Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?
Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings. Everyone else in between. It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.
And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.
If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
The number of vaccinations given is 29,865, for an estimated population of older care homes of exactly 30,000 residents which gives you 99.55%. I wonder how likely it is that the estimated population is correct? Hey they might have to stop vaccinating people in case they go over 100%.
My view FWIW is that the Brexit deal was known in advance by the UK government to be unworkable with regard to the island of Ireland. And this would be true of any deal within the various parties' red lines.
The actual intention, and the only one available to a UK Brexit government was to agree to something which contravened a UK red line, be terminologically inexactitudinous about its meaning and consequence....and wait.
That's exactly what they have done.
They are now in a position where RoI and the UK (and peace) have a common interest in something which breaches the EUs red lines.
For the island of Ireland to work when the UK has a hardish Brexit someone's red lines are going to go.
it's what Gove calls a political solution.
The outstanding Tony Connelly is very much on the ball. WHat I haven't noticed from him is how to square the circle.
The common interest of RoI and UK (which will never be acknowledged of course) against the interests of the EU, its other members and (to some extent) NI unionists will be interesting to watch as it plays out.
Can the UK detach RoI (without admitting anything) from the solidarity of the EU?
The game's afoot.
This may well be the view of the UK government, albeit with major implications of bad faith. It is absolutely not the view of the Irish government. Neither the UK nor the rest of the EU is anything like as invested in the Northern Ireland protocol as Ireland, as has been demonstrated recently by both parties. Someone who seemed well connected with the Irish government did a thread on this. The real thing that can't acknowledged by the Irish government is that they will put in a hard land border before they will detach themselves by one iota from the Single Market. The Northern Ireland Protocol exists so they don't have to make that choice. The Irish are very determined on this and they have plenty of diplomatic capital both in the EU and the US.
I struggle to see a way to square the circle. So you voted for Brexit because you wanted to take control and to get an alien and overbearing institution out of your lives. The EU mandated internal border screams loss of control and imposition by overbearing foreign institutions more than anything else possibly could. On the other hand if you want the United Kingdom to survive in its current form, you are stuck with making the Northern Ireland Protocol sort of work.
I think that's a lot of bollocks.
Charles put it brilliantly: the GFA was designed in a climate where both the UK and Irish Republic were full EU members.
Now one is not it needs to be redesigned. It can't be totally lopsided to EU single market dogma or it will risk the Troubles restarting.
Ireland is going to have to show a bit of leg too, with the tacit permission of the EU, and it already does with the CTA and Anglo-Irish agreement.
How can you redesign something that only worked because it was based on the foundation of everyone being in a single political and common market with broad decisions at a level above both countries.
Brexit removed the foundations (and most of the cliff) on which the GFA agreement was built - so I really can't see how you can quickly fix something that took 10 years to build on foundations that have also disappeared.
Easily, if the will is there. The idea this is insolveable is a fantasy, made by those who want it to be there for political reasons.
The British Isles need to form a special SPS zone. Free movement for plants and animals for internal consumption, just as the CTA is for people.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I’m like a stuck record on here pointing out the steep decline in infections, indeed reported deaths, globally but it doesn’t seem to be mentioned in many places outside WHO press releases. There’s all sorts of reasons this might be happening, and cases might yet bounce right back up again, but (leaving aside local variations) the general direction of travel globally for over a month now has been down. That has never happened before since the start of the pandemic.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I don’t disagree with anything you said there. And I am carried along on the general wave of optimism of something like normal sometime this year.
But to some extent you only answered your own questions, I didn’t ask, not the three I posted?
I’ll ask them again, but differently by first subtracting what you have said.
1. Vaccinations going great guns currently but how lumpy could supply get? Especially if mutations undermine big stockpile? 2. Impact on opening up of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? Like the one bit of bad news you explained, if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading using them. we can’t depend on new variants not bringing more bad news? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. How might this slow down back to normal?
Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?
Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings. Everyone else in between. It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.
And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.
If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
And are they really vaccinating people in the end stages of life who may be dead before the vaccine is even effective? Surely that is daft.
A significant difference between England and Scotland will be the percentage of ethnic minorities in care homes. If these figures from Bradford for over 80s refusing vaccination and broken down by ethnicity are repeated elsewhere in the England then it will be nearly impossible to get anywhere near 100% vaccination.
Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?
Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings. Everyone else in between. It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.
And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.
If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
The number of vaccinations given is 29,865, for an estimated population of older care homes of exactly 30,000 residents which gives you 99.55%. I wonder how likely it is that the estimate population is correct?
Also, new people move into care homes all the time, while others "leave". So that statistic might still get over 100%.
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds, but they have brilliant names for grit lorries. Worth a zoom in and browse,:
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
From a pandemic-management point of view, the problems with the AZ vaccine really aren't much of a problem- for the reasons you mention. And yes, I'd happily have it tomorrow.
From a political point of view, it's potentially a massive problem. So much of the government's recent oomph has come from the perception that AZ has been brought into the world through the midwifery of the Johnson government. So much of the UK's vaccine lead is due to rapid and aggressive deployment of the AZ vaccine. Look at the howling there has been when foreign medical regulators have said "OK, but your trial data are really quite thin."
The (so far) successful gamble the UK government took on the Oxford vaccine has become totemic for a certain view of how the country will be in the future. If it gets overtaken by events, that totem falls.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I don’t disagree with anything you said there. And I am carried along on the general wave of optimism of something like normal sometime this year.
But to some extent you only answered your own questions, I didn’t ask, not the three I posted?
I’ll ask them again, but differently by first subtracting what you have said.
1. Vaccinations going great guns currently but how lumpy could supply get? Especially if mutations undermine big stockpile? 2. Impact on opening up of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? Like the one bit of bad news you explained, if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading using them. we can’t depend on new variants not bringing more bad news? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. How might this slow down back to normal?
On 1...
Supply is only going on one direction. Let me give you an example. Imagine that a factory has capacity of 10. In its first month, it'll produce 1, in its second 3, in its third 6, and in its fourth 10. (It'll often go on to produce more than 10 when it's debottlenecked, but that's another story).
Now, imagine that a firm has one factory in month one; two in month two, four in month three, etc.
That's what we're seeing right now. Just look at Pfizer. Across the whole world, they had two production sites for their vaccine in December. They now have three in the US alone. And they have signed production agreements with Novartis and Sanofi. By April or May, there might be a dozen plants producing Pfizer's vaccine alone. Now, most of those will be at the earliest stage of ramp up. But they will grow and grow and grow.
At the beginning of last month, Pfizer said it would produce 1.2bn doses of its vaccine in 2021. It now says two billion.
I think the word you're looking for is unbelievable
So are you saying the Scot Gov is lying about the number of people vaccinated?
As any ful kno, it would be impossible for Scotland (a country whose services are less resilient than those of England) to surpass England in this matter. Occam’s razor sez lie.
Surpassing England isn't odd. Only finding 0.4% care home residents who either refused or were ineligible for the vaccine is.
Interesting article in the Spectator about internet users. [Not a subscriber, read it as one of the free articles a month if you register].
"In the transition from the power found online to the political impotence of the physical world, feelings of frustration are entirely predictable. Returning to reality from the internet is a constraint on an individual’s freedom to control the information they encounter, unlike when they’re grasping at the mouse. Suddenly, actions have measurable consequences. On a basic level, we can even equate this to the nominal costs for information online and the price of a newspaper in the local corner-shop; when desire is concerned, the physical world is the place of total frustration to the internet’s surreal freedom."
Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?
Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings. Everyone else in between. It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.
And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.
If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
The number of vaccinations given is 29,865, for an estimated population of older care homes of exactly 30,000 residents which gives you 99.55%. I wonder how likely it is that the estimate population is correct?
Also, new people move into care homes all the time, while others "leave". So that statistic might still get over 100%.
Sure but that's another factor to consider. Basically Scotland is using an estimate of 30,000, rounded to the nearest thousand, for a changing population as you point out, where the most recent actual count was 32,455 in 2019. Claiming 99.6% vaccinated on that basis is a bit silly, and I'm sure that the contraindications should make such a figure impossible if you follow the rules.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
Certainly not the Holyrood Committee - but it is doing what it was designed and set up to do - not get to the bottom of it.....
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Possible.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
The SA study into the AZ jab was quite clear that although it was poor against reinfection there was still a T-Cell response that should prevent serious illness. That means it has efficacy come what may. That, coupled with the fact the world is going to be swimming in various vaccines reasonably soon, means that I would not lose any sleep over it.
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds, but they have brilliant names for grit lorries. Worth a zoom in and browse,:
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds...
But you have already commented. I think your comment was along the lines of 'Salmond should shut up and stop ruining my Brexit-revenge dream of Britain being broken up making accusations against that nice Mrs. Sturgeon.'
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
Interesting article in the Spectator about internet users. [Not a subscriber, read it as one of the free articles a month if you register].
"In the transition from the power found online to the political impotence of the physical world, feelings of frustration are entirely predictable. Returning to reality from the internet is a constraint on an individual’s freedom to control the information they encounter, unlike when they’re grasping at the mouse. Suddenly, actions have measurable consequences. On a basic level, we can even equate this to the nominal costs for information online and the price of a newspaper in the local corner-shop; when desire is concerned, the physical world is the place of total frustration to the internet’s surreal freedom."
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds...
But you have already commented. I think your comment was along the lines of 'Salmond should shut up and stop ruining my Brexit-revenge dream of Britain being broken up making accusations against that nice Mrs. Sturgeon.'
Not quite. I merely commented that Salmond being the agent of the SNP losing control at Holyrood in May is not likely to enhance his popularity north of the border.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Possible.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
Based on current data within SA it’s not spreading there all that much anymore either.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I don’t disagree with anything you said there. And I am carried along on the general wave of optimism of something like normal sometime this year.
But to some extent you only answered your own questions, I didn’t ask, not the three I posted?
I’ll ask them again, but differently by first subtracting what you have said.
1. Vaccinations going great guns currently but how lumpy could supply get? Especially if mutations undermine big stockpile? 2. Impact on opening up of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? Like the one bit of bad news you explained, if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading using them. we can’t depend on new variants not bringing more bad news? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. How might this slow down back to normal?
Re 2:
Remember mutations happen when there are lots of people who are sick with a disease. Lots of hosts mean lots of opportunities for viruses to mutate. It's no coincidence that it was Brazil and South Africa (two countries with mammoth CV19 problems) also saw mutations arrive there.
The fewer people have really major CV19 infections, the less likely we are to see mutations.
Also, this is not a one/zero thing. I'll bet you that people who had the AZ vaccine or who previously had regular CV19 turn out to have much better outcomes even if they get SA variant. Because that's the nature of our immune systems: how much of a headstart do they get, and any vaccine or any exposure to a previous coronavirus gives them some.
Last point, the new variants have all shown similar types of mutations. This is really good news: this is not a disease which appears to be able to mutate in different directions, it's one where the there appears to be just one path to greater infectiousness. That's going to make our job a whole bunch easier.
Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?
Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings. Everyone else in between. It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.
And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.
If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
The number of vaccinations given is 29,865, for an estimated population of older care homes of exactly 30,000 residents which gives you 99.55%. I wonder how likely it is that the estimate population is correct?
Also, new people move into care homes all the time, while others "leave". So that statistic might still get over 100%.
Sure but that's another factor to consider. Basically Scotland is using an estimate of 30,000, rounded to the nearest thousand, for a changing population as you point out, where the most recent actual count was 32,455 in 2019. Claiming 99.6% vaccinated on that basis is a bit silly, and I'm sure that the contraindications should make such a figure impossible if you follow the rules.
After a year (almost) of covid, woul;dn't that 32K be rather smaller?
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
The SA study into the AZ jab was quite clear that although it was poor against reinfection there was still a T-Cell response that should prevent serious illness. That means it has efficacy come what may. That, coupled with the fact the world is going to be swimming in various vaccines reasonably soon, means that I would not lose any sleep over it.
I think that the South African variant has 73 of 86 antigen binding sites the same, so there should be at least some useful antibody effect.
Which is absolutely brilliant because defeating Covid is a very well defined challenge and I had no doubt mankind would rise to it (though I am surprised at how fast we have done it). If only climate change and general environmental degradation was a similar type of problem....
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Possible.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
It's interesting that SA have had a sharp peak during their summer.
I am not sure whether that means we should be more worried about the SA variant or less.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Possible.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
If things go as well as you suggest then we'll still probably only get some of the schools back and nothing else. It looks as if the Government has finally swung in favour of caution, and the scientists will fly into a panic at the thought of significant relaxation whilst everyone under 50 or 55 remains unjabbed. They'll plug the numbers into the models and conclude that the hospitals will be swamped in a few weeks if we're allowed out to play (and that mass-scale transmission will mean that the subset of idiots amongst the elderly who won't take the vaccine will get the disease and be wiped out by it as well.) So, everything will be done at a snail's pace, and reversed at the first sign of trouble.
And then there's the possibility that a worse mutation gets in through our highly porous borders and makes a complete mess of everything.
Good suggestion re: the South African Plague though, makes some kind of sense. Hopefully you're right.
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds, but they have brilliant names for grit lorries. Worth a zoom in and browse,:
The worse competition I’d seen was one on par with boaty Mc boat face - a council asking Twitter to name its new gritter. There were a few unsavoury ones in there..
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds, but they have brilliant names for grit lorries. Worth a zoom in and browse,:
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Possible.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
If things go as well as you suggest then we'll still probably only get some of the schools back and nothing else. It looks as if the Government has finally swung in favour of caution, and the scientists will fly into a panic at the thought of significant relaxation whilst everyone under 50 or 55 remains unjabbed. They'll plug the numbers into the models and conclude that the hospitals will be swamped in a few weeks if we're allowed out to play (and that mass-scale transmission will mean that the subset of idiots amongst the elderly who won't take the vaccine will get the disease and be wiped out by it as well.) So, everything will be done at a snail's pace, and reversed at the first sign of trouble.
And then there's the possibility that a worse mutation gets in through our highly porous borders and makes a complete mess of everything.
Good suggestion re: the South African Plague though, makes some kind of sense. Hopefully you're right.
You can wallow in doom porn fears all you like.
But the reality is when infections and hospitalizations fall below various levels things will be returned step by step to normal.
After a year (almost) of covid, woul;dn't that 32K be rather smaller?
Quite likely, hence the estimate being used. The point stands though that you can't really say to three significant figures what fraction of that population are vaccinated.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
The SA study into the AZ jab was quite clear that although it was poor against reinfection there was still a T-Cell response that should prevent serious illness. That means it has efficacy come what may. That, coupled with the fact the world is going to be swimming in various vaccines reasonably soon, means that I would not lose any sleep over it.
I think that the South African variant has 73 of 86 antigen binding sites the same, so there should be at least some useful antibody effect.
I think the other issue with the SA study is that all of the participants were on the 4 week gap for dosing which had an overall 55% efficacy vs the 12 week gap having 83% efficacy. It's possible that the UK's choice of dosing will raise that 22% (with a very wide CI) considerably as there is a significant jump in neutralising antibodies with the 12 week gap vs the 4 week one. Even with lesser binding efficiency that increase might be enough to give the AZ recipients a very high level of protection against severe symptoms, hospitalisation and death which is good enough for now while we await the updated September booster and the updated versions of CureVac, Novavax and Valneva where we have got domestic manufacturing and longer term supply deals.
After a year (almost) of covid, woul;dn't that 32K be rather smaller?
Quite likely, hence the estimate being used. The point stands though that you can't really say to three significant figures what fraction of that population are vaccinated.
If one didn't then the Scottish Tories would be howling for the exact figure to be released, and so would the media. Unless they want to accept 100%, being the innumerate idiots many are.
And on a pedantic point, surely the actual figure being claimed is edit@ effectively 0.04% unvaccinated - only one significant figure.
Edit: deducting a very small figure from a very large figure and all that.
After a year (almost) of covid, woul;dn't that 32K be rather smaller?
Quite likely, hence the estimate being used. The point stands though that you can't really say to three significant figures what fraction of that population are vaccinated.
If one didn't then the Scottish Tories would be howling for the exact figure to be released, and so would the media. Unless they want to accept 100%, being the innumerate idiots many are.
So SNP maths is just make up a figure to so we can avoid looking bad. Any other areas of public life they do that in do you think?
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Possible.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
If things go as well as you suggest then we'll still probably only get some of the schools back and nothing else. It looks as if the Government has finally swung in favour of caution, and the scientists will fly into a panic at the thought of significant relaxation whilst everyone under 50 or 55 remains unjabbed. They'll plug the numbers into the models and conclude that the hospitals will be swamped in a few weeks if we're allowed out to play (and that mass-scale transmission will mean that the subset of idiots amongst the elderly who won't take the vaccine will get the disease and be wiped out by it as well.) So, everything will be done at a snail's pace, and reversed at the first sign of trouble.
And then there's the possibility that a worse mutation gets in through our highly porous borders and makes a complete mess of everything.
Good suggestion re: the South African Plague though, makes some kind of sense. Hopefully you're right.
There will be considerable pressure by the time deaths fall into the tens per day in two to three weeks and hospitalisations fall to the low hundreds.
SA COVID may actually be being contained by the current lockdown and we know that is going to continue for at least another two weeks, 147 cases will fall to zero when the R is below 1.
The whole point of the CureVac deal is to completely sidestep the snail's pace so we have got fully integrated model of variant detection, vaccine editing, rapid efficacy trials based on immune response testing and rapid manufacturing roll out. The process is currently 8-10 months. The CureVac deal cuts that down to around a month and it needs no special transportation and storage so all of the existing vaccine sites can be used for a very fast single booster shot for everyone eligible. With the manufacturing in place we could be get from design to fully jabbed within two months of detecting a serious mutation that evades existing vaccine responses. Unless the mutation develops within the UK we may not even see many cases and everyone will already be vaccinated.
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds, but they have brilliant names for grit lorries. Worth a zoom in and browse,:
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
The SA study into the AZ jab was quite clear that although it was poor against reinfection there was still a T-Cell response that should prevent serious illness. That means it has efficacy come what may. That, coupled with the fact the world is going to be swimming in various vaccines reasonably soon, means that I would not lose any sleep over it.
I think that the South African variant has 73 of 86 antigen binding sites the same, so there should be at least some useful antibody effect.
I think the other issue with the SA study is that all of the participants were on the 4 week gap for dosing which had an overall 55% efficacy vs the 12 week gap having 83% efficacy. It's possible that the UK's choice of dosing will raise that 22% (with a very wide CI) considerably as there is a significant jump in neutralising antibodies with the 12 week gap vs the 4 week one. Even with lesser binding efficiency that increase might be enough to give the AZ recipients a very high level of protection against severe symptoms, hospitalisation and death which is good enough for now while we await the updated September booster and the updated versions of CureVac, Novavax and Valneva where we have got domestic manufacturing and longer term supply deals.
I wonder if the lower effectiveness in the original arm was simply that the SA variant was prevalent then.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
After a year (almost) of covid, woul;dn't that 32K be rather smaller?
Quite likely, hence the estimate being used. The point stands though that you can't really say to three significant figures what fraction of that population are vaccinated.
If one didn't then the Scottish Tories would be howling for the exact figure to be released, and so would the media. Unless they want to accept 100%, being the innumerate idiots many are.
So SNP maths is just make up a figure to so we can avoid looking bad. Any other areas of public life they do that in do you think?
You edited my post to ignore that point I made which is that it's not 3sf anyway. ,
Anne Harvey, the Principal Assistant to the SNP Chief Whip, on Alex Salmond:
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
I can't comment on the SNP feuds, but they have brilliant names for grit lorries. Worth a zoom in and browse,:
The worse competition I’d seen was one on par with boaty Mc boat face - a council asking Twitter to name its new gritter. There were a few unsavoury ones in there..
That might have been my local council, though it was a whole fleet of gritters.
It’s obvious to me that an extremely high proportion of oldies have been vaccinated, many more than the Scottish Government expected. If our media wasn’t so utterly shit, there would be no need to try and produce figures to two decimal places.
I just saw what the bloke in Glasgow said about Captain Tom. Don't understand how he's been arrested. Can any of our legal experts chime in here? What crime is he suspected of committing?
After a year (almost) of covid, woul;dn't that 32K be rather smaller?
Quite likely, hence the estimate being used. The point stands though that you can't really say to three significant figures what fraction of that population are vaccinated.
If one didn't then the Scottish Tories would be howling for the exact figure to be released, and so would the media. Unless they want to accept 100%, being the innumerate idiots many are.
So SNP maths is just make up a figure to so we can avoid looking bad. Any other areas of public life they do that in do you think?
You edited my post to ignore that point I made which is that it's not 3sf anyway. ,
Also that 32K figure will be more wrong than 30K.
Just highlighting the portion where you said it's fine to make figures up to save some embarrassment.
And it should be fairly easy to get a figure. Presumably they have a record of how many care home residents were offered the vaccine and how many accepted and how many refused.
That seems a perfectly transparent way of going about it and avoids the use of estimates altogether.
That's possibly still in the low side, as a month ago the Russian statistical office concluded there were 130,000 extra deaths, up to December, on top of the official figure at the time. Adding that to the current official figure would give over 200,000 COVID-19 deaths in Russia to date. Of course there's a lot of of/with COVID-19 still going on, and for how long do you consider the infection being a significant cause of mortality.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
This is the government confirming what the Russian statistical agency said at the turn of the year, which was basically 'it's three times the official figure'.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I just hope that Dr Van-Tam was right and we don't end up stuck in lockdown all year whilst everybody who's had the AZ jab then has to be given something else because South African Plague (and we have to wait for said something else to be delivered first,) which in turn means that the fit half of the population remains completely unprotected and, consequently, we're not allowed out through continued terror of mass transmission and hospital swamping.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
Possible.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
“ It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.”.
It shares with much the rest of Africa? Including places largely untouched so far. So chances it could WOOOOOMPH across the whole continent?
I am into doom porn aren’t I? I didn’t realise that before. 😕
The problem then would be, if we are still boasting of neglible South African variant here, whilst it rips through Africa, whilst we sit on stockpile of the kind of vaccine they need they have little of.
I still think the “impossible” will happen and Boris shares vaccine with EU country before Easter Monday. We share a land border with Ireland is why I don’t think it’s as impossible as I’m told on here.
When the virus mutates and a new vaccine is manufactured to deal with the new spike or whatever it targets then does that new adjusted vaccine need to go through Phase III and all the other trials again, like the first one did, or can it be used immediately?
Given that the trials were the time consuming element prior to manufacture, how much time can be saved on new vaccinations?
Does that differ between mRNA and tradition Oxford style vaccinations?
When the virus mutates and a new vaccine is manufactured to deal with the new spike or whatever it targets then does that new adjusted vaccine need to go through Phase III and all the other trials again, like the first one did, or can it be used immediately?
Given that the trials were the time consuming element prior to manufacture, how much time can be saved on new vaccinations?
Does that differ between mRNA and tradition Oxford style vaccinations?
You can probably jump to p3
Would that be the case if a new viral vector is needed for the AZ one to evade potential vector immunity?
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think so too. But those performances are reason enough for the odds being as they are I reckon. They certainly won't lack for any belief that they can do it.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think the Aussies, England, India and NZ are pretty much on a par, and home advantage counts a lot. Seem to recall NZ have mostly played at home in the current world test series, hence their top placing in the ranks. I think India win at 1 % is about right, and England or draw about the same. Re getting good odds on the spreads due to overconfident Indian fans, surely the same could be said for when England play footy? Often seem to be stronger favourites here than they should be.
When the virus mutates and a new vaccine is manufactured to deal with the new spike or whatever it targets then does that new adjusted vaccine need to go through Phase III and all the other trials again, like the first one did, or can it be used immediately?
Given that the trials were the time consuming element prior to manufacture, how much time can be saved on new vaccinations?
Does that differ between mRNA and tradition Oxford style vaccinations?
You can probably jump to p3
Probably only need safety and a comparison study against existing vaccine. Not full on p3.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think so too. But those performances are reason enough for the odds being as they are I reckon. They certainly won't lack for any belief that they can do it.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think so too. But those performances are reason enough for the odds being as they are I reckon. They certainly won't lack for any belief that they can do it.
Ishant wasn't fibbing. They will believe they can do it, and in any case their best chance of getting out with a draw is by showing genuine attacking intent. They have no chance if they just try and defend for 90 overs. They have to carry the threat of getting the runs as long as they possibly can, even if it's near impossible.
Anyway the odds on India are only a bit out. The market says 5% chance; I'm saying 1% which isn't really so different. Backing England is a better bet than laying India.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think the Aussies, England, India and NZ are pretty much on a par, and home advantage counts a lot. Seem to recall NZ have mostly played at home in the current world test series, hence their top placing in the ranks. I think India win at 1 % is about right, and England or draw about the same. Re getting good odds on the spreads due to overconfident Indian fans, surely the same could be said for when England play footy? Often seem to be stronger favourites here than they should be.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think the Aussies, England, India and NZ are pretty much on a par, and home advantage counts a lot. Seem to recall NZ have mostly played at home in the current world test series, hence their top placing in the ranks. I think India win at 1 % is about right, and England or draw about the same. Re getting good odds on the spreads due to overconfident Indian fans, surely the same could be said for when England play footy? Often seem to be stronger favourites here than they should be.
That often applies. My Dad's life tip for the RL. Bet on the Catalan Dragons. They are always longer than they ought to be. For the reasons you outline.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I don’t disagree with anything you said there. And I am carried along on the general wave of optimism of something like normal sometime this year.
But to some extent you only answered your own questions, I didn’t ask, not the three I posted?
I’ll ask them again, but differently by first subtracting what you have said.
1. Vaccinations going great guns currently but how lumpy could supply get? Especially if mutations undermine big stockpile? 2. Impact on opening up of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? Like the one bit of bad news you explained, if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading using them. we can’t depend on new variants not bringing more bad news? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. How might this slow down back to normal?
Re 2:
Remember mutations happen when there are lots of people who are sick with a disease. Lots of hosts mean lots of opportunities for viruses to mutate. It's no coincidence that it was Brazil and South Africa (two countries with mammoth CV19 problems) also saw mutations arrive there.
The fewer people have really major CV19 infections, the less likely we are to see mutations.
Also, this is not a one/zero thing. I'll bet you that people who had the AZ vaccine or who previously had regular CV19 turn out to have much better outcomes even if they get SA variant. Because that's the nature of our immune systems: how much of a headstart do they get, and any vaccine or any exposure to a previous coronavirus gives them some.
Last point, the new variants have all shown similar types of mutations. This is really good news: this is not a disease which appears to be able to mutate in different directions, it's one where the there appears to be just one path to greater infectiousness. That's going to make our job a whole bunch easier.
Yep. That very much answers one and two. And you don’t really need to answer the third, if people decide they are immune and lock down falls apart, it will set normal back a bit, but not by very much?
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think the Aussies, England, India and NZ are pretty much on a par, and home advantage counts a lot. Seem to recall NZ have mostly played at home in the current world test series, hence their top placing in the ranks. I think India win at 1 % is about right, and England or draw about the same. Re getting good odds on the spreads due to overconfident Indian fans, surely the same could be said for when England play footy? Often seem to be stronger favourites here than they should be.
I'd have India a shade ahead of NZ and England. Aussies have dropped back a bit, but not much. Rest I agree with completely.
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
Better chance than that for England. I think Indian batsmen will be easy to goad into making rash shots and the wickets will fall.
Their 2 fifth day batting displays in the final 2 tests in Oz might suggest otherwise.
Oh, they're a good side alright - best in the world, imo. The odds are against them here though.
I think the Aussies, England, India and NZ are pretty much on a par, and home advantage counts a lot. Seem to recall NZ have mostly played at home in the current world test series, hence their top placing in the ranks. I think India win at 1 % is about right, and England or draw about the same. Re getting good odds on the spreads due to overconfident Indian fans, surely the same could be said for when England play footy? Often seem to be stronger favourites here than they should be.
I'd have India a shade ahead of NZ and England. Aussies have dropped back a bit, but not much. Rest I agree with completely.
If home advantage is such a big thing in test cricket, maybe more matches should be played at neutral venues in order to discover which teams really are the best when you exclude that factor.
After a year (almost) of covid, woul;dn't that 32K be rather smaller?
Quite likely, hence the estimate being used. The point stands though that you can't really say to three significant figures what fraction of that population are vaccinated.
If one didn't then the Scottish Tories would be howling for the exact figure to be released, and so would the media. Unless they want to accept 100%, being the innumerate idiots many are.
And on a pedantic point, surely the actual figure being claimed is edit@ effectively 0.04% unvaccinated - only one significant figure.
Edit: deducting a very small figure from a very large figure and all that.
Not really.
It was the Scottish Government, trying to distract from the fact they've not done many vaccinations overall compared to Northern Ireland, Wales and England, that tried to invent this notion they've done better on care home residents. Despite the other nations saying that they had completed the vaccine rollout for care homes.
Rather than trying to escalate the vaccine rollout so getting doses out of the freezer and into people's arms, this rather ludicrous and unbelievable PR operation has been launched instead. Hence coming out with this not credible tractor stat of 99.6% based on an incredibly dodgy estimate.
Had the Scottish Government just said "we have finished vaccinating care homes" that would have been accepted. With the English saying "we have too".
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
Sporting Index goes 250/275 but even your higher figure suggests England win fairly comfortably.
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
Seems like betting on cricket when India are playing usually offers lots of opportunities due to the, shall we say, "over-enthusiastic" attitude of Indian fans to the chances of their team winning matches regardless of the situation.
I estimate England's chances at 66%, the draw 33%, and India 1% despite what Ishant says. How far out do you think I am?
With this Indian batting lineup, their win chances are surely better than one chance in 100 tests of knocking off the runs ?
I think it will, we're currently in lockdown with the R at around 0.8, the SA variant will also be being squished down by this, maybe even more than the Kent mutation which is more transmissive than the SA one.
What we need to do is squish it down, vaccinate everyone, secure the border and prepare 53m booster shots for September which are updated to the variants.
The issue is the secure the border part and not a singe person in the media or opposition is asking the right questions.
Is this because Scots geezers are trying to bump up the jab rate north o' the border, in order to catch up and hopefully surpass the English?
Could be the up side of vaccination nationalism!
One life saved for every 20 inoculations of elderly residents of care homes, versus one saved for every 40,000 50-somethings. Everyone else in between. It’s not nationalism, it’s about the risk of death.
And filling up hospital ICUs, too.
I'm sorry but the Scottish figure doesn't make much sense. Is it 99.6% of care home residents being vaccinated (even if they shouldn't be because of illnesses and pre-existing conditions) or 99.6% of those who can be vaccinated have been vaccinated.
If it's the former WTF and if it's the latter I suspect England is virtually identical but used a different calculation.
And are they really vaccinating people in the end stages of life who may be dead before the vaccine is even effective? Surely that is daft.
A significant difference between England and Scotland will be the percentage of ethnic minorities in care homes. If these figures from Bradford for over 80s refusing vaccination and broken down by ethnicity are repeated elsewhere in the England then it will be nearly impossible to get anywhere near 100% vaccination.
Because Boris is going to hotlink opening-up road map on infection rates and NHS capacity, surely these are the unknown/uncontrollable variables to scupper opening up because they will push up infectionand transmission rates?
1. Impact of doing over fifties first jab at same time as over seventies second, plus any unexpected lumpiness in supply of vaccine. Might not happen. Can’t be ruled out. 2. Question marks over impact of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The gnomonic specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? And if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading than thought. Already happening? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. The biggest unknown impact.
We're suffering from the same problem with vaccines that we suffered from in Lockdown One.
People forget, but on here, lockdowns were decried as not working because "we implemented a lockdown a week ago, and cases are still up 30% and therefore it doesn't work".
With the vaccine, there are two different time lags to take into account: Firstly, there's the time lag between vaccine and protection. Secondly, there's the fact that today's "positive" number is actually measuring infections two weeks.
The reported CV19 caseload today is based on (basically) the number of people vaccinated up to about 5-10 January.
In the last two weeks, there has been lots of excellent news (CureVac-GSK, the mega infection in the old age people's home in Israel with zero serious infections, Novavax, Pfizer cutting manufacturing times in half, antibody response data on the SA variant from Moderna and Pfizer, J&J, continuing falls in CV19 cases across the world, the manufacturing deals for Pfizer with Sanofi and Novartis, etc.).
And there's been one piece of bad news: that AZ is largely ineffective against the SA variant.
That's it.
Now, that sucks because we have lots of AZ. And it was a British developed vaccine.
But we also have lots of Pfizer and lots of CureVac and lots of Novavax. And the first two of these can be very rapidly changed to deal with new variants. And the more people have been vaccinated, the fewer hosts there are for the virus to have mutations in.
I don’t disagree with anything you said there. And I am carried along on the general wave of optimism of something like normal sometime this year.
But to some extent you only answered your own questions, I didn’t ask, not the three I posted?
I’ll ask them again, but differently by first subtracting what you have said.
1. Vaccinations going great guns currently but how lumpy could supply get? Especially if mutations undermine big stockpile? 2. Impact on opening up of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? Like the one bit of bad news you explained, if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading using them. we can’t depend on new variants not bringing more bad news? 3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. How might this slow down back to normal?
On 1...
Supply is only going on one direction. Let me give you an example. Imagine that a factory has capacity of 10. In its first month, it'll produce 1, in its second 3, in its third 6, and in its fourth 10. (It'll often go on to produce more than 10 when it's debottlenecked, but that's another story).
Now, imagine that a firm has one factory in month one; two in month two, four in month three, etc.
That's what we're seeing right now. Just look at Pfizer. Across the whole world, they had two production sites for their vaccine in December. They now have three in the US alone. And they have signed production agreements with Novartis and Sanofi. By April or May, there might be a dozen plants producing Pfizer's vaccine alone. Now, most of those will be at the earliest stage of ramp up. But they will grow and grow and grow.
At the beginning of last month, Pfizer said it would produce 1.2bn doses of its vaccine in 2021. It now says two billion.
This is like aircraft production in WW2.
And they’ve nearly doubled the speed of production for batches of the vaccine in their original plants. It’s an entirely new bulk production process, so rapid improvements are to be expected.
Comments
The British Isles need to form a special SPS zone. Free movement for plants and animals for internal consumption, just as the CTA is for people.
Simples.
This could so easily turn into "not enough jabbed, it's not safe... still not enough jabbed, still not safe... vulnerable no longer safe, need booster jabs... Christmas 2021 is cancelled (etc, etc)"
But to some extent you only answered your own questions, I didn’t ask, not the three I posted?
I’ll ask them again, but differently by first subtracting what you have said.
1. Vaccinations going great guns currently but how lumpy could supply get? Especially if mutations undermine big stockpile?
2. Impact on opening up of variants and speed of detecting them on infection rates. The specialty in U.K. is good, but still slower than needed to keep on top of variants spreading? Like the one bit of bad news you explained, if vaccines can’t stop mild illness of variant, there’s going to be more spreading using them. we can’t depend on new variants not bringing more bad news?
3. Human behaviour in jumping the gun. I’ve had my jab, it can’t get me now, back to normal ‘I go. How might this slow down back to normal?
Cricket prediction: India all out for between 275 and 300.
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/2CE6/production/_116849411_optimised-vaccine_refusal_bradford_6feb-nc.png
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55952189
“I have believed for some time that there was...a witch-hunt against him after receiving what I considered to be an improper request from SNP HQ seeking to damage Mr Salmond.”
Can anyone shed any light on what on earth is going on in Scotland?
https://twitter.com/jezmccole/status/1358783476816879621?s=19
From a political point of view, it's potentially a massive problem. So much of the government's recent oomph has come from the perception that AZ has been brought into the world through the midwifery of the Johnson government. So much of the UK's vaccine lead is due to rapid and aggressive deployment of the AZ vaccine. Look at the howling there has been when foreign medical regulators have said "OK, but your trial data are really quite thin."
The (so far) successful gamble the UK government took on the Oxford vaccine has become totemic for a certain view of how the country will be in the future. If it gets overtaken by events, that totem falls.
Supply is only going on one direction. Let me give you an example. Imagine that a factory has capacity of 10. In its first month, it'll produce 1, in its second 3, in its third 6, and in its fourth 10. (It'll often go on to produce more than 10 when it's debottlenecked, but that's another story).
Now, imagine that a firm has one factory in month one; two in month two, four in month three, etc.
That's what we're seeing right now. Just look at Pfizer. Across the whole world, they had two production sites for their vaccine in December. They now have three in the US alone. And they have signed production agreements with Novartis and Sanofi. By April or May, there might be a dozen plants producing Pfizer's vaccine alone. Now, most of those will be at the earliest stage of ramp up. But they will grow and grow and grow.
At the beginning of last month, Pfizer said it would produce 1.2bn doses of its vaccine in 2021. It now says two billion.
This is like aircraft production in WW2.
"In the transition from the power found online to the political impotence of the physical world, feelings of frustration are entirely predictable. Returning to reality from the internet is a constraint on an individual’s freedom to control the information they encounter, unlike when they’re grasping at the mouse. Suddenly, actions have measurable consequences. On a basic level, we can even equate this to the nominal costs for information online and the price of a newspaper in the local corner-shop; when desire is concerned, the physical world is the place of total frustration to the internet’s surreal freedom."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/internet-users-are-the-new-surrealists-and-they-keep-changing-the-world
The PB consensus strongly suggests the exchanges are out on this one and may well be distorted by Asian punters. Credence is added to this theory by the way Englands price has shortened a bit since this evening while Asia sleeps.
The 2.5 England nevertheless reains a bit of a gift.
But when cases are below a thousand a day (six weeks from now?) and hospitalisations are down to negligible levels (eight?), then won't it be more popular to remove restrictions?
I'd also point out that the SA variant has not spread that much outside SA (unlike our super British Kent Covid). It's possible that the environmental circumstances in SA are particularly good for that variant.
https://twitter.com/willnorman/status/1357745398387982339?s=19
ruining my Brexit-revenge dream of Britain being broken upmaking accusations against that nice Mrs. Sturgeon.'Remember mutations happen when there are lots of people who are sick with a disease. Lots of hosts mean lots of opportunities for viruses to mutate. It's no coincidence that it was Brazil and South Africa (two countries with mammoth CV19 problems) also saw mutations arrive there.
The fewer people have really major CV19 infections, the less likely we are to see mutations.
Also, this is not a one/zero thing. I'll bet you that people who had the AZ vaccine or who previously had regular CV19 turn out to have much better outcomes even if they get SA variant. Because that's the nature of our immune systems: how much of a headstart do they get, and any vaccine or any exposure to a previous coronavirus gives them some.
Last point, the new variants have all shown similar types of mutations. This is really good news: this is not a disease which appears to be able to mutate in different directions, it's one where the there appears to be just one path to greater infectiousness. That's going to make our job a whole bunch easier.
How far out do you think I am?
https://twitter.com/DanVevers/status/1358858735058313217?s=20
https://twitter.com/MichaelLCrick/status/1358889845951770624?s=20
I am not sure whether that means we should be more worried about the SA variant or less.
And then there's the possibility that a worse mutation gets in through our highly porous borders and makes a complete mess of everything.
Good suggestion re: the South African Plague though, makes some kind of sense. Hopefully you're right.
But the reality is when infections and hospitalizations fall below various levels things will be returned step by step to normal.
And on a pedantic point, surely the actual figure being claimed is edit@ effectively 0.04% unvaccinated - only one significant figure.
Edit: deducting a very small figure from a very large figure and all that.
https://twitter.com/AFP/status/1358874240582209536
https://twitter.com/crispmermaid/status/1358874459596292100?s=21
SA COVID may actually be being contained by the current lockdown and we know that is going to continue for at least another two weeks, 147 cases will fall to zero when the R is below 1.
The whole point of the CureVac deal is to completely sidestep the snail's pace so we have got fully integrated model of variant detection, vaccine editing, rapid efficacy trials based on immune response testing and rapid manufacturing roll out. The process is currently 8-10 months. The CureVac deal cuts that down to around a month and it needs no special transportation and storage so all of the existing vaccine sites can be used for a very fast single booster shot for everyone eligible. With the manufacturing in place we could be get from design to fully jabbed within two months of detecting a serious mutation that evades existing vaccine responses. Unless the mutation develops within the UK we may not even see many cases and everyone will already be vaccinated.
Also that 32K figure will be more wrong than 30K.
https://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/news/gritters-named
And it should be fairly easy to get a figure. Presumably they have a record of how many care home residents were offered the vaccine and how many accepted and how many refused.
That seems a perfectly transparent way of going about it and avoids the use of estimates altogether.
https://twitter.com/simon_brooke/status/1358899142567878661?s=21
It shares with much the rest of Africa? Including places largely untouched so far. So chances it could WOOOOOMPH across the whole continent?
I am into doom porn aren’t I? I didn’t realise that before. 😕
The problem then would be, if we are still boasting of neglible South African variant here, whilst it rips through Africa, whilst we sit on stockpile of the kind of vaccine they need they have little of.
I still think the “impossible” will happen and Boris shares vaccine with EU country before Easter Monday. We share a land border with Ireland is why I don’t think it’s as impossible as I’m told on here.
£20k a week Cotswold cottage it is then....
£25k for ConHome inmates.
https://twitter.com/holyroodmandy/status/1358558958919778308?s=20
Anyway the odds on India are only a bit out. The market says 5% chance; I'm saying 1% which isn't really so different. Backing England is a better bet than laying India.
https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1358895943576412162?s=20
It was the Scottish Government, trying to distract from the fact they've not done many vaccinations overall compared to Northern Ireland, Wales and England, that tried to invent this notion they've done better on care home residents. Despite the other nations saying that they had completed the vaccine rollout for care homes.
Rather than trying to escalate the vaccine rollout so getting doses out of the freezer and into people's arms, this rather ludicrous and unbelievable PR operation has been launched instead. Hence coming out with this not credible tractor stat of 99.6% based on an incredibly dodgy estimate.
Had the Scottish Government just said "we have finished vaccinating care homes" that would have been accepted. With the English saying "we have too".
https://twitter.com/HomeMckee/status/1358906750955577344?s=20
2-3% India, 15-20% the draw, IMO.
What we need to do is squish it down, vaccinate everyone, secure the border and prepare 53m booster shots for September which are updated to the variants.
The issue is the secure the border part and not a singe person in the media or opposition is asking the right questions.
Mastermind was big in the seventies, just like this ladies dress sense was?
https://twitter.com/FraserNelson/status/1358910536457551877?s=20
It’s an entirely new bulk production process, so rapid improvements are to be expected.