now any giggle is worth sharing. Back to the serious stuff now.
I personally fundamentally disagree with lockdowns but don’t deny that a comprehensive (much harsher than we’ve had before) one of 2-3 weeks would reduce the number of deaths over the next few months.
Probably about the most honest view I've read. Thanks. And I do frequent lockdownskeptics for balance. It's also one I have some sympathy with actually. As I have always said, there are no good choices here. None. But honesty in decision making over balancing education, economy, healthcare provision, and the likely consequences of actions should be at the fore. I don't personally think we'll achieve anything better than we did in March. We'll buy two weeks of growth, which at the moment is roughly a half of deaths, or some fraction of healthcare provision for routine treatment, operations and cancer clinics. It's not a long-term strategy.... Get to Christmas...get to half-term... repeat till vaccine.
Hi John.
Hi John
Genius. Gonna be a meme if we're not careful...
I think the government were holding out to get to half-term, then have some form of harder lockdown when the schools were out as a homage to March.
I used to think that… but… why go through all the current mess of getting regions into “Teir3” just before announcing a different approach based around greater restrictions and an extended half term? I don’t think it’s coming now, even though it should be. Up here, regions are going into Tier3 as half term starts… you may have later half terms there, I dunno.
BTW this is the only social media outlet I post on on the subject in any depth depth. I have twitter and FB, but don’t find them constructive - I barely read them actually. And only post public domain information. Work means I don’t comment to the media at all. You are welcome to take whatever you wish. But you get what you pay for. So if it’s helpful get a “P” if you haven’t already. 😉
Get paper? Get a pimp? Get a polo neck? 😀
I is confused. Can I apply for permission to access your work?
But cheers TiRed, your posts are really interesting. We do appreciate it, don’t worry we understand that NDAs limit what can be talked about.
Genius. Gonna be a meme if we’re not careful
Am I out of the loop on /r/dankmemes or something?
I'm assuming the government is planning to move every region into tier 3 (possibly leaving out one small area like the Isle of Wight) so that while there is effectively a a national lockdown, there technically isn't one so they don't need to do furlough again. It's all sophistry and semantics to these chuffs.
so that while there is effectively a a national lockdown,
It's identical to March's lockdown except for most of the pubs (which serve food) being open, plus schools, shops and workplaces, and the ability to travel from town to town. Plus any variations negotiated with your local authority, such as gyms in Lancashire.
Tier 3 has been widely acknowledged to be insufficient to reduce R to less than one, so all it will do is most likely freeze transmission at the point of application. Which, in the case of most of the areas put in so far, is a high rate.
When you go into Tier 3, there is no plan to get you out of it any time soon.
I'm eagerly awaiting the arrival of Tier 4, the one that actually gets R down so that a region can come out of not-quite-lockdown...
Didn't we used to have five levels at the start of this? Varying from what might be tier zero up to something just beyond tier 3 (4!?)??
Looks like Scotland will have five tiers. Let's hope they cover that scenario.
Didn’t we used to have five levels at the start of this?
For about a week. But then it looked like far too much work to do go down the tiers... as moving between tiers in the way the government had set out involved actual delivery of the means to do so, rather than 5 mins of table bashing by the PM in a pre-recorded piece to camera.
I is confused
P was for Premier account - but now it's Blue I think? Anyway if you'd like to say thanks buy a subscription. They need it.
Tier 4, the one that actually gets R down
That's the schools closed. You Buy (Tier) 3 and get one free during holidays. Limited offer only.
Unbelievably, Serco's test and trace system continues to get even worse
Surely, with figures this low, the whole thing is just a complete waste of time and money? It's just completely ineffective if only just over half of contacts are ever being reached?
What an utter and complete shambles!
It's Serco, they don't know how to make things better.
I'm guessing someone has figured out that they get paid the same regardless of whether the Trace bit works or not so just do loads of the Test bit and watch the money roll in.
Can you summarise the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine news for us lay people please, TiRed?
Two friends of friends have both reported that they have had positive test results come back, but on looking at the time the test was taken it was showing as well off from the time they were actually done.
Both told to treat it as if it was positive anyway and self-isolate. One of them has had an antibody test done and it’s come back negative.
One is a vet, one is a nurse. Nurse was actually on her second time of catching it, so should we be thankful that this isn’t evidence you can get it twice, or worried that results are given out on a bit of a random basis.
Anyone else had results back from a test? Do the times align, do you even see the times?
Funny that, missus had the wee one for a test this morning, missus is a nurse and has done some extra shifts testing cos she feels a moral compulsion to help out, so knows the routine. Lass taking the test this morning never asked name and DOB etc, 'got details of it over there on a clipboard' etc, missus not amused.
Could quite easily get swabs mixed up, although i'd say the time differences you mention may be due them batching a load together, or when each lot is sent, could be any number of reasons.
looking at the time the test was taken
So, is this when the sample was analysed, or when the swabs were administered?
What counts as 'well off'?
I'm not trying to be a dick (for once!) but this anecdote doesn't hold much information as it is. 😬
Anecdote: somebody who is a buyer of services and capital equipment said they couldn't remember how many meetings they'd been at where early on some director will say 'we're not having Serco.' I can only imagine that the Tories regard the Churchill family as second only to the Windsors and will happily spaff taxpayers' money on them irrespective of the outcomes. It's been going on for years and it has been estimated that people's political memory is on average 3 weeks.
Regarding number of parameters, it could be an issue but I have a fairly restrictive prior in that the daily change in R value is only around 0.02 (gaussian 1sd) except for a couple of breakpoints when I deliberately allowed for a larger jump, which can be seen on the graph (lockdown and the "freedom" day that pubs opened). Similar for case ascertainment where I built in a bit of a ramp as test numbers increased but allow the model to fit around that.
As for fitting splines, the ONS seem to have been doing that and despite collecting some very interesting data, they have generated some startlingly shit analyses on occasion. They actually had the number of daily infections going down at the start of Oct which was patently nonsensical. They were also regularly contradicting their previous analyses from one week to the next which is a sure sign that their method is failing. I don't see the point in fitting curves that cannot (due their form) reasonably represent the real trajectory of the system.
Moonshot? Gone the same way as Coronavirus Wardens… and the Garden Bridge… and that airport he wanted but now he’s PM he’s forgotten about… oh, and any number of other never to be built bridge and tunnels that the Fisher-Price Benito keeps trying to distract us with…
Remdesivir has been approved by the FDA formally.
But you can’t cheat the laws of pharmacology. This is a weakly potent antiviral, screened for a different virus, that is not orally available. It consequently has a modest effect on viral load if given before antibodies have emerged and will only benefit patients if administered early. Don’t get your hopes up. The patients it showed some limited benefit in would not have been admitted to a U.K. hospital anyway - what saving? The label does not state it reduces mortality (it doesn’t) and the solidarity trial upholds that conclusion. They have a few smaller studies to conduct to tidy up some minor concerns.
AZ just licensed what could be a potentially oral remdesivir (originally a hep C antiviral nucleoside analogue) with broadly similar (ie, weak) potency. An oral drug would basically be tamiflu for influenza - keep it at home in the medicine cupboard and take it at first symptom onset. That will avoid the need for healthcare utility (no daily IV infusion), reduce symptoms and hopefully help prevent hospitalisation.
[tl:dr] The first proven treatment with modest antiviral effect. May get you out of hospital earlier but won’t save your life. The next generation would be a tablet in your bathroom cupboard which may come along next year.
Licensed for US electoral purposes.
Licensed for US electoral purposes.
How cynical! I'd say licensed to treat the rich early... as part of their "throw everything at me, I can afford it, some of it might stick" treatments.
Licensed for US electoral purposes.
Precisely.
You don't need research or experts if Trump took it and says it fixed everything for him, he's more expert than any expert.
Apologies, it’s Roche. And it’s not the same molecule as remdesivir. There is a chemical problem with getting nucleoside analogues into the body
I'm not watching that. Avoid Ivor Cummings. The scam artist should be in jail. He's a quack.
Waste of time watching that video.
TWIV as ever lots of interesting things going on.
Comments about Trump's Covid19 timescale, and being perhaps *not* actually immune, due to his use of Regeneron were interesting. But lots of other gems as well.
@angallis_arvensis mortality analysis now released and you are welcome to read here. Essentially I found countries that have a poor history of previous mortality did poorly in 2020 with regards to excess mortality.
@TiRed, thanks for that. I had to sit down with a beer just to read the paper - I can't imagine the work to write it.
... find that reduced healthcare spending, increased residential care and a history of past epidemics are significant predictors of whether a country experienced excessive mortality in 2020.
TLDR - countries with crap healthcare provision are crap
TLDR – countries with crap healthcare provision are crap
That's about the sum of it 🙂
Something worth reading for people still wondering why we don’t just “lock up the vulnerable” and the rest of us get back to normal…
It’s Sage not “Indy Sage” this time. Unsurprisingly they pretty much say the same thing. Read what they have to say. Please. Before bringing it up again.
Will get some coffee and biscuits and haveca read tomorow. Thanks
Whilst I'm not suggesting locking up the vulnerable there are, according to that report, a hell of a lot of people over 7O who could isolate themselves. It's school holidays here, 67-year-old grandpa has been installed next door to look after the grandkids. 🙂 It's comic and is the same in millions of households.
Out on the MTB earlier I noticed a large group of pensioner ramblers getting out of four cars. They'd car shared to the start point, great for the environment, but not a mask in sight. The restauraunts in town are rammed with unmasked pensioners at lunch while thanks to the local curfew the working population is effectively banned from evening dining.
You can't look after people who won't look after themselves and it's abundantly clear that the oldies won't even if they could. Those on golden pensions are sabotaging the economy for the young by filling hospitals to the point the government is obliged to bring in restrictions.
Bars and gyms get shut but WIs and home guard clubs continue to operate, Madness.
https://northumberlandwi.org.uk/member-information/important-guidance-on-re-opening-your-wi-2/
Yup, totally.
Wfh and 5live and radio Scotland morning shows are polluted with pensioners complaining about not getting out for lunch 3 times a week.
And they call the young selfish
The Sage report is not arguing against shielding, it makes that explicit right from the start.
Someone else can explain what is happening here as regards social clubs (for old and young) being open with measures in place, and gyms also being open in most areas, restrictions are geographic currently. Nightclubs are closed though, obvious why. As for your comment about old people “filling up hospital beds” and “sabotaging the economy”, well… I assume that is designed just to get a response.
It's similar here in Wales. Nipped out this afternoon to get some milk and the supermarket was rammed with pensioners, lots not wearing masks due to 'health issues' (that's what a few said to the guy on the door as we queued), going around in large groups blocking off aisles and all they were talking about was how they couldn't go to the pub/restaurant for the next 17 days. Heard at least one suggesting a house party!
I know there are plenty of pensioner age people who are behaving and still isolating if they need to but the ones that aren't really are taking the piss.
Blame the young, blame the old… whatever floats your boat.
It's not the young people filling the hospital beds and that's what all the restrictions are about in this part of the world. The criteria are published for all to read, it's the level of occupation of beds that's crtical to the alert level and retrictions. The beds are filled with people who for the vast majority are perfectly placed to self-isolate according to that Sage report. But they won't.
No, the Sage report does not say that. It makes it clear that… no, **** this, you’re just trolling.
From the Sage report:
Only 8% of householdscontaining at least one white person aged over 70 also containssomeone aged under age 50.
I'm not trolling but you are with your repeated accusation of trolling. Read back and check your previous unfounded accusations. My facts were right each time.
New study of impact of recent restrictions (not yet peer reviewed)
Results
Among 3,222 individuals, we found strong evidence (p<0.001) that following the rule of six more people reduced their non-work and non-home contacts than expected by chance, though the data were consistent (p=0.827) with an absolute effect of zero. For 1,868 participants, the data were consistent with no change (p=0.18) in other contacts due to 10pm closure. For 639 employed adults, the data suggested (p=0.001) more people reduced their work contacts than expected by chance but results were consistent (p=0.213) with an absolute effect of zero. Among 293 individuals, there was evidence (p=0.01) that following local restrictions more participants had reduced their contacts. On average, participants reported 0.74 (0.16 to 1.55) fewer non-work and non-school contacts than before the restrictions (p=0.005).
Conclusions
We determine that the rule of six and encouraging people to WFH, has seen the average person reduce contacts but these reductions are likely small. There was little suggestion that 10pm closure has affected the number of contacts that participants make outside home, work and school. In contrast to national restrictions, there was a strong suggestion that local restrictions reduced the number of contacts individuals make outside of work and school, though again, this effect was small in comparison to the national lockdown.