This is the most negative place ever. If you want cheering up don’t visit this thread.
Oddly I don't feel that way about the thread, if anything it's reduced my anxiousness much of the time.
There's the occasional spat/ disagreement of course but at least it's about important issues rather than a new hub standard.😀
Cheer me up
If you feel that way about those people, then you are a sensible and pragmatic guy.
Unfortunately not. England has chosen a different path
Although England has, I think people are forgetting a large part of the drop in Scotland is driven by the school holidays.
Will be interesting to see what happens a couple of weeks after the 17th Aug.
Should flatten off and be dropping in England well before the new academic year starts. Everyone will then breath a sigh of relief (accept the scientists no one will be listening to). It’s not ‘till we get towards the end of September that we find out where this gamble has left us. Looking to Scotland’s return to school won’t tell us much, because they’ll start with things much more under control than we will (because… choices).
I'd like to find out the vaccination status of the current number of UK cases...struggling to find anything.
Is this data avaliable?
Sir Patrick Vallance
@uksciencechief
Correcting a statistic I gave at the press conference today, 19 July. About 60% of hospitalisations from covid are not from double vaccinated people, rather 60% of hospitalisations from covid are currently from unvaccinated people.
8:26 PM · Jul 19, 2021
Do they class single jabbed people as vaccinated or unvaccinated in that 60/40 split?
On p 775 I ran a prediction based on i/ doubling rates and ii/ comparing deaths as a % of cases 3 weeks previous*, and estimated 0.2-0.25% (1/400- 1/500)
* 3 weeks because in the past diagnosis to hosp was 7-10d and hosp to death was 7-10d. Hence realistically 2-3 weeks, I took 3. Assuming evolution of cases is predictable (broadly yes, exponential) the two will track even if it isn't an absolute correlation
I modified my understanding on p779 based on a BBC report at 'less than 1/1000'
Three weeks ago our new daily case rate (7d rolling average) was ca 20K - source https://github.com/CSSEGISandData/COVID-19 for UK, new cases and deaths.
Our current daily death rate is 52 (same 7d ra) with 96 reported yesterday.
52/20,000 = 0.26%. Almost spot on with what i calculated 25 pages ago and substantially different to the BBC number.
If that continues, and the case rates continue to climb (our current new case rate is 47K as a 7d ra) - and we have Freedom day on one hand vs reduced testing in schools and in general (I think people are starting to avoid testing for mild symptoms already because a + means isolate) - meaning I don't think case rates reported are anything like cases rates actual.
So I predicted 100K new cases per day by 23rd which isn't happening; the case rate doubling has slowed and the graphs are levelling. But 50K new cases currently at 0.25% is 125 deaths per day or nearly 1000 per week in 3 weeks time. And 100K by end of the month (maybe more if you consider reduced testing so actual > reported) would be 250/d or 1500-2000 per week.
I'm inquisitive but ultimately only qualified to A level maths and the back of an envelope, but where's my maths wrong?
I fear the lack of transparency on this simple yet super important data shows it could be a...
A. A mixed bag of un and vaxed
B. More vaxed
Reason being the lack of transparency and gov would no doubt use any positive data in their drive to encourage uptake?
@sefton - 2 days ago / page 795, iffoverload posted the same question with the graph from a ZOE study and a decent explanation / discussion ensued.
If 100% of the population is vaccinated, all cases, hospitalisations and deaths will be from the vaccinated. As we approach 100% then, inevitably, there will be more from the vaccinated population than not.
The proportion of those newly hospitalised who are double vaccinated will continue to rise, as more and more people are vaccinated. To view the success of the vaccine you need to look at the proportion of cases that require hospitalisation, and that is much lower than it was before when vaccination rates were much lower.
Kelvin, true, but if the above about 60% of hospitalisations are unvaccinated or at best single jab it's a reasonable inference that 2 jabs gives pretty good protection from hospitalisation when you consider the majority of adults are now double jabbed and those that aren't tend to be younger and healthier. Ill take the positives where i can find them.
I was questioning this based upon the idea of passports.
Even if 100percent of people are vaxed and it still circulates whats the point of any kind of passport?
Is there any sense in a passport or is it just tactical?
Well, if 100% are vaccinated, then there is no point at all.
Vaccinated people gathering indoors is much safer than a mix of vaccinated and unvaccinated. The point of the passports? Two fold… try and keep clubs etc trading over the winter, and encourage the young to get vaccinated. I think it might be the wrong approach on both counts, personally.
because being vaccinated reduces the likelihood of passing it on. Not to 0% but by enough to make it worthwhile
To borrow my seatbelt analogy again - a seatbelt won't guarantee saving you in a car crash but increases your chances substantially. No-one's suggesting not to bother because they're not 100% effective
[edit - I see another angle to the question. Yes, if we were at 100% vaccination then no point, but we will not reach that. As above, the benefit is potentially two-fold ]
meaning I don’t think case rates reported are anything like cases rates actual.
Bears repeating.
Attitudes seems mixed.
Some amount of head in sand. Some actively antivax. Some stupidly ignoring / not reporting (the parent who sent their obviously ill child to school and got the entire top two years sent home for self isolation). Some having contact and knowing that and not isolating and continuing to mix - even before confirming a negative test (parents who went to that large / illegal party where a case was, I'm looking at you).
I doubt very much if any reliable info is coming from any of that group, the unfortunate 0.26% excepted.
OTOH the majority are playing nicely and giving a good picture.
As ever, the selfish camp takes the shine off it for everyone else.
Is there any sense in a passport or is it just tactical?
Might be instructive to look at the Macron's recent announcement and the volume of vaccine bookings the day after.
Edit: others were faster and better 😟😀
Not to 0% but by enough to make it worthwhile
...so why not the transparency on the current case figure?
Surly they have this? Would it not be the first question you'd want to know?
So our health minister could flash a passport and infect the whole nightclub?
The idea of something like a passport/ ID when the above scenario is extremely likely worries me.
And are we not all more likely to be unaware we have it now we are vaccinated? And also a behavioural shift because we think we've done our bit/safe? Feels like a recipy for disaster in terms of cases. I personally feel this is the reason for the high number of current cases.
the above scenario is extremely likely
The likelihood of someone who is vaccinated passing on the virus is much lower than someone who is unvaccinated doing so. Reducing transmission is what it is all about.
But you are correct, clubs will still be a significant transmission risk if/when we use vaccine passports in them... which is why I don't think it's a silver bullet to keep clubs safe and open this winter, and is likely to fail to keep them trading if it is the only measure used.
I personally feel this is the reason for the high number of current cases.
Rather than, say, removing mask wearing in schools some time ago? And all the happy gatherings that happened during the Euros? Or because of the rise of a more easily transmitted variant while we still only had half the population double jabbed?
I’m inquisitive but ultimately only qualified to A level maths and the back of an envelope, but where’s my maths wrong?
Looks to me like the lag between 'cases by date reported' and 'deaths by date reported' on the government dashboard is 2 weeks rather than 3 (just by comparing peaks from November and January).
Cases 2 weeks ago was 32k rather than 20k, that brings your estimate down to 0.16% Number of deaths is still very low and so even taking the 7 day rolling average has a lot of variation. Pick a date 2 days earlier and you get 0.13% instead. Who knows which is more representative, I certainly don't! I think it tells us that these back of fag packet type calculations can be useful to see if something sounds plausible, but not a great deal more than that. To me 0.1% sounds plausible based on those numbers (as does 0.2% or 0.5%)
Number of tests done across the UK is pretty much flat this week according to the government dashboard - there doesn't seem to be any indication that people are avoiding testing from that. Tests will of course drop as we get into the English summer holidays, but we're still testing something like 5 times more than most comparable countries.
but we’re still testing something like 5 times more than most comparable countries
This is very true. But many of those tests are LFT, which require repeated near continual use to avoid missing cases due to false negatives, which bumps our testing numbers up compared to countries that aren't leaning on LFT as much.
Just doing some very rough estimate calcs...
c60/70 deaths per day now - given 3 week lead time that's based on 25k cases
Govt suggest infections could get to 200k per day. Simple extrapolation suggests we will get to about 500 deaths per day.
Mitigating factor is increasing vaccination rates. Negative factors, age profile of infections is rising as it has moved from schools/Uni into wider population
Views - do you think 500 deaths per day is likely, is it acceptable?
Second rough calc. 200k per day testing positive. Previous waves suggest about 1/3 test to total infections. So 600k infections per day, 4million a week. So 4 months we'll all have had it. Or will it top out and slow down quite quickly through her immunity from partial protection from vaccines and/or previous infections?
.
This is very true. But many of those tests are LFT, which require repeated near continual use to avoid missing cases due to false negatives, which bumps our testing numbers up compared to countries that aren’t leaning on LFT as much.
Government dashboard shows 35-40% of our testing is PCR tests. If we exclude all LF tests from the UK figures we're still testing twice as much as other countries (including whatever LF tests they are doing).
Drop off in tests while the schools are off (and now we're not giving free LF tests to work places) will mainly be in LF tests too so the figures will become more comparable
Looks to me like the lag between ‘cases by date reported’ and ‘deaths by date reported’ on the government dashboard is 2 weeks rather than 3 (just by comparing peaks from November and January).
True but if the cases are evolving at a predictable rate, whether the true lag is 2 or 3 weeks makes no real difference in my calc, there's just another factor in there.
D = C (2 weeks ago) x M
or D = C (3 weeks ago) x M x (factor to convert 3 weeks ago into 2 week estimate)
And my calc 3 weeks ago said 0.25%, today is 0.26% - only 2 data points but consistent.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57924264
I hope everyone has stocked up with big roll.
Don’t panic Mr Mainwaring.
The likelihood of someone who is vaccinated passing on the virus is much lower than someone who is unvaccinated doing so. Reducing transmission is what it is all about.
Correct. But this is not to do with the transmissibility of the virus in its own right. Particle for particle, delta is more transmissible. The hope is the vaccine mobilises the patient's immune system quicker, thus giving them a milder illness and reducing their viral load, thus using the statistics to reduce transmission.
Unfortunately incubating a large pool of virus 'out there' in a partially vaccinated population seems to me to be playing Russian Roulette with 'natural' selection. A mutation that is more vaccine-resistant now confers a better chance of transmission - probably even if that mutation would be less transmissible (particle for particle) in an unvaccinated population.
To my mind the answer is to go hell for leather in trying to vaccinate everyone with some social distancing, restrictions and mask wearing still in place. If a big enough % of the population is vaccinated the potential for transmission will (hopefully) reach a critically small probability - so the virus is permanently subdued.
Permitting free transmission in a partially vaccinated population is asking for trouble IMO.
And there is the geopolitical angle to consider here (even if Boris Bullshit's GINO pretends the rest of the world only exists to venerate Britain).
We got the vaccines earlier than most. We hoarded the vaccines. We vaccinated a greater proportion of our population earlier. We then 'opened up' for economic reasons and to steal a march on 'abroad'.
If we now incubate and transmit a variant that damages vaccination as an effective countermeasure, we deserve more than a mild ticking off.
To my mind the answer is to go hell for leather in trying to vaccinate everyone with some social distancing, restrictions and mask wearing still in place. If a big enough % of the population is vaccinated the potential for transmission will (hopefully) reach a critically small probability – so the virus is permanently subdued.
You won't hear any disagreement from me.
To my mind the answer is to go hell for leather in trying to vaccinate everyone with some social distancing, restrictions and mask wearing still in place
You are Nicola Sturgeon and ICMFP
Don't Younger people tend to have a lower viral load if carrying the virus anyway (effectively making them less transmissible )?
Isn't this the argument for lower transmission once jabbed?
Anyway, I'd just like to see how many cases are in the unvaxed, 1 and 2 jabbed. Why is no-one asking this? (I can't find anything apart from the zoe app data)
Why is no-one asking this?
They are.
Go back to the information and discussion Jon pointed you to earlier in this thread.
Why is no-one asking this?
Because, as explained, it's not that relevant. The percentages must change over time as we head towards 100% vaccination.
Cheers.
Don’t Younger people tend to have a lower viral load if carrying the virus anyway (effectively making them less transmissible )?
That's what was thought initially and also that the asymptotic were not big spreaders (because it was thought they also carried a lower viral load) but both these things are incorrect.
I get that every transmission is a potential mutation and consequently the more transmissions the more chances of that magic mutation happening. But:
there's so many transmissions happening is it realistic to think that 10% more vaccination or whatever in the UK is going to keep the genie corked. There will be hundreds of thousands of mutating virus opportunities every day, it'll happen somewhere even if it isn't here and unless we also go to Australian levels of insulation then it'll get here anyway. Remember before the alpha, beta, delta naming conventions they were Kent, Brazil, SA, etc., based on where they were first typed but they all got here. There's a limited (large but limited) number of mutations that can happen and like monkeys / typewriters / shakespeare the virus has numbers in its favour.
Of course it could (possibly will) eventually settle on a vaccine resistant, transmissable, but predominantly non-harmful variant, doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to try to prevent in case it isn't non-harmful.
. The point of the passports? Two fold… try and keep clubs etc trading over the winter, and encourage the young to get vaccinated. I think it might be the wrong approach on both counts, personally.
Ah the state approved Covid Exposure parties (in lieu of vaccine):-)
I guess passports make more sense long term (boosters or improved vaccines for new variants).
I suppose it's useful to get people accustomed to the idea. Then if they can get the Europeans to accept them it can be painted as a win rather than us having to sign up to their scheme...
A quick trip into town…
Mask use:
Train in ~ 30%
Ordering in queue in cafe ~ 25% (ie me)
Opticians/chemists ~ 100%
Sweet shop ~ 100%
Train back ~ 10%
Obvious where the behaviour has changed the most. Will be using the car more than normal this summer, for sure. You can eye up a shop or cafe before use, and make your “choice”. Once you’re committed to public transport you’re entirely dependent on other people’s “choices”. And for a duration that’s also outside your control.
I havent been out this week, will be interresting to see how much has changed. Wife said on Monday mask wearing was at previous levels and I did wonder if it might actually be sustained, not so sure now, I did think when it was announced we'd see adherence collapse pretty quickly, starting the with selfish which will eventually infect every one else, why bother wearing on to protect others when no one else is. I'll make my own decision based on what I see, if others make the effort I'll definitely do my bit, if others aren't there's no point really. FWIW I'll be avoiding eating indoors and public transport where I can regardless.
In the few shops I've been in since the weekend, mask wearing seems to be the same as always. Only a couple of people not wearing them. Seems totally normal these days. I guess that's what nearly 18 months of wearing one does to you.
COVID cases down today though they aren’t really are they as that’s not how exponential growth works. We are seeing the next big problem. People are not reporting cases or going for PCRs during the holidays and and now the schools are not chasing. My son was a likely close contact of someone at school earlier this week who had a positive lat flow. School said to us to take daily lat flows and come in as it’s not their responsibility anymore and wait for track and trace. Turns out he’s not gone for a PCR so no track and trace. I suspect that this is happening all over the country as people don’t want to isolate their households during the hols.
