Is it a trick question? Assumption is we will all get it in the end, it’s how bad. And the first vax helps, but not as much as having the second.

That’s a 1 in 5 chance of getting symptoms, and of those 1/5 whatever chance that is of those symptoms being serious. Long Covid I’ve seen 5-13.7% numbers in various places so on the conservative side, 1/20 get long Covid symptoms. so of the 1/5 = 4/20 that get it and show symptoms, 1 out of those 4 will have long covid.

Whereas (guesstimate) 1/2 get ‘symptoms’ from the vaxxination, ranging from a sore arm thru’ a ‘hangover’ thru’ quite severe flu-like thru’ in the worst cases blood clots and sadly death. Yes, it happens as people on here know too starkly.

So 1/2 get symptoms = 40,000/80,000.  1/80,000 get blood clots, so 1 out of those 40,000 with symptoms get blood clots. 39,999/40,000 don’t.

TLDR, I think you did the right thing getting the vaccine.

Or am I missing the point.

Is he right? Should I not have bothered getting my second dose of AZ the other day?

If I’m reading this correctly deaths with no pre-existing conditions in age group 0-44 was 101

And remember that any if they died up to 28 days after Covid diagnosis it’s still classed as Covid. So they could have died in a car accident but still put as Covid on death certificate.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathsandhospitalisationsbypreexistingconditionandage

And Yellow Card reported side effects from the vaccine

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions

And if under 30…..

https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/news/covid-19-vaccines-update-ongoing-evaluation-myocarditis-pericarditis

Looks like we apparently have six weeks in which to fully open up this summer or we will have to have restrictions until next spring, what’s the deal with that then

Should I not have bothered getting my second dose of AZ the other day?

If you didn’t get blood clots from the first dose you are even less likely to get them from the second, 10 times less risk according to a French doc.

« Les gens qui avaient eu à faire un caillot l’ont fait après la première dose. Il y a beaucoup moins de risques après la deuxième », affirme d’emblée Alain Lamarre, professeur et chercheur en immunologie et en virologie à l’Institut national de la recherche scientifique (INRS).

Les risques d’avoir un caillot sanguin à la suite de l’administration de la première dose du vaccin d’AstraZeneca varient entre 1 et 2 sur 100 000. Les risques sont beaucoup plus faibles lors de la deuxième dose. « Ils sont environ 10 fois plus faibles, soit 1 cas sur 1 million », indique M. Lamarre.

The French numbers for under 40 Covid deaths are now up to 354, including those with comorbidities.

The risks with Pfizer and Moderna are half to third of those with AZ in younger people we’re told here. That 1/80 000 figure is therefore pessimistic.

I eventually went with a second AZ jab on the basis that the side effects are gnerally less marked the second time around. The first time I got a neck and head ache that put me off the bike for several weeks that started four days in.

If I were a parent I wouldn’t be rushing to get my kids vaccinated, I’d wait a month and see how the first lot get on. Has there been a Covid death yet in a healthy 12-18 year old?

And remember that any if they died up to 28 days after Covid diagnosis it’s still classed as Covid. So they could have died in a car accident but still put as Covid on death certificate.

Here we go… can we not just delete this post, and this multiple account user, rather than go through all this nonsense again?

what’s the deal with that then?

What’s the deal with what? Could you post a link or a quote to help us understand who is saying that the decision comes down to those two options/scenarios? Ta.

If I were a parent I wouldn’t be rushing to get my kids vaccinated

It is a different balance for deciding about kids than yourself, for sure. But my 19 year is getting her first jab next week, and as soon as the Pfizer jab is being offered to the younger teens, by 14 year old (will probably be 15 by the time the opportunity arises) will get it as soon as possible.

I did’t have the jab myself to protect me from dying of Covid, there is much more to the decision whether to get vaccinated than that.

And remember that any if they died up to 28 days after Covid diagnosis it’s still classed as Covid. So they could have died in a car accident but still put as Covid on death certificate.

Here we go… can we not just delete this post, and this multiple account user, rather than go through all this nonsense again?

Errm multiple accounts?

Why would I delete true facts?
And how’s it nonsense? I look at all sides lots fact and plenty fiction and make my decisions and don’t shoot down anyone for making there own choices Unlike you.

Do your own research.

Do your own research

All above is from the Government FACT

And for every yellow card report..how many’s not reported?

And how’s it nonsense?

this is how

If someone dies in circumstances involving an accident, violence or suspicious circumstances, the case is referred to a coroner for investigation. A post-mortem examination is carried out and usually an inquest is held. The Coroner’s Court hears all the evidence and follows legal rules of evidence when deciding the causes of death. It is extremely unlikely that a coroner would find that someone was involved in a traffic accident, or was the victim of violence, because of having COVID-19 or a positive COVID-19 test — so they would not mention COVID-19 on the death certificate. This applies to any death caused by an accident, violence, poisoning, or other external causes.

Even if in an unusual case a death certificate mentioned both COVID-19 and a traffic accident (or other external causes), the World Health Organisation (WHO) rules for coding deaths mean that the traffic accident would be identified as the underlying cause of death in our data.

But 101 deaths in age 0-44 with no underlying illnesses?https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/deaths

So they could have died in a car accident but still put as Covid on death certificate.

Not quite correct, I believe, but happy to be put right.

Deaths within 28 days of a positive test are the deaths reported on the news daily, even if hit by a car. It is not taken from the official death certificate. You have to accept though that dying at day 29+, which is more likely if you are young and as treatment has improved, don’t get counted.

That number is heading towards 130,000 I think.

The ONS collects the actual cause of death from the death certificate, which is more accurate and will exclude the car crash scenario, and Covid deaths counted that way, where Covid is a factor in the death, are over 150,000

But 101 deaths in age 0-44 with no underlying illnesses?

Can you provide a link to that to save me trawling the ONS website in my phone.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/covid19deathsandhospitalisationsbypreexistingconditionandage

What’s the deal with what? Could you post a link or a quote to help us understand who is saying that the decision comes down to those two options/scenarios? Ta.

It’s in the Sunday telegraph and is via senior ministers and advisors.

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/CD00/production/_118908425_telegraph-nc.png

Looks to me like the timeframe for that report and those figures is quite key:

Figures for COVID-19 deaths with no underlying health conditions are available on Table 5. This means where no other underlying condition was listed on the death certificate. This publication states that between March and June 2020, there have been 46,736 deaths involving COVID-19. 4,476 of these deaths had no pre-existing conditions.

So that’s just the first 3 months of the pandemic then.

The second sentence there rather kicks the car accident theory into touch as well, as others have explained above.

Junoir age 23 is vaccinated too, Kelvin, by kids I meant under 18 which means you make the decision for them. Like you I’m happy to contributive to the collective good by getting vaccinated myslelf but if I had kids I’d like to be reassured by a million or so rather than the numbers in clinical trials.

I’m not going to argue about the 101 with no underlying health issues but I’d point out that with Pfizer or Moderna you’re a looking at less than a fifth of that from vaccination if you vaccinate everyone from 12 to 44.

1) posting that so confidently and not signposting that it’s only 3 months is pretty poor (or didn’t you notice, bikeforfreedom?)

2) I’m in my forties, I had covid, I’m not dead. My lungs are **** though, and my heart races sometimes and I’m knackered all the time. I would have killed for a vaccine last March. Have your vaccines.

It’s in the Sunday telegraph

Thanks airvent. I read that at first as suggesting exactly what you summarised, but I’m not sure what they’re saying and what they’re suggesting are the same thing. I find it confusing. I think they are suggesting that we either open up during the summer break, or next spring… but if there is a chance we need to be “closed” over the winter, then why does not opening up over the summer increase rather than increase the chance of that? I think I’ve missed something.

Following on from the notion that we’re all going to get it. And that severity is decreased either by vaccination or by previous infection. AND comparing the past 9 months infection rates between England and Scotland, is it not possible that opening up in the summer actually reduces the severity of a winter wave? In a way, it flattens out the peaks and troughs.

But doesn’t vaccinating as many people as possible while keeping infections down make being ‘open’ this winter more likely? Unless the thought is that letting as many people as possible catch it as soon as possible before they are vaccinated is the path to take? If so, that is the herd immunity via infection idea, again, even though we have vaccinations and a stretched health system. Do you’d think that’s what they’re suggesting (again)?

If so… I agree, that must be what they are thinking but not saying.

It’s also the only reason I can think of for the current government mess as regards masks (or no masks) for older teens in schools and colleges. If that is the case, it really is a case of no lessons learned over the last 18 months. Herd immunity by infection… just don’t say so to avoid being blamed for any possible fall out from that plan. Is that where we are? I don’t know.

I agree it’s a confusing statement Kelvin. Does sound like its come from reliable sources though so not sure what to make of it. The issue is I don’t think anyone has a handle on what we’re ultimately aiming for anymore.

Agreed. Not sure the Telegraph are going to make it any clearer for us though.

It’s a stretched health system suffering peaks and troughs of demand. I’m not arguing in favour of the approach but this is the “turning on and off the tap” methodology that’s been in place for a year.

I don’t know how many times it needs to be said, but it’s not about deaths. 20% likelihood of symptoms. 10% likelihood of significant enduring morbidity, say 1% risk of very significant impairment. Times that by 20 million people is 4K very debilitated young and economically active.

Covid Vaccines are to prevent morbidity and the overwhelming of healthcare. They do reduce transmission and do prevent death in the elderly.

I don’t hink you can infect enough over the Summer to reduce a Winter wave, Sctoroutes. Latest estimates for France say just over 20% of the population has now had Covid in 18 months. What proportion do you think opening up this Summer would infect? I suggest it wouldn’t be enough to reduce a Winter wave, it would just mean the virus circulating at higher levels going into Winter so more cases. And with more chance of mutations.

That’s my reading of it as well Ed. And with the vaccination programme going so well here in the UK, keeping infections down while we progress with the vaccinations at speed will give us (or rather the government) more option not fewer this winter.

The issue with letting it run through the young (as well as the non-fatal but substantial long term debilitating illness) is that they are in essence a transmission network through the community, exposing their parents, the elderly, etc. Fingers crossed, the most vulnerable in the ‘older’ age groups are mainly protected now so the risk becomes smaller but not inconsequential when the maths is big enough. Letting it run could work if it was a discrete community, but it isn’t.

I don’t know how many times it needs to be said, but it’s not about deaths.

You, I, we can say it ‘till we’re blue in the face. Because we were doing so much to avoid hundreds of thousands of deaths, the focus is still (wrongly) on this and this alone right now. Last summer some of the media (TV news in particular) did try and draw attention to illness rather than death, and began to shift understanding a bit… but then the government messed up the winter, we doubled our Covid19 death count, and all the focus shifted back onto deaths, understandably. The work has to begin again to get people to understand the non-fatal illnesses that can arise from this virus. Currently it is just “negative” news to ignore and do nothing about, for a great many people.

If you haven’t had a good sweary shout at the radio lately then here’s your chance, Majiid “Bawbag” Nawaz is up to his usual bullshit again, ‘we don’t lock down for the flu – think for yourself people, it’s undemocratic to lockdown”.

10mins is all I could stomach.

LBC (warning – may increase blood pressure)

I never listen to him. I’ll listen/read pieces by people pushing a similar narrative, but he just wants you to get angry with him. Just ignore. Worst shock jock ‘star’ on LBC currently.

I just had a shopping trolley taken off me because it hadn’t been cleaned yet. Thing is it was just in the trolley bay in the car park with no instructions not to take it so I’d already touched it.

He’s now talking about overusing vaccines/vaccinating too many people which will lead to greater risk of the virus mutating…….I would call and swear at him but im banned from his show after last time.

Time for 6music……

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57460595

“Pubs showing the game across the UK have been told to make sure their venues are Covid secure” under a photo of seven lads sitting shoulder to shoulder on two sides of an outdoor table without masks, getting ready to watch the England game, while a ~60% more transmittable Delta variant is on the lose…

What could possibly go wrong?

Maybe they all houseshare together and are ultra careful with others not part of their household, or maybe this afternoon’s game is a great day to kill your friends/family/others with “kindness” in the coming weeks.

Yeah, yeah, rules allow it… Boris has done another world beating deal, this time with Delta.

Yeah, yeah, rules allow it…

No they don’t. Social distancing still applies to people not in your household/bubble, and have done throughout.

The problem is the government haven’t hammered the message home or legislated for it properly in a way it can be enforced. And the media happily spent last summer, and now this, interviewing people in pub gardens who are (probably) not a household or bubble, and not calling out those who are not following the guidance.

Just got back from my daughter’s dance show at the local theatre. Theatre was very well organised, every other row of seats removed, a gap of one seat between each family group, masks required unless drinking.

Light go down, a significant number of people decide that means they can take their masks off. I really don’t get it.

Same in Tesco yesterday, people walking around with masks at half mast including some members of staff.

It annoys me far more than I should let it.

As I said last year, the deaths data are extremely unreliable.

As an example, a few months ago, a relative of mine, aged 98, was admitted to hospital after a fall. Tests revealed various tumours that she’d been concealing from close family members, who were told that she probably wouldn’t survive for more than a few weeks.

She died a few days later in hospital. The primary cause of death on the death certificate was COVID19. When my relatives, who were somewhat sceptical about this, asked for evidence of a positive test, the hospital became defensive and stated that she’d been close to someone who tested positive.

I’m not suggesting that there is some sort of conspiracy, but in this case COVID19 was clearly not a cause of death. I’m sure that this is not the only example of this happening.

But, of course, Professor Kelvyn knows best and none of this is true – just wacky conspiracy nonsense.

JP

Perhaps the doctors knew more about the manner of the death then you. Just possible. Are you suggesting they lied, or that they got it wrong?

And by “extremely unreliable”, how far from “the truth” do you think the “deaths data” is/are? That we’ve had slightly fewer deaths than reported, or a hundred thousand fewer?

I’m not suggesting that there is some sort of conspiracy, but in this case COVID19 was clearly not a cause of death. I’m sure that this is not the only example of this happening.

Probably not, but producing a single example does not support your opening statement. Anecdote does not equal data etc.

I vaguely seem to remember you popping up on here after wave 1 to predict, IIRC, that excess deaths moving forward would not be greater than the average year, and that you’d be back to rub our doomongering faces in it. If you’ve got any actual data which supports significant inaccuracy in death recording, rather than having a dig at Kelvin, then go ahead.

I don’t know for sure but expect that, as we’ve been in lockdown and not much else to do but shag, the birth rate has increased?

Also, is there any evidence that any of the Covid jabs hinder pregnancy in any way?