RugbyRebels

Stom wrote:BTW, that 10% efficiency is because the new strain is very contagious but very weak and the vaccine doesn't do much against covid with minor symptoms?

What about the British strain? Isn't that also very virulent but not very powerful? Could we be seeing the virus mutating into a milder illness? There was a lot of talk about that before. If it really does end up like the common cold in 5-6 months, will the vaccine drive continue? Will the drug companies push for a vaccine to be administered even if it is relatively ineffective?

At least we're seeing some progress on combating the virus. Good news is always welcome.

morepork wrote:

Stom wrote:BTW, that 10% efficiency is because the new strain is very contagious but very weak and the vaccine doesn't do much against covid with minor symptoms?

What about the British strain? Isn't that also very virulent but not very powerful? Could we be seeing the virus mutating into a milder illness? There was a lot of talk about that before. If it really does end up like the common cold in 5-6 months, will the vaccine drive continue? Will the drug companies push for a vaccine to be administered even if it is relatively ineffective?

At least we're seeing some progress on combating the virus. Good news is always welcome.

Virulence = damage to the host. It can be both more infectious and less virulent, more infectious and more virulent, or more infectious and the same virulence. I don't think the new variants are particularly more virulent, yet, but the rate at we are hosting this fucker for extended periods makes the worse combination of infectivity and virulence a little more likely than astronomically impossible. Hold onto your hats.

Stom wrote:

morepork wrote:

Stom wrote:BTW, that 10% efficiency is because the new strain is very contagious but very weak and the vaccine doesn't do much against covid with minor symptoms?

What about the British strain? Isn't that also very virulent but not very powerful? Could we be seeing the virus mutating into a milder illness? There was a lot of talk about that before. If it really does end up like the common cold in 5-6 months, will the vaccine drive continue? Will the drug companies push for a vaccine to be administered even if it is relatively ineffective?

At least we're seeing some progress on combating the virus. Good news is always welcome.

Virulence = damage to the host. It can be both more infectious and less virulent, more infectious and more virulent, or more infectious and the same virulence. I don't think the new variants are particularly more virulent, yet, but the rate at we are hosting this fucker for extended periods makes the worse combination of infectivity and virulence a little more likely than astronomically impossible. Hold onto your hats.

Sorry, got confused with the term :p Less virulent but more infectious.

Is that what you're seeing?

Hospitalisation rate is down, death rate once they get to hospital is down, and then this 10% efficiency because it's less virulent? Seems to be weakening, although it could be that people are just more aware (though considering the general uselessness of most populations, I somehow doubt that).

morepork wrote:

Stom wrote:

morepork wrote:

Virulence = damage to the host. It can be both more infectious and less virulent, more infectious and more virulent, or more infectious and the same virulence. I don't think the new variants are particularly more virulent, yet, but the rate at we are hosting this fucker for extended periods makes the worse combination of infectivity and virulence a little more likely than astronomically impossible. Hold onto your hats.

Sorry, got confused with the term :p Less virulent but more infectious.

Is that what you're seeing?

Hospitalisation rate is down, death rate once they get to hospital is down, and then this 10% efficiency because it's less virulent? Seems to be weakening, although it could be that people are just more aware (though considering the general uselessness of most populations, I somehow doubt that).

10% efficacy means in this instance that the vaccine only prevents mild to moderate illness in 10 out of 100 people vaccinated. Old/comorbidity situation unknown. If it is still causing illness in 80% of people vaccinated, then the vaccine is likely not very good at preventing infection, which is the whole aim of the exercise. How to hobble a vaccination program before it even starts. Textbook fuckwittery.

Stom wrote:

morepork wrote:

Stom wrote:
Sorry, got confused with the term :p Less virulent but more infectious.

Is that what you're seeing?

Hospitalisation rate is down, death rate once they get to hospital is down, and then this 10% efficiency because it's less virulent? Seems to be weakening, although it could be that people are just more aware (though considering the general uselessness of most populations, I somehow doubt that).

10% efficacy means in this instance that the vaccine only prevents mild to moderate illness in 10 out of 100 people vaccinated. Old/comorbidity situation unknown. If it is still causing illness in 80% of people vaccinated, then the vaccine is likely not very good at preventing infection, which is the whole aim of the exercise. How to hobble a vaccination program before it even starts. Textbook fuckwittery.

What you're saying is that the vaccine is only protecting 10 people or that it's only protecting 10 people against mild or moderate symptoms but protects 80% against serious symptoms?

And by hobbling the program you mean these reports coming out or that the vaccine doesn't work or something else?

Sorry, you're one of my sources of information, lol, just trying to get my head around it.

Stom wrote:On the point of "booster jabs", how many young people actually have the flu jab every year or at all?

Does this suggest they're looking toward a similar situation to the flu jab?

morepork wrote:

Stom wrote:On the point of "booster jabs", how many young people actually have the flu jab every year or at all?

Does this suggest they're looking toward a similar situation to the flu jab?

Please be aware I charge by the hour.

Flu boosters are given because the virus is constantly mutating meaning last years vaccine is not as effective against this years variant, so an up to date vaccine is required for efficacy. The Covid vaccines have two doses because clinical trials indicate repeat exposure to the antigen prime the immune system better than a single dose. Both doses are the same formulation. The issue currently is that this formulation may not be as effective against new variants...a situation akin to different flu variants from year to year.

morepork wrote:

Stom wrote:On the point of "booster jabs", how many young people actually have the flu jab every year or at all?

Does this suggest they're looking toward a similar situation to the flu jab?

Please be aware I charge by the hour.

Flu boosters are given because the virus is constantly mutating meaning last years vaccine is not as effective against this years variant, so an up to date vaccine is required for efficacy. The Covid vaccines have two doses because clinical trials indicate repeat exposure to the antigen prime the immune system better than a single dose. Both doses are the same formulation. The issue currently is that this formulation may not be as effective against new variants...a situation akin to different flu variants from year to year.

morepork wrote:UK coronavirus variant on target to become the dominant variant in the US:


As of January of 2021, the highly transmissible B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2, which was first identified in the United Kingdom (U.K.), has gained a strong foothold across the world. Because of the sudden and rapid rise of B.1.1.7, we investigated the prevalence and growth dynamics of this variant in the United States (U.S.), tracking it back to its early emergence and onward local transmission. We found that the RT-qPCR testing anomaly of S gene target failure (SGTF), first observed in the U.K., was a reliable proxy for B.1.1.7 detection. We sequenced 212 B.1.1.7 SARS-CoV-2 genomes collected from testing facilities in the U.S. from December 2020 to January 2021. We found that while the fraction of B.1.1.7 among SGTF samples varied by state, detection of the variant increased at a logistic rate similar to those observed elsewhere, with a doubling rate of a little over a week and an increased transmission rate of 35-45%. By performing time-aware Bayesian phylodynamic analyses, we revealed several independent introductions of B.1.1.7 into the U.S. as early as late November 2020, with onward community transmission enabling the variant to spread to at least 30 states as of January 2021. Our study shows that the U.S. is on a similar trajectory as other countries where B.1.1.7 rapidly became the dominant SARS-CoV-2 variant, requiring immediate and decisive action to minimize COVID-19 morbidity and mortality.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 21251159v1


*NOTE: this data has yet complete peer review, but is in the process of doing so....data are real.

This is what happens when you keep borders unregulated during a viral pandemic. No fucking surprises there. We are actively promoting advantageous genetic drift and it will for sure render vaccines less effective. How all very depressingly predictable.

Son of Mathonwy wrote:New ONS numbers up to 29 Jan are out, so as of that date we have:
Positive test UK Covid-19 deaths (headline gov number): 104,371
All UK Covid-19 per death certificate (ONS number): 121,674
So the Covid-19 death certificate number is 17% higher than the government number.

Excess deaths compared with 5 year average to 29 Jan: 110,682
which is 6% higher than the government number.

This is interesting, as the government number has been catching up with the excess deaths number through the second wave. My totally speculative thinking (because I lack the detailed numbers) would be something like this: during Winter, a significant number of people always die of respiratory diseases, particularly Influenza. This Winter however, many who would have been expected to die of the flu are actually dying of Covid-19. Also, the extra precautions taken to fight Covid (lockdown, masks, social distancing etc) will have reduced the incidence of influenza considerably. So in recent weeks the deaths linked to Covid-positive tests exceeds the total excess deaths (compared with the last 5 years). (NB this is educated guesswork)

To get an estimate for the total excess deaths as of 9 Feb, start with the excess deaths for 29 Jan and add the government number for the subsequent days: this give us approx 120,000 excess deaths in the UK since the start of the pandemic.

Digby wrote:The numbers dying of flu is a worryingly low, in that the rate of incidence is so low it's causing a problem developing the new season's jab.

morepork wrote:

Digby wrote:The numbers dying of flu is a worryingly low, in that the rate of incidence is so low it's causing a problem developing the new season's jab.

You mean they are not able to sample enough to identify dominant upcoming strains?

Son of Mathonwy wrote: This is interesting, as the government number has been catching up with the excess deaths number through the second wave. My totally speculative thinking (because I lack the detailed numbers) would be something like this: during Winter, a significant number of people always die of respiratory diseases, particularly Influenza.

Which Tyler wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: This is interesting, as the government number has been catching up with the excess deaths number through the second wave. My totally speculative thinking (because I lack the detailed numbers) would be something like this: during Winter, a significant number of people always die of respiratory diseases, particularly Influenza.

When you look at the graphs, it's fairly obvious.
There's that 5 week period in April where deaths not-attributed to Covid were spiking significantly at the same time as deaths attributed to Cvoid were spiking - this spike in unattributed (IIRC, there was a convenient spike in "pneumnia"deaths there) magically disappeared once the ONS started releasing the figures (mid-May), rather than Mr Hancock.
We all "knew" in April that people were dying of Covid, but that it wasn't being recorded that way (for example, my Aunt Joy who I posted on here about).
That 5 week period saw an extra 13,336 people die of officially non-covid causes - this in a year where non-covid deaths have been below the average, and often setting a new 5-year low, the vast majority of weeks.

This means that the real number of covid deaths is a good 13k higher than the official government figures.

You can also see that non-covid deaths are particularly below the normal from November onwards, when flu season usually starts. On top of that, we're repeatedly told that this year's flu season has been ridiculously low (guardian reports 1/20 normal, friend who's a hospital admin in the US says about 1/30).
This is remarkably unsurprising, and had been predicted by most people from the start - the measures that work to reduce the spread of coronavirus are exactly the same as reduce the spread of influenza virus.
Covid Deaths.jpg

Which Tyler wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: This is interesting, as the government number has been catching up with the excess deaths number through the second wave. My totally speculative thinking (because I lack the detailed numbers) would be something like this: during Winter, a significant number of people always die of respiratory diseases, particularly Influenza.

When you look at the graphs, it's fairly obvious.
There's that 5 week period in April where deaths not-attributed to Covid were spiking significantly at the same time as deaths attributed to Cvoid were spiking - this spike in unattributed (IIRC, there was a convenient spike in "pneumnia"deaths there) magically disappeared once the ONS started releasing the figures (mid-May), rather than Mr Hancock.
We all "knew" in April that people were dying of Covid, but that it wasn't being recorded that way (for example, my Aunt Joy who I posted on here about).
That 5 week period saw an extra 13,336 people die of officially non-covid causes - this in a year where non-covid deaths have been below the average, and often setting a new 5-year low, the vast majority of weeks.

This means that the real number of covid deaths is a good 13k higher than the official government figures.

You can also see that non-covid deaths are particularly below the normal from November onwards, when flu season usually starts. On top of that, we're repeatedly told that this year's flu season has been ridiculously low (guardian reports 1/20 normal, friend who's a hospital admin in the US says about 1/30).
This is remarkably unsurprising, and had been predicted by most people from the start - the measures that work to reduce the spread of coronavirus are exactly the same as reduce the spread of influenza virus.
Covid Deaths.jpg

Sandydragon wrote:

Which Tyler wrote:

Son of Mathonwy wrote: This is interesting, as the government number has been catching up with the excess deaths number through the second wave. My totally speculative thinking (because I lack the detailed numbers) would be something like this: during Winter, a significant number of people always die of respiratory diseases, particularly Influenza.

When you look at the graphs, it's fairly obvious.
There's that 5 week period in April where deaths not-attributed to Covid were spiking significantly at the same time as deaths attributed to Cvoid were spiking - this spike in unattributed (IIRC, there was a convenient spike in "pneumnia"deaths there) magically disappeared once the ONS started releasing the figures (mid-May), rather than Mr Hancock.
We all "knew" in April that people were dying of Covid, but that it wasn't being recorded that way (for example, my Aunt Joy who I posted on here about).
That 5 week period saw an extra 13,336 people die of officially non-covid causes - this in a year where non-covid deaths have been below the average, and often setting a new 5-year low, the vast majority of weeks.

This means that the real number of covid deaths is a good 13k higher than the official government figures.

You can also see that non-covid deaths are particularly below the normal from November onwards, when flu season usually starts. On top of that, we're repeatedly told that this year's flu season has been ridiculously low (guardian reports 1/20 normal, friend who's a hospital admin in the US says about 1/30).
This is remarkably unsurprising, and had been predicted by most people from the start - the measures that work to reduce the spread of coronavirus are exactly the same as reduce the spread of influenza virus.
Covid Deaths.jpg

Stats are notoriously difficult sometimes.

The husband of a friend of ours died recently from covid. He had recently been diagnosed with a brain tumour and had 3-6 months to live. He caught covid whilst in hospital and the medics began to treat him. However, he decided that he would rather die from covid than go through what a brain tumour would bring for him.

So technically he died from covid. There is a high chance he could have been saved, but decided not to let that happen because of the tumour.

Which Tyler wrote:Covid Deaths.jpg

morepork wrote:I notice that the compulsory quarantine for returning UK residents is guided by a red list of countries to which borders are closed that includes much of the African and South American continents but not the USA. Or any Western European nation. Nice one. That should stop the virus in its tracks.

Which Tyler wrote:

morepork wrote:I notice that the compulsory quarantine for returning UK residents is guided by a red list of countries to which borders are closed that includes much of the African and South American continents but not the USA. Or any Western European nation. Nice one. That should stop the virus in its tracks.

Be fair Morepork, there's bound to be teething troubles and unforseen problems, they've only had... erm... 380 days to plan for this.