And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."
... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.
And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).
And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).
The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.
I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.
The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.
Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.
I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.
The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?
We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.
Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.
Your whole premise is flawed.
So you assert, but you cite no evidence.
My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?
Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.
How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.
69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.
This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.
Indeed. How many healthy under 40s have died of Covid since the pandemic began?
I’ve not seen the latest figures, but as of August 2020 that figure stood at 38 individuals.
Ah but... Long Covid...
I need to see more evidence about this. Is it proven? Could be a reaction to trauma, a rekindling of glandular fever, or a whole host of things. More data and analysis is required.
Interesting. A couple of WWC blokes in their early 40s (I'm in Basingstoke) miffed that they can't give "English" as their nationality, and have to give British instead.
Seems to be a thing.
I’m pretty sure I gave both English and British as mine on the census. I can’t remember the choice on the vax - you might be right. In any case, I think one should be able to say English/Scots etc. It should be the same as the census IMO.
Interestingly, unlike at least one other senior politician, he's not prejudging the result of any trial. 'Consequences' could cover anything from a Royal Commission downward.
Remember that many Indians came via Uganda. Also that India is approx 15% Muslim (a little less at the period of high migration). The Muslim populations of Bangladesh, Pakistan and India are quite similar in numbers.
Also:
One that surprised me last week is that no other EU countries have significant Indian-origin populations.
UK is 1.4m. Next on the list is Italy at 10% of that.
Isn't that down to the UK hiring doctors from that part of the world and you know being the pre-eminent colonial power in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh?
The latter explains why we have so much immigration from that part of the world, for good or ill British colonialism/immigration/conquest of other countries explains why we went for mass immigration from that part of the world
The likes of Portuguese India consisted of a few goat herders whilst the British Raj controlled everything.
Apparently those goat herders may have been few in number but they were real Goas.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
And you completely fail to understand what the vaccines are here to achieve. It's to stop people going to hospital, whatever they do beyond that is merely a bonus. Both AZ and Pfizer prevent hospitalisation with both doses to a very high degree.
No. The problem is that your attention span is apparently so short that you can't remember more than the first part of the post you started to argue with in the first place.
It's not a question of herd immunity per se. It's a question of (1) whether we reach herd immunity, (2) how many more infections there will be if we don't and (3) what the case fatality rate will be after vaccination.
Too hard to grasp?
1. You're literally contradicting the first line of the paragraph, does herd immunity matter or doesn't it, make up your mind. 2. No one cares about the infection rate if it isn't feeding through to hospitals. 3. We already know from studies done in the US, UK, Israel and Europe based on actual real world fucking data that the CFR for vaccinated people is extremely low.
Once again, the PHE Siren study showed that a single dose of AZ or Pfizer resulted in a cumulative reduction of 80% in the hospitalisation rate, for two doses of Pfizer this rises to around 95% and the AZ study is ongoing. You're making this about efficacy against asymptomatic infection, but that's never been what vaccines are here to do. I'll keep saying it until you understand it, vaccines are here to stop people from going to hospital for COVID, what they do beyond that is a bonus.
Honestly, you seem to think you're always the smartest guy in the room, people who think that way are prone to making idiotic mistakes just as you are on this whole "yeah but it doesn't stop people getting infected" idea.
Agreed. Slightly tangentially positive tests also appear to be falling on the Zoe app, which I hadn’t expected. It’s too soon to call a trend but worth keeping an eye on (it tends to be a fortnight or so ahead of government data IIRC).
Usual caveats of I'm a lawyer not an epidemologist, but the more I see about the Indian variant, the more I think it's going to fizzle, just like the South African variant etc. It may become dominant here, but I strongly suspect that it'll be dominant in the same way Kent variant was a month ago - small numbers and not really a threat.
Do you mean SA variant in your final sentence?
No, I meant Kent. SA was never dominant here. Kent variant a month ago was dominant, but low numbers, not a threat to opening up due to the vaccine program etc. So what I meant to say was instead of Kent variant it may be Indian variant making up 80%+ of our cases, but if numbers of cases/hospitalisations are low, it doesn't really matter which variant is dominant. Obviously I'm not saying it wouldn't be a horrific threat in an unvaccinated population with no restrictions.
Interestingly, unlike at least one other senior politician, he's not prejudging the result of any trial. 'Consequences' could cover anything from a Royal Commission downward.
You would hope that a former DPP would avoid prejudging the result of a trial. It would render the process rather pointless if he did.
Remember that many Indians came via Uganda. Also that India is approx 15% Muslim (a little less at the period of high migration). The Muslim populations of Bangladesh, Pakistan and India are quite similar in numbers.
Also:
One that surprised me last week is that no other EU countries have significant Indian-origin populations.
UK is 1.4m. Next on the list is Italy at 10% of that.
Isn't that down to the UK hiring doctors from that part of the world and you know being the pre-eminent colonial power in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh?
The latter explains why we have so much immigration from that part of the world, for good or ill British colonialism/immigration/conquest of other countries explains why we went for mass immigration from that part of the world
The likes of Portuguese India consisted of a few goat herders whilst the British Raj controlled everything.
Apparently those goat herders may have been few in number but they were real Goas.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
Can you give me some data that shows the efficacy of AstraZenica is 50%-60% in all cohorts (not just the over 70s) as in a discussion about herd immunity that is vital.
Chris read some data 4 months ago and doesn't seem to think anything has changed since then. No point in engaging until he updates his data sets.
This forum seems to be full of people who don't see the point of engaging with the facts!
As for recent "real world" data on efficacy against infections, here's the preprint from just three weeks ago from the ONS infection survey, which is based on random PCR tests, and therefore picks up all infections, not just symptomatic ones: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.22.21255913v1.full.pdf
It shows an efficacy of 61% for asymptomatic and 63% for asymptomatic, 21 days or more after the first dose of AstraZeneca (insufficient data so far on the effect of two doses).
Not that I'm under any illusion that anyone wants to know that.
Impact of vaccination type on new infections There was no evidence that reductions in odds of new infections differed between the Pfizer- BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (Figure 4A; Supplementary Table 7) whether the vaccine was received 0 to 7 days ago (P=0.965), 8 to 20 days ago (P=1.00), or ≥21 days ago (P=0.998 for Pfizer-BioNTech ≥21 days ago, one dose only, vs Oxford-AstraZeneca ≥21 days ago, one or two doses).
Interestingly, unlike at least one other senior politician, he's not prejudging the result of any trial. 'Consequences' could cover anything from a Royal Commission downward.
You would hope that a former DPP would avoid prejudging the result of a trial. It would render the process rather pointless if he did.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
Can you give me some data that shows the efficacy of AstraZenica is 50%-60% in all cohorts (not just the over 70s) as in a discussion about herd immunity that is vital.
Chris read some data 4 months ago and doesn't seem to think anything has changed since then. No point in engaging until he updates his data sets.
Interesting. A couple of WWC blokes in their early 40s (I'm in Basingstoke) miffed that they can't give "English" as their nationality, and have to give British instead.
Seems to be a thing.
I’m pretty sure I gave both English and British as mine on the census. I can’t remember the choice on the vax - you might be right. In any case, I think one should be able to say English/Scots etc. It should be the same as the census IMO.
I don't remember being asked for the Vax.
I was definitely asked, but can’t remember what choices I was given. A few hours later I was having feverish side effects which possibly wiped my memory!!
I find it very hubristic to assume that the Lib Dems would automatically vote Labour over Tory. Many would, but others wouldn't.
Personally speaking I could easily be a Lib Dem voters, especially orange book, but not Labour.
In 1983 didn't the opinion polls show that most Alliance voters preferred a Thatcher government over a Foot one? So quite possibly the Alliance far from splitting the "anti-Conservative" vote could have split the anti-Foot vote too.
Having been disappointed in various ways by both of the larger parties, I suspect the only offer which might cement any kind of electoral alliance would be a cast iron commitment to PR. In the end that’s the only way the smaller parties have any prospect getting a real say.
The Lib Dems had a real say in 2010.
Also, PR might mean it's a very different set of small parties having a say.
Progressive Alliance easily won GE 2019 on 52.4% of the vote!
Right-wing Alliance only got 46.8%!
(tables shown up-thread)
I trust you on the figures, but I can't be bothered trying to work out your calculation; Are Lib Dems Proggressive Alliance or Right-wing Alliance?
Horrifying stuff. Quadruply worse because it's on Finchley road, one of the main places of residence for British Jews
It’s vile, it’s disgusting. You can support the Palestinian cause without resorting to such foul anti Semitic slurs.
It's outrageous. And it is an obvious threat of great violence, with a specific target: so it is surely illegal
And they have been filmed and the Met Police can identify them by the Car Reg
Arrest and prosecute, hard
If only - mind you plod would be straight round after some 78 year old street preacher quoting from the bible or someone making a "hurtful" (but lawful) tweet
Boils my piss
Took them all of 5 minutes to arrest the doddery old Christian quoting the Bible. These guys are driving through Jewish districts of London demanding rape and threatening murder. FFS
This is why the police are not as respected by ordinary people as they used to be.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
And you completely fail to understand what the vaccines are here to achieve. It's to stop people going to hospital, whatever they do beyond that is merely a bonus. Both AZ and Pfizer prevent hospitalisation with both doses to a very high degree.
No. The problem is that your attention span is apparently so short that you can't remember more than the first part of the post you started to argue with in the first place.
It's not a question of herd immunity per se. It's a question of (1) whether we reach herd immunity, (2) how many more infections there will be if we don't and (3) what the case fatality rate will be after vaccination.
Too hard to grasp?
1. You're literally contradicting the first line of the paragraph, does herd immunity matter or doesn't it, make up your mind. 2. No one cares about the infection rate if it isn't feeding through to hospitals. 3. We already know from studies done in the US, UK, Israel and Europe based on actual real world fucking data that the CFR for vaccinated people is extremely low.
Once again, the PHE Siren study showed that a single dose of AZ or Pfizer resulted in a cumulative reduction of 80% in the hospitalisation rate, for two doses of Pfizer this rises to around 95% and the AZ study is ongoing. You're making this about efficacy against asymptomatic infection, but that's never been what vaccines are here to do. I'll keep saying it until you understand it, vaccines are here to stop people from going to hospital for COVID, what they do beyond that is a bonus.
Honestly, you seem to think you're always the smartest guy in the room, people who think that way are prone to making idiotic mistakes just as you are on this whole "yeah but it doesn't stop people getting infected" idea.
Agreed. Slightly tangentially positive tests also appear to be falling on the Zoe app, which I hadn’t expected. It’s too soon to call a trend but worth keeping an eye on (it tends to be a fortnight or so ahead of government data IIRC).
Usual caveats of I'm a lawyer not an epidemologist, but the more I see about the Indian variant, the more I think it's going to fizzle, just like the South African variant etc. It may become dominant here, but I strongly suspect that it'll be dominant in the same way Kent variant was a month ago - small numbers and not really a threat.
Do you mean SA variant in your final sentence?
No, I meant Kent. SA was never dominant here. Kent variant a month ago was dominant, but low numbers, not a threat to opening up due to the vaccine program etc. So what I meant to say was instead of Kent variant it may be Indian variant making up 80%+ of our cases, but if numbers of cases/hospitalisations are low, it doesn't really matter which variant is dominant. Obviously I'm not saying it wouldn't be a horrific threat in an unvaccinated population with no restrictions.
I think most of our cases are Kentish now, but I take your wider point.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
And you completely fail to understand what the vaccines are here to achieve. It's to stop people going to hospital, whatever they do beyond that is merely a bonus. Both AZ and Pfizer prevent hospitalisation with both doses to a very high degree.
No. The problem is that your attention span is apparently so short that you can't remember more than the first part of the post you started to argue with in the first place.
It's not a question of herd immunity per se. It's a question of (1) whether we reach herd immunity, (2) how many more infections there will be if we don't and (3) what the case fatality rate will be after vaccination.
Too hard to grasp?
1. You're literally contradicting the first line of the paragraph, does herd immunity matter or doesn't it, make up your mind. 2. No one cares about the infection rate if it isn't feeding through to hospitals. 3. We already know from studies done in the US, UK, Israel and Europe based on actual real world fucking data that the CFR for vaccinated people is extremely low.
Once again, the PHE Siren study showed that a single dose of AZ or Pfizer resulted in a cumulative reduction of 80% in the hospitalisation rate, for two doses of Pfizer this rises to around 95% and the AZ study is ongoing. You're making this about efficacy against asymptomatic infection, but that's never been what vaccines are here to do. I'll keep saying it until you understand it, vaccines are here to stop people from going to hospital for COVID, what they do beyond that is a bonus.
Honestly, you seem to think you're always the smartest guy in the room, people who think that way are prone to making idiotic mistakes just as you are on this whole "yeah but it doesn't stop people getting infected" idea.
Agreed. Slightly tangentially positive tests also appear to be falling on the Zoe app, which I hadn’t expected. It’s too soon to call a trend but worth keeping an eye on (it tends to be a fortnight or so ahead of government data IIRC).
Usual caveats of I'm a lawyer not an epidemologist, but the more I see about the Indian variant, the more I think it's going to fizzle, just like the South African variant etc. It may become dominant here, but I strongly suspect that it'll be dominant in the same way Kent variant was a month ago - small numbers and not really a threat.
Do you mean SA variant in your final sentence?
No, I meant Kent. SA was never dominant here. Kent variant a month ago was dominant, but low numbers, not a threat to opening up due to the vaccine program etc. So what I meant to say was instead of Kent variant it may be Indian variant making up 80%+ of our cases, but if numbers of cases/hospitalisations are low, it doesn't really matter which variant is dominant. Obviously I'm not saying it wouldn't be a horrific threat in an unvaccinated population with no restrictions.
Ultimately of course the ideal is to have a largely harmless variant becoming pre-eminent. If the "aim" of a virus is to assert dominance, but not primarily to cause harm, then the best strategy becomes for it to spread rapidly through the population and not put up any resistance to it. I don't know how dangerous this variant really is, even in an unvaccinated population (it is not ridiculous to think that perception could be skewed by what are inevitably large numbers in India, and the quality of healthcare in that country).
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Remember that many Indians came via Uganda. Also that India is approx 15% Muslim (a little less at the period of high migration). The Muslim populations of Bangladesh, Pakistan and India are quite similar in numbers.
Also:
One that surprised me last week is that no other EU countries have significant Indian-origin populations.
UK is 1.4m. Next on the list is Italy at 10% of that.
Isn't that down to the UK hiring doctors from that part of the world and you know being the pre-eminent colonial power in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh?
The latter explains why we have so much immigration from that part of the world, for good or ill British colonialism/immigration/conquest of other countries explains why we went for mass immigration from that part of the world
The likes of Portuguese India consisted of a few goat herders whilst the British Raj controlled everything.
Agree.
I was surprised that it was quite 10:1, though.
I was also puzzled that the boroughs suffering are mostly - I understood - Pakistani/Bangladeshi minorities rather than Indian minorities.
However, there still are Indian heritage people in Blackburn and Bolton.
My theory is that in Bolton/Blackburn there have been a few supersrpeader events associated with individuals who partly through sheer bad luck were infected with the Indian variant, possibly associated with Eid (hence spreading - I think? - through the Muslim population of Muslim-heavy boroughs).
And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."
... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.
And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).
And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).
The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.
I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.
The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.
Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.
I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.
The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?
We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.
Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.
Your whole premise is flawed.
So you assert, but you cite no evidence.
My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?
Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.
How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.
69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.
This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.
Some people have PTSD from the government’s deliberate scare messaging. Some were burned by hugely underplaying covid back in Feb / March 2020 and hence now lap up doom porn to compensate for their prior error. Others predicted covid was going to be Disease X and we’d never have effective vaccines. They are annoyed that their clairvoyance was wrong and are driven by confirmation bias.
Truth is, this was a generationally nasty virus but nowhere near as bad as was feared early on. Some of the restrictions were helpful, many were not and some were actively harmful even against the narrow goal of reducing covid deaths, yet alone broader measures. And finally, the UK is now through it, a bit poorer and with society much changed. But it’s done.
This from a guy who sat three years in a Shadow Cabinet as antisemitism ran riot in the Party around him.
There must be consequences indeed.
As someone who saw leaked parts of the Islaamaphobia report* on the Conservative party, the idea that the above will ever be punished is quite funny.
*Which will never be published** **Not because it highlights Islamaphobia in the Conservative party, especially. But the *complaints* were, in a number of cases.... er.... interesting.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
Can you give me some data that shows the efficacy of AstraZenica is 50%-60% in all cohorts (not just the over 70s) as in a discussion about herd immunity that is vital.
Chris read some data 4 months ago and doesn't seem to think anything has changed since then. No point in engaging until he updates his data sets.
This forum seems to be full of people who don't see the point of engaging with the facts!
As for recent "real world" data on efficacy against infections, here's the preprint from just three weeks ago from the ONS infection survey, which is based on random PCR tests, and therefore picks up all infections, not just symptomatic ones: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.22.21255913v1.full.pdf
It shows an efficacy of 61% for asymptomatic and 63% for asymptomatic, 21 days or more after the first dose of AstraZeneca (insufficient data so far on the effect of two doses).
Not that I'm under any illusion that anyone wants to know that.
Single dose for asymptomatic infection, that study doesn't look into the hospitalisation rate for those people. Even at 61/63% it's higher than your range of 50-60% and it's with a single dose. I don't know if you read or watch the news at all, we're currently doing around 400k second doses per day.
And CDC released updated real-world data for Pfizer and Moderna for effectiveness against infection, transmission, hospitalization, ICU and death for both 1st and 2nd doses, all of which are well north of the numbers Chris is using.
Fact of the matter is that after two doses, we are talking 90-98% effectiveness against all the parameters, and that once we get 90% of the 12+ population vaccinated, we'll achieve herd immunity against Indian 2 even if its R0 is 6 (which has yet to be confirmed with good data).
And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."
... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.
And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).
And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).
The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.
I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.
The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.
Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.
I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.
The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?
We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.
Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.
Your whole premise is flawed.
So you assert, but you cite no evidence.
My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?
Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.
How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.
69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.
This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.
Some people have PTSD from the government’s deliberate scare messaging. Some were burned by hugely underplaying covid back in Feb / March 2020 and hence now lap up doom porn to compensate for their prior error. Others predicted covid was going to be Disease X and we’d never have effective vaccines. They are annoyed that their clairvoyance was wrong and are driven by confirmation bias.
Truth is, this was a generationally nasty virus but nowhere near as bad as was feared early on. Some of the restrictions were helpful, many were not and some were actively harmful even against the narrow goal of reducing covid deaths, yet alone broader measures. And finally, the UK is now through it, a bit poorer and with society much changed. But it’s done.
The average weekly death toll in the UK in recent years is around 12,500.
Last week, 74 died with Covid.
That number may rise a little. But only because a number of people who were offered protection from it chose not to take it. And will die as a consequence of that decision.
Normal life cannot now be prevented just because people take the bet it will not get them - and lose.
I think there's one important thing your analysis misses.
Real world efficacy data for AstraZeneca is dramatically better than that achieved in Phase 3 trials.
Why?
Because trials measured people getting CV19 relative to the placebo pretty much immediately after getting vaccinated. But we now know that efficacy builds over quite a long period of time for AstraZeneca (and for J&J). Simply, after four weeks you don't have that much protection; but after 14 weeks (i.e. two weeks after your second dose) you have lots.
There was similarly promising data out of India this week, looking at healthcare workers who'd been double jabbed, and which showed very high levels of protection (again, above 90%) against the new variant.
Now, sure, there's more work that needs to be done. But it's very important to realise that - in the real world - the vaccines are proving very efficacious.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
Can you give me some data that shows the efficacy of AstraZenica is 50%-60% in all cohorts (not just the over 70s) as in a discussion about herd immunity that is vital.
Chris read some data 4 months ago and doesn't seem to think anything has changed since then. No point in engaging until he updates his data sets.
This forum seems to be full of people who don't see the point of engaging with the facts!
As for recent "real world" data on efficacy against infections, here's the preprint from just three weeks ago from the ONS infection survey, which is based on random PCR tests, and therefore picks up all infections, not just symptomatic ones: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.22.21255913v1.full.pdf
It shows an efficacy of 61% for asymptomatic and 63% for asymptomatic, 21 days or more after the first dose of AstraZeneca (insufficient data so far on the effect of two doses).
Not that I'm under any illusion that anyone wants to know that.
If this new alliance made their one policy pledge to immediately implement a different voting system followed by a dissolution and a new election then I can certainly see many people who had felt trapped by FPTP voting for the local candidate whoever they nominally stood for.
I find it very hubristic to assume that the Lib Dems would automatically vote Labour over Tory. Many would, but others wouldn't.
Personally speaking I could easily be a Lib Dem voters, especially orange book, but not Labour.
In 1983 didn't the opinion polls show that most Alliance voters preferred a Thatcher government over a Foot one? So quite possibly the Alliance far from splitting the "anti-Conservative" vote could have split the anti-Foot vote too.
Having been disappointed in various ways by both of the larger parties, I suspect the only offer which might cement any kind of electoral alliance would be a cast iron commitment to PR. In the end that’s the only way the smaller parties have any prospect getting a real say.
The Lib Dems had a real say in 2010.
Also, PR might mean it's a very different set of small parties having a say.
This is key.
We wouldn't have the same parties if we had PR.
Which might, come to mention it, be a good argument in favour of PR...
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes: knowing the truth about Israel's treatment both of Palestinians and of Arab Israelis is enough to explain why the Israeli government should lead to people's supporting of a terrorist organization.
Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.
You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?
(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and (2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60% (3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.
Can you give me some data that shows the efficacy of AstraZenica is 50%-60% in all cohorts (not just the over 70s) as in a discussion about herd immunity that is vital.
Chris read some data 4 months ago and doesn't seem to think anything has changed since then. No point in engaging until he updates his data sets.
This forum seems to be full of people who don't see the point of engaging with the facts!
As for recent "real world" data on efficacy against infections, here's the preprint from just three weeks ago from the ONS infection survey, which is based on random PCR tests, and therefore picks up all infections, not just symptomatic ones: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.22.21255913v1.full.pdf
It shows an efficacy of 61% for asymptomatic and 63% for asymptomatic, 21 days or more after the first dose of AstraZeneca (insufficient data so far on the effect of two doses).
Not that I'm under any illusion that anyone wants to know that.
1. That the protection against disease in the study that Chris cites (above) is entirely consistent with the data shown in the table. Which it should be be. It is, I believe one of the input studies.
2. The effectiveness of the second doses. This explains why the Government is interested in accelerating the second doses in the vulnerable groups
I think there's one important thing your analysis misses.
Real world efficacy data for AstraZeneca is dramatically better than that achieved in Phase 3 trials.
Why?
Because trials measured people getting CV19 relative to the placebo pretty much immediately after getting vaccinated. But we now know that efficacy builds over quite a long period of time for AstraZeneca (and for J&J). Simply, after four weeks you don't have that much protection; but after 14 weeks (i.e. two weeks after your second dose) you have lots.
There was similarly promising data out of India this week, looking at healthcare workers who'd been double jabbed, and which showed very high levels of protection (again, above 90%) against the new variant.
Now, sure, there's more work that needs to be done. But it's very important to realise that - in the real world - the vaccines are proving very efficacious.
The Oxford team looks to have made an incredible vaccine that was trialled extremely poorly. Hopefully AZ/Oxford will have learned a lot from this experience and the next time they need to trial a vaccine they will do it properly like Pfizer and Moderna rather than the disjointed trial they had.
For Labour doing a deal with the LDs whereby Labour focuses on London, the North and Midlands and the LDs focus on most of the South would make sense from their perspective
Bear in mind that the published number for mild to moderate CV19 efficacy for J&J was in the 60s. But for went from bugger all in the first few weeks (which are still counted in the test result numbers) up to more than 90% (albeit with big confidence intervals) at the 10 week level.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
I think, to somewhat misquote Team America, you’re just an inch and a half away with that analogy.
I think there's one important thing your analysis misses.
Real world efficacy data for AstraZeneca is dramatically better than that achieved in Phase 3 trials.
Why?
Because trials measured people getting CV19 relative to the placebo pretty much immediately after getting vaccinated. But we now know that efficacy builds over quite a long period of time for AstraZeneca (and for J&J). Simply, after four weeks you don't have that much protection; but after 14 weeks (i.e. two weeks after your second dose) you have lots.
There was similarly promising data out of India this week, looking at healthcare workers who'd been double jabbed, and which showed very high levels of protection (again, above 90%) against the new variant.
Now, sure, there's more work that needs to be done. But it's very important to realise that - in the real world - the vaccines are proving very efficacious.
The Oxford team looks to have made an incredible vaccine that was trialled extremely poorly. Hopefully AZ/Oxford will have learned a lot from this experience and the next time they need to trial a vaccine they will do it properly like Pfizer and Moderna rather than the disjointed trial they had.
Yep: they ran a very poor trial, and they combined that with very poor messaging.
I mean, getting publicly slapped down by the FDA; that's something no big pharma company should ever do.
But the underlying vaccine is great. At the 10-12 week level, I doubt there's going any functional difference in efficacy between PFE/Moderna and AZ.
Edit to add: if I were Oxford University, I'd be pretty pissed with AZ.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.
"Nice Suit. John Philips, London. I have two myself. Rumor has it Arafat buys his there ..."
Like a well-oiled military machine from start to finish, plus with a London 2012 style of service from car parking volunteers to reception staff to medical staff. Also, the personal service isn't lost too: 3-4 minutes of chat and small talk first before the shot (which takes seconds) and space for a couple of jokes too from the two nurses.
Extremely impressive. We are very very good at single-minded national efforts. Extremely good.
I totally agree.
What is nice is that, around here at least, they seem to be sharing shifts out so that as many volunteers can help as possible. I know several sitting and ex councillors, for example, who have helped out with things around jabbing and surge testing in the area. They all seem to get 1 shift per week.
Someone has thought that through. Keep everyone happy.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
I think, to somewhat misquote Team America, you’re just an inch and a half away with that analogy.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.
"Nice Suit. John Philips, London. I have two myself. Rumor has it Arafat buys his there ..."
Please can we not talk about Christmas movies in May.
And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."
... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.
And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).
And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).
The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.
I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.
The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.
Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.
I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.
The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?
We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.
Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.
Your whole premise is flawed.
So you assert, but you cite no evidence.
My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?
Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.
How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.
69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.
This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.
Some people have PTSD from the government’s deliberate scare messaging. Some were burned by hugely underplaying covid back in Feb / March 2020 and hence now lap up doom porn to compensate for their prior error. Others predicted covid was going to be Disease X and we’d never have effective vaccines. They are annoyed that their clairvoyance was wrong and are driven by confirmation bias.
Truth is, this was a generationally nasty virus but nowhere near as bad as was feared early on. Some of the restrictions were helpful, many were not and some were actively harmful even against the narrow goal of reducing covid deaths, yet alone broader measures. And finally, the UK is now through it, a bit poorer and with society much changed. But it’s done.
The average weekly death toll in the UK in recent years is around 12,500.
Last week, 74 died with Covid.
That number may rise a little. But only because a number of people who were offered protection from it chose not to take it. And will die as a consequence of that decision.
Normal life cannot now be prevented just because people take the bet it will not get them - and lose.
"That number may rise a little. But only because a number of people who were offered protection from it chose not to take it. And will die as a consequence of that decision."
Even that may not come true due to herd immunity cutting off replication routes.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.
"Nice Suit. John Philips, London. I have two myself. Rumor has it Arafat buys his there ..."
Please can we not talk about Christmas movies in May.
On thread, it took about fifteen years for Labour supporters to forgive the LDs for the break away of the SDP. It'll probably take about 15 years for Labour voters to forgive the LDs for going into coalition with the Conservative Party.
If (and it's far from a given) the LDs manage to maintain their challenger position, then they can probably benefit meaningfully from tactical voting come 2028. (And may even manage to benefit a bit in 2024.)
However, they really need some kind of big "thing" - like opposition to the Iraq war was when Blair was PM - that they can use to propel themselves to national relevance.
For Labour doing a deal with the LDs whereby Labour focuses on London, the North and Midlands and the LDs focus on most of the South would make sense from their perspective
But only once they have abandoned all hope of ever winning another election under FPTP, and agree to ram through PR at the head of a future coalition. We may be some considerable distance from that point.
Re herd immunity: it is worth remembering that Pfizer and Moderna offer much *quicker* protection than AZ. Therefore, the coming weeks, when the UK is highly likely to get up to 3m+ first doses a week, are going to see a massive drop in the number of individuals likely to transmit CV19.
"This forum seems to be full of people who don't see the point of engaging with the facts!"
Including the author of above (any guesses who that is) who as far as I can tell has yet to recognize ANY "facts" other than ones he's presenting as gospel.
Except by twisting their words? And/or insulting their intelligence?
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.
Indeed. But you don't have to be able to run faster than the predator - only faster than the slowest prey.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
I think, to somewhat misquote Team America, you’re just an inch and a half away with that analogy.
I like your thinking.
Great job, team. Head back to base for debriefing and cocktails!
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.
Indeed. But you don't have to be able to run faster than the predator - only faster than the slowest prey.
With Arafat et al, it wasn't a matter of running faster than anyone. He had the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian people to plunder, without any recourse for anyone else.
David Paton @cricketwyvern · 3h In case you were wondering, this is not a spoof: SAGE really have presented a paper to Govt suggesting step 4 of the roadmap may lead to 10k hospitalisations /day in England. In fact, the upper bound projection is 20k /day. This is from serious academics at top universities ...
David Paton @cricketwyvern · 3h Remember, policies based on projections like these from SAGE have profound implications for business, for public finances and for the health & wellbeing & livelihoods of millions of people.
I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.
If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.
Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.
To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.
Indeed. But you don't have to be able to run faster than the predator - only faster than the slowest prey.
With Arafat et al, it wasn't a matter of running faster than anyone. He had the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian people to plunder, without any recourse for anyone else.
I know - I was in Yemen when the PLA decamped from Lebanon en masse to Sana'a and got to know many of the PLA leaders in person. I was speaking in the context of should there be another election where the PLO take on Hamas.
The similar posts beneath are unreal - the megaphone shouting "F the Jews" and talking of rape, the three young boys, one with the Israeli flag on the sole of his shoes, saying "Israel is not real"
Incredible scenes, one of the major unthought of down sides of multiculturalism. The people who introduced the concept - Roy Jenkins, Lord Lester etc - arrogantly thought that the commonwealth immigrants and their descendants would be so happy to be called British they'd forget their roots
I dare say a few hearty white Englishmen who can trace their ancestry back to Ethelred aren't wholly immune from such bigotry.
Of course, I agree. I don't know that we see them in their thousands parading the streets telling reporters that other ethnic/religious groups don't exist, or that their daughters should be raped though. The anti BLM demos last year? I dont know that they were openly racist, although maybe the people on them just dont shout about it anymore
And even if we did, why invite millions of new people with similarly strong views against other religions and races into the country?
In my city we had a few thousand white Brits bellowing about being up to their knees in Fenian blood yesterday.
I find it fascinating how these epidemic waves do seem to follow Farr's Law, even when a wave is not infecting anywhere near herd immunity levels of the population.
The similar posts beneath are unreal - the megaphone shouting "F the Jews" and talking of rape, the three young boys, one with the Israeli flag on the sole of his shoes, saying "Israel is not real"
Incredible scenes, one of the major unthought of down sides of multiculturalism. The people who introduced the concept - Roy Jenkins, Lord Lester etc - arrogantly thought that the commonwealth immigrants and their descendants would be so happy to be called British they'd forget their roots
I dare say a few hearty white Englishmen who can trace their ancestry back to Ethelred aren't wholly immune from such bigotry.
Of course, I agree. I don't know that we see them in their thousands parading the streets telling reporters that other ethnic/religious groups don't exist, or that their daughters should be raped though. The anti BLM demos last year? I dont know that they were openly racist, although maybe the people on them just dont shout about it anymore
And even if we did, why invite millions of new people with similarly strong views against other religions and races into the country?
In my city we had a few thousand white Brits bellowing about being up to their knees in Fenian blood yesterday.
That would be a city in Scotland would it?
So not "white Scots"?
Yep, the UJ waving, sectarian bigots are noted for preferring to be called Scots rather than Brits.
The similar posts beneath are unreal - the megaphone shouting "F the Jews" and talking of rape, the three young boys, one with the Israeli flag on the sole of his shoes, saying "Israel is not real"
Incredible scenes, one of the major unthought of down sides of multiculturalism. The people who introduced the concept - Roy Jenkins, Lord Lester etc - arrogantly thought that the commonwealth immigrants and their descendants would be so happy to be called British they'd forget their roots
I dare say a few hearty white Englishmen who can trace their ancestry back to Ethelred aren't wholly immune from such bigotry.
Of course, I agree. I don't know that we see them in their thousands parading the streets telling reporters that other ethnic/religious groups don't exist, or that their daughters should be raped though. The anti BLM demos last year? I dont know that they were openly racist, although maybe the people on them just dont shout about it anymore
And even if we did, why invite millions of new people with similarly strong views against other religions and races into the country?
In my city we had a few thousand white Brits bellowing about being up to their knees in Fenian blood yesterday.
That would be a city in Scotland would it?
So not "white Scots"?
You're being exclusivist. More than a few would be from the Six Counties.
The similar posts beneath are unreal - the megaphone shouting "F the Jews" and talking of rape, the three young boys, one with the Israeli flag on the sole of his shoes, saying "Israel is not real"
Incredible scenes, one of the major unthought of down sides of multiculturalism. The people who introduced the concept - Roy Jenkins, Lord Lester etc - arrogantly thought that the commonwealth immigrants and their descendants would be so happy to be called British they'd forget their roots
I dare say a few hearty white Englishmen who can trace their ancestry back to Ethelred aren't wholly immune from such bigotry.
Of course, I agree. I don't know that we see them in their thousands parading the streets telling reporters that other ethnic/religious groups don't exist, or that their daughters should be raped though. The anti BLM demos last year? I dont know that they were openly racist, although maybe the people on them just dont shout about it anymore
And even if we did, why invite millions of new people with similarly strong views against other religions and races into the country?
In my city we had a few thousand white Brits bellowing about being up to their knees in Fenian blood yesterday.
The similar posts beneath are unreal - the megaphone shouting "F the Jews" and talking of rape, the three young boys, one with the Israeli flag on the sole of his shoes, saying "Israel is not real"
Incredible scenes, one of the major unthought of down sides of multiculturalism. The people who introduced the concept - Roy Jenkins, Lord Lester etc - arrogantly thought that the commonwealth immigrants and their descendants would be so happy to be called British they'd forget their roots
I dare say a few hearty white Englishmen who can trace their ancestry back to Ethelred aren't wholly immune from such bigotry.
Of course, I agree. I don't know that we see them in their thousands parading the streets telling reporters that other ethnic/religious groups don't exist, or that their daughters should be raped though. The anti BLM demos last year? I dont know that they were openly racist, although maybe the people on them just dont shout about it anymore
And even if we did, why invite millions of new people with similarly strong views against other religions and races into the country?
In my city we had a few thousand white Brits bellowing about being up to their knees in Fenian blood yesterday.
That would be a city in Scotland would it?
So not "white Scots"?
A "reverse Andy Murray"?
No: as I say, TUD is being precise and fair in his inclusiveness.
Re herd immunity: it is worth remembering that Pfizer and Moderna offer much *quicker* protection than AZ. Therefore, the coming weeks, when the UK is highly likely to get up to 3m+ first doses a week, are going to see a massive drop in the number of individuals likely to transmit CV19.
Re herd immunity: it is worth remembering that Pfizer and Moderna offer much *quicker* protection than AZ. Therefore, the coming weeks, when the UK is highly likely to get up to 3m+ first doses a week, are going to see a massive drop in the number of individuals likely to transmit CV19.
You can't even call Union flag waving, anti Scottish independence fanatical supporters of the UK Brits any more. It's political correctness gone mad I tells ye.
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
You can't even call Union flag waving, anti Scottish independence fanatical supporters of the UK Brits any more. It's political correctness gone mad I tells ye.
You can call me a Brit all you like M8 - because that's what I am.
You can't even call Union flag waving, anti Scottish independence fanatical supporters of the UK Brits any more. It's political correctness gone mad I tells ye.
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.
And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."
... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.
And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).
And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).
The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.
I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.
The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.
Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.
I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.
The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?
We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.
Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.
Your whole premise is flawed.
So you assert, but you cite no evidence.
My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?
Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.
How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.
69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.
This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.
Indeed. How many healthy under 40s have died of Covid since the pandemic began?
I’ve not seen the latest figures, but as of August 2020 that figure stood at 38 individuals.
Ah but... Long Covid...
I need to see more evidence about this. Is it proven? Could be a reaction to trauma, a rekindling of glandular fever, or a whole host of things. More data and analysis is required.
Long Covid is going to be prevented to a huge degree by vaccination.
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Was there a particularly high number of viral immunologists in the group?
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.
The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.
Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.
And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.
Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.
Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.
On topic, the assumption that a progressive alliance would sweep the board is bollocks. If one came about I would come out for example and vote tory purely on I don't want pr and I have abstained since 2010 as there is never anyone worth voting for in my constituency only having con lab ld to vote for. The progressive alliance would try and bring in pr without a referendum which frankly I think is shit. Any major constitutional change should get the ok from voters. However they know voters wouldn't support PR anymore than they did av. Bring in PR and I walk away totally as I refuse to give my vote to anyone when I dont know what I am voting for. The coalition left a bad enough taste in my mouth when they claimed my vote was part of a mandate for a manifesto I wouldn't have voted for
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.
The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.
Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.
And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.
Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.
Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.
And of course those younger unvaccinated ones who do get covid will add to herd immunity once recovered
I really do not see this as an issue and am pleased Boris is opening tomorrow, and with a sensible expression of caution, but is not bowing to the zero covid and anti HMG grouping who would have us all tied down until covid is eliminated, which is just absurd
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.
The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.
Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.
And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.
Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.
Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.
Cases now also appear to be falling in… India. Surprising as it might seem, I haven’t seen anything on the TV news about that!
On topic, the assumption that a progressive alliance would sweep the board is bollocks. If one came about I would come out for example and vote tory purely on I don't want pr and I have abstained since 2010 as there is never anyone worth voting for in my constituency only having con lab ld to vote for. The progressive alliance would try and bring in pr without a referendum which frankly I think is shit. Any major constitutional change should get the ok from voters. However they know voters wouldn't support PR anymore than they did av. Bring in PR and I walk away totally as I refuse to give my vote to anyone when I dont know what I am voting for. The coalition left a bad enough taste in my mouth when they claimed my vote was part of a mandate for a manifesto I wouldn't have voted for
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
My prediction:
Boris, being able to sense oncoming political problems relatively well, will of course become aware of this shortly. The added impetus of the back benches will help to remind him.
Combined with the SAGE predictions not coming to pass, it will end up as a triumph when we do eventually open on time.
So the conclusion to my "debate" on Israel vs Palestine is that I've been blocked. I guess I've been cancelled. 🤷♂️
Not cancelled as far as I am concerned I am just not listening. Israel and palestine are both the bad guys. They are too entrenched, the hard liners that is. It is not a problem that can be solved so ceased caring
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.
The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.
Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.
And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.
Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.
Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.
In a pub garden in Penzance. Talking to a young couple from Cardiff: they are both 29 and have been jabbed, his boss is 24 and likewise
On topic, the assumption that a progressive alliance would sweep the board is bollocks. If one came about I would come out for example and vote tory purely on I don't want pr and I have abstained since 2010 as there is never anyone worth voting for in my constituency only having con lab ld to vote for. The progressive alliance would try and bring in pr without a referendum which frankly I think is shit. Any major constitutional change should get the ok from voters. However they know voters wouldn't support PR anymore than they did av. Bring in PR and I walk away totally as I refuse to give my vote to anyone when I dont know what I am voting for. The coalition left a bad enough taste in my mouth when they claimed my vote was part of a mandate for a manifesto I wouldn't have voted for
"only having con lab ld to vote for"
Are you to the left or right of con lab ld?
I won't vote ld because they are neither liberal or democratic, I didnt vote labour because corbyn was in charge and couldn't vote tory because of their authoritarianism. If the monster raving looney party was standing they would have got my vote as most sane party
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.
The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.
Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.
And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.
Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.
Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.
In a pub garden in Penzance. Talking to a young couple from Cardiff: they are both 29 and have been jabbed, his boss is 24 and likewise
My soon to be daughter in law (37) has had her first pfizer vaccination meaning all my family are now vaccinated, my wife and I twice, my two sons, their spouse and partner, and my daughter and her husband all first dose
Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’. Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India. Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.
The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.
Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.
And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.
Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.
Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.
Cases now also appear to be falling in… India. Surprising as it might seem, I haven’t seen anything on the TV news about that!
Fantastic news for India.
For us as well - panic over the Indian variant looks to have been overblown.
Comments
There was no evidence that reductions in odds of new infections differed between the Pfizer- BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine (Figure 4A; Supplementary Table 7) whether the vaccine was received 0 to 7 days ago (P=0.965), 8 to 20 days ago (P=1.00), or ≥21 days ago (P=0.998 for Pfizer-BioNTech ≥21 days ago, one dose only, vs Oxford-AstraZeneca ≥21 days ago, one or two doses).
interesting....
Johnson and others have condemned it too. As has every poster here who commented on it.
There must be consequences indeed.
The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.
Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.
And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.
However, there still are Indian heritage people in Blackburn and Bolton.
My theory is that in Bolton/Blackburn there have been a few supersrpeader events associated with individuals who partly through sheer bad luck were infected with the Indian variant, possibly associated with Eid (hence spreading - I think? - through the Muslim population of Muslim-heavy boroughs).
Truth is, this was a generationally nasty virus but nowhere near as bad as was feared early on. Some of the restrictions were helpful, many were not and some were actively harmful even against the narrow goal of reducing covid deaths, yet alone broader measures. And finally, the UK is now through it, a bit poorer and with society much changed. But it’s done.
*Which will never be published**
**Not because it highlights Islamaphobia in the Conservative party, especially. But the *complaints* were, in a number of cases.... er.... interesting.
I'm not sure how you can believe this.
Fact of the matter is that after two doses, we are talking 90-98% effectiveness against all the parameters, and that once we get 90% of the 12+ population vaccinated, we'll achieve herd immunity against Indian 2 even if its R0 is 6 (which has yet to be confirmed with good data).
Last week, 74 died with Covid.
That number may rise a little. But only because a number of people who were offered protection from it chose not to take it. And will die as a consequence of that decision.
Normal life cannot now be prevented just because people take the bet it will not get them - and lose.
I think there's one important thing your analysis misses.
Real world efficacy data for AstraZeneca is dramatically better than that achieved in Phase 3 trials.
Why?
Because trials measured people getting CV19 relative to the placebo pretty much immediately after getting vaccinated. But we now know that efficacy builds over quite a long period of time for AstraZeneca (and for J&J). Simply, after four weeks you don't have that much protection; but after 14 weeks (i.e. two weeks after your second dose) you have lots.
Let me give you an example. Phase 3 trials pegged AZ efficacy at something in the 60s. But in Italy this week, they released real world data showing AZ with 95% efficacy against symptomatic and 99% against severe Covid.
There was similarly promising data out of India this week, looking at healthcare workers who'd been double jabbed, and which showed very high levels of protection (again, above 90%) against the new variant.
Now, sure, there's more work that needs to be done. But it's very important to realise that - in the real world - the vaccines are proving very efficacious.
From https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/986361/Vaccine_surveillance__report__week_19.pdf
We wouldn't have the same parties if we had PR.
Which might, come to mention it, be a good argument in favour of PR...
1. That the protection against disease in the study that Chris cites (above) is entirely consistent with the data shown in the table. Which it should be be. It is, I believe one of the input studies.
2. The effectiveness of the second doses. This explains why the Government is interested in accelerating the second doses in the vulnerable groups
https://twitter.com/JuliaLMarcus/status/1367159066531880961
Bear in mind that the published number for mild to moderate CV19 efficacy for J&J was in the 60s. But for went from bugger all in the first few weeks (which are still counted in the test result numbers) up to more than 90% (albeit with big confidence intervals) at the 10 week level.
I mean, getting publicly slapped down by the FDA; that's something no big pharma company should ever do.
But the underlying vaccine is great. At the 10-12 week level, I doubt there's going any functional difference in efficacy between PFE/Moderna and AZ.
Edit to add: if I were Oxford University, I'd be pretty pissed with AZ.
And can PBers guess which poster posted this?
What is nice is that, around here at least, they seem to be sharing shifts out so that as many volunteers can help as possible. I know several sitting and ex councillors, for example, who have helped out with things around jabbing and surge testing in the area. They all seem to get 1 shift per week.
Someone has thought that through. Keep everyone happy.
Even that may not come true due to herd immunity cutting off replication routes.
If (and it's far from a given) the LDs manage to maintain their challenger position, then they can probably benefit meaningfully from tactical voting come 2028. (And may even manage to benefit a bit in 2024.)
However, they really need some kind of big "thing" - like opposition to the Iraq war was when Blair was PM - that they can use to propel themselves to national relevance.
For England, since the beginning of this
00-04 9
05-09 6
10-14 12
15-19 30
20-24 59
25-29 115
30-34 210
35-39 353
40-44 570
45-49 1,128
50-54 2,011
55-59 3,285
60-64 3,870
65-69 8,070
70-74 11,048
75-79 15,314
80-84 20,407
85-89 22,243
90+ 23,552
I'd also point to Israel where new CV19 cases dropped to just 20 yesterday (https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/coronavirus-in-israel-20-new-cases-04-percent-of-tests-positive-668288). That Israeli CV19 number just keeps on droppin'.
Including the author of above (any guesses who that is) who as far as I can tell has yet to recognize ANY "facts" other than ones he's presenting as gospel.
Except by twisting their words? And/or insulting their intelligence?
@MLevitt_NP2013
The current outbreak of COVID-19 in India is ending faster than expected.
Exponential growth factor H(t) continues decreasing linearly for both cases & deaths.
Daily cases peaked & daily deaths peak soon.
From this outbreak, deaths will be ~300,000, cases ~30,000,000.
https://twitter.com/MLevitt_NP2013/status/1393962628641218561
Will India follow Gompertz?
@cricketwyvern
·
3h
In case you were wondering, this is not a spoof: SAGE really have presented a paper to Govt suggesting step 4 of the roadmap may lead to 10k hospitalisations /day in England. In fact, the upper bound projection is 20k /day. This is from serious academics at top universities ...
David Paton
@cricketwyvern
·
3h
Remember, policies based on projections like these from SAGE have profound implications for business, for public finances and for the health & wellbeing & livelihoods of millions of people.
When will the Government say enough is enough?
https://twitter.com/MiddleEastEye/status/1393588991711186944?s=20
So not "white Scots"?
Before you know it, there really will be no place for CV19 to hide.
Good behaviour = Scots
No true Scotsman is the name of a fallacy for a reason.
Ah well. At least the reverse Andy Murray myth got dispelled - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-34909845
Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India.
Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.
Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.
And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.
Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.
Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.
The progressive alliance would try and bring in pr without a referendum which frankly I think is shit. Any major constitutional change should get the ok from voters. However they know voters wouldn't support PR anymore than they did av.
Bring in PR and I walk away totally as I refuse to give my vote to anyone when I dont know what I am voting for. The coalition left a bad enough taste in my mouth when they claimed my vote was part of a mandate for a manifesto I wouldn't have voted for
And now they’re legging it to the clubhouse as there’s lightning about.
I really do not see this as an issue and am pleased Boris is opening tomorrow, and with a sensible expression of caution, but is not bowing to the zero covid and anti HMG grouping who would have us all tied down until covid is eliminated, which is just absurd
Are you to the left or right of con lab ld?
Boris, being able to sense oncoming political problems relatively well, will of course become aware of this shortly. The added impetus of the back benches will help to remind him.
Combined with the SAGE predictions not coming to pass, it will end up as a triumph when we do eventually open on time.
Can Labour go any lower?
https://twitter.com/TheIsraelink/status/1393961886966747138
Terror by vehicle
For us as well - panic over the Indian variant looks to have been overblown.