Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
The Portuguese are pretty much the only other country in Europe doing lots of sequencing.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
To be fair, there's a lag between cases and deaths. Nevertheless, it is *extremely* encouraging that hospital bed usage (in England at least) is growing dramatically slower than case numbers.
More importantly Rob is taking the down slope.
For the comparable case numbers in September deaths 7 day average was 47.
I was looking at the upward slope, but before the wave in December/January.
7 day average hasn't hit November/Dec numbers yet.
Good point. Closest I see is around 10th Oct, where deaths were about 5x what they are now. That clearly suggests the link has been broken.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
The Portuguese are pretty much the only other country in Europe doing lots of sequencing.
And, purely coincidentally, the country that has noticed a Delta outbreak.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
We're reaching the point where morons really should shut up.
{Looks up phone number of the mad lawyer with the baseball bat}
Look gentlemen - you can't fight in the War Room......
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Considering they're miles behind in vaccinations it's not that ridiculous.
Though what would make more sense is shutting down Schengen.
EU are not that far behind they are on 28.8% fully vaccinated the UK was on that number 14 May, and 47.7% with one does, UK had that on 14 April, so 5 to 9 weeks behind, in the UK cases botted out on 4 May, and then started to rise slowly, in the EU they are still falling overall. So I would anticipate that by the time Delta becomes doment in the the EU they may well be more vaccinated than the UK was.
The disition to stop using the AZ on the under 40s is looking more questionable by the day!
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
We're reaching the point where morons really should shut up.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
A million tests per day must be costing billions that could be better put to some other use. We don't spend billions testing for the flu and with the vulnerable vaccinated that's basically what this is now.
While we still have restrictions for the purpose of restricting the spread of infection, then it makes sense to test as well, with the purpose of identifying the infectious and having them isolate, to reduce the spread of infection.
But once we end all domestic restrictions, then perhaps we should consider stopping testing for the purpose of isolating the infectious. You might replace it with a standard public health message asking people to stay at home when they have symptoms of any respiratory infection, or at least wear a mask if they have to go out while having symptoms of a respiratory infection.
You could maintain, perhaps even expand, population-level testing to keep an eye on the big picture, e.g. with the ONS survey testing, and perhaps with testing of sewage. Then if you detect a particular surge in a location you might want to do some enhanced testing for the purpose of monitoring variants.
One of the problems with testing in the UK is that the purpose of our testing was always to test lots of people in order to reach a public commitment to test lots of people. But we never did anything useful with that ability to test lots of people.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
We're reaching the point where morons really should shut up.
Yes you should.
Right. Everyone stand in a corner facing the wall, for 3 minutes plus 1 minute for each year of your ages.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
To be fair, there's a lag between cases and deaths. Nevertheless, it is *extremely* encouraging that hospital bed usage (in England at least) is growing dramatically slower than case numbers.
I have been watching the numbers at my Trust. Broadly flat at 30-35 over the last month. Some caught it in a hospital ward outbreak.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Considering they're miles behind in vaccinations it's not that ridiculous.
Though what would make more sense is shutting down Schengen.
Schengen has been largely suspended.
Haven't they just said that it's going to be restored at the end of the month?
Delta spreading in the UK is no big deal as we're pretty much done with vaccinations and have double dosed all the vulnerable. That's not the case in Germany or the EU generally.
The EU is catching up pretty quick, you know - they're at 28 million doses a week being done right now, and most EU countries are now above 60% of adults with at least one dose.
They also benefit from having their school summer breaks being earlier than in the UK, which will dramatically reduce transmission.
Yes, we're leading, but the gap is down to about six weeks now. So long as they keep up their pace of vaccinations, they shouldn't do any worse in this wave than we've done.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
So what are you saying the fatality rate is now?
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
The 7 day average is 12.
Which is saying that the CFR is 2.7% of what it was last October.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
So what are you saying the fatality rate is now?
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
What are you on about? Of course the fatality rate is lower, that's the whole point of the vaccines.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
The Portuguese are pretty much the only other country in Europe doing lots of sequencing.
The Danes are sequencing almost every case I think, though they have fewer per head than us.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
So what are you saying the fatality rate is now?
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
What are you on about? Of course the fatality rate is lower, that's the whole point of the vaccines.
Maybe you have a reading impediment.
What I'm doingn is asking you what you think the fatality rate is now? I've asked you twice, and you don't seem able to understand. What's the problem?
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
We're reaching the point where morons really should shut up.
Yes you should.
Right. Everyone stand in a corner facing the wall, for 3 minutes plus 1 minute for each year of your ages.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
The 7 day average is 12.
Which is saying that the CFR is 2.7% of what it was last October.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
So what are you saying the fatality rate is now?
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
What are you on about? Of course the fatality rate is lower, that's the whole point of the vaccines.
Maybe you have a reading impediment.
What I'm doingn is asking you what you think the fatality rate is now? I've asked you twice, and you don't seem able to understand. What's the problem?
I don't have the exact numbers, but at this point in the cycle in October deaths were 5x higher.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something? That would only be the case if the vaccines were equally effective at preventing you catching it as they are preventing you from dying from it. Which we know isn't the case.
And, honestly, you'd be well served being a bit less abrasive with people.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
We're reaching the point where morons really should shut up.
Latest: UK government has quietly exempted travellers attending the Climate Change #COP26 conference, Global Education Summit & ‘related events’ from both quarantine and testing
(This is in addition to exempting 3,000 UEFA ‘VIPs’ from quarantine too)
Quietly exempted? These exemptions have always been there.
I never know quite what is meant when quietly is used in these contexts. Sometimes you see 'quietly announced' regs, guidance or whatever - I mean, if something is announced at what point does it become quiet?
It's like the 5.04pm email you send out on the Friday. Click Send, then quickly shut down because you know the readers aren't going to like the content. You'll deal with the fallout on Monday.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
So what are you saying the fatality rate is now?
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
We're reaching the point where morons really should shut up.
Agreed, starting with the Smartest Guy in the Room™
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
A million tests per day must be costing billions that could be better put to some other use. We don't spend billions testing for the flu and with the vulnerable vaccinated that's basically what this is now.
I just thought I would have a look at comparable Hospitalisation rates with te EU, there are 18EU nations with Daily hospitalisations recorded on the 'Our would in data' website, of these 10 have more hospilisations per day than the UK and 8 less, so very much middle of the pack.
Perhaps if we were doing less testing, espsealy mass asymptomatic testing is schools, collages, and university's, would we know we had a new wave?
Caviat 1:for some reason this only goes u to 13 June, and things have changed a bit in last 10 days Caviat 2: ours is rising (slowly) most others, (but not all) are going down.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
A million tests per day must be costing billions that could be better put to some other use. We don't spend billions testing for the flu and with the vulnerable vaccinated that's basically what this is now.
While we still have restrictions for the purpose of restricting the spread of infection, then it makes sense to test as well, with the purpose of identifying the infectious and having them isolate, to reduce the spread of infection.
But once we end all domestic restrictions, then perhaps we should consider stopping testing for the purpose of isolating the infectious. You might replace it with a standard public health message asking people to stay at home when they have symptoms of any respiratory infection, or at least wear a mask if they have to go out while having symptoms of a respiratory infection.
You could maintain, perhaps even expand, population-level testing to keep an eye on the big picture, e.g. with the ONS survey testing, and perhaps with testing of sewage. Then if you detect a particular surge in a location you might want to do some enhanced testing for the purpose of monitoring variants.
One of the problems with testing in the UK is that the purpose of our testing was always to test lots of people in order to reach a public commitment to test lots of people. But we never did anything useful with that ability to test lots of people.
Apart from (apparently) base all subsequent decisions on the resulting numbers from that testing, until (at best) extremely recently.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
We're reaching the point where morons really should shut up.
Yes you should.
Right. Everyone stand in a corner facing the wall, for 3 minutes plus 1 minute for each year of your ages.
Latest: UK government has quietly exempted travellers attending the Climate Change #COP26 conference, Global Education Summit & ‘related events’ from both quarantine and testing
(This is in addition to exempting 3,000 UEFA ‘VIPs’ from quarantine too)
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
So what are you saying the fatality rate is now?
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
Not next month, Now, we should be opening everything now!
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
A million tests per day must be costing billions that could be better put to some other use. We don't spend billions testing for the flu and with the vulnerable vaccinated that's basically what this is now.
Aren't a lot of the tests LFTs?
When Foxjr2 went for a proper test he was the only one in the place, like something in a zombie flick.
Galloway immediately snapped back, haranguing Leadbeater for being “as clear as mud” on the issue, and insisting that the teacher shouldn’t have shown the cartoon in the first place. Apparently, had he been in charge, the whole thing “never would have happened“.
If I had a vote, I think I’d lend it to Labour to deny Galloway the satisfaction of stopping Labour from winning.
The mass vaccination centres opened in parts of London over the past couple of weekends have been incredibly popular so demand doesn't seem to be an issue.
They weren't "walk-in" centres - some form of booking needed to be made - and there were variations, Stratford, for instance, provides first doses of Pfizer for those aged 25-39 from five east London boroughs plus the City - other venues provided second vaccinations for older people.
We never really got to the notion of "24/7" vaccination centres for which some on here argued - perhaps now id the time to have some centres operating through the night and throughout the weekend to get to as many as possible.
As I said last week, there were 110,000 adults over 30 in Newham who had not received any vaccinations - hopefully this week's figures will look better.
Angela Merkel has said travellers from the UK should be quarantined wherever they arrive in the EU, as the union’s agency for disease control forecast that the Delta variant of Covid will account for 90% of cases in member states by the end of August.
Even if they're double jabbed? (Which of course 50% more of them are, than in Germany...)
It's ridiculous, the amount of fighting the last war that's been going on in this pandemic is astounding.
Spoken like only the leader of a country not dependent on summer tourism could.
She's got a point however. Would you want loads of Delta-sodden Brits coming to your town in the next few weeks?
There's a reason we're finding "lots of Delta-sodden Brits":
The UK positivity rate is a lot lower than most EU countries.
This has been the case throughout the Spring (and variant sequencing capacity in most of the EU is also still very limited, IIRC.) You're less likely to find problems if you're not looking very hard for them.
We're reaching the point where maybe we should stop testing.
A million tests per day must be costing billions that could be better put to some other use. We don't spend billions testing for the flu and with the vulnerable vaccinated that's basically what this is now.
Aren't a lot of the tests LFTs?
When Foxjr2 went for a proper test he was the only one in the place, like something in a zombie flick.
About 300k PCR a day. So still a lot by comparison to a lot of nations. Then LFT tests go from anywhere from 300k to high 100k's.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
The 7-day average of cases peaked on 1st January and the 7-day average of deaths peaked on 19th January, suggesting a lag of 18 days from the 7-day average of cases by specimen date to the 7-day average of deaths by date of death (within 28 days of a +ve Covid test).
Our most recent 7-day average for deaths is 11, on the 15th June, so we should compare this to cases 18 days previously, which would be 28th May, when the 7-day average was 3435.1 cases.
Last autumn cases reached a 7-day average of 3433.1 on 14th September, so we should look at deaths 18 days after that, which would be 2nd October, when the 7-day average was 62.7 deaths.
This comparison isn't perfect, because the pace of increase in case rates would also have an effect on the figures, but it suggests that the vaccination effect of our level of vaccination some weeks ago, was to reduce the number of deaths by a factor of 5.7 in the population as a whole (including the unvaccinated), compared to where they would be without vaccination.
This reduces the estimated IFR for Covid from ~1% to ~0.17%, and we still have more benefit from the vaccination program to come.
Galloway immediately snapped back, haranguing Leadbeater for being “as clear as mud” on the issue, and insisting that the teacher shouldn’t have shown the cartoon in the first place. Apparently, had he been in charge, the whole thing “never would have happened“.
If I had a vote, I think I’d lend it to Labour to deny Galloway the satisfaction of stopping Labour from winning.
If it was a choice of Galloway or Labour I'd vote Labour. Its not so that's fine, but if it was, then unless Labour were nominating Chris Williamson I'd hold my nose and vote Labour.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
The 7-day average of cases peaked on 1st January and the 7-day average of deaths peaked on 19th January, suggesting a lag of 18 days from the 7-day average of cases by specimen date to the 7-day average of deaths by date of death (within 28 days of a +ve Covid test).
Our most recent 7-day average for deaths is 11, on the 15th June, so we should compare this to cases 18 days previously, which would be 28th May, when the 7-day average was 3435.1 cases.
Last autumn cases reached a 7-day average of 3433.1 on 14th September, so we should look at deaths 18 days after that, which would be 2nd October, when the 7-day average was 62.7 deaths.
This comparison isn't perfect, because the pace of increase in case rates would also have an effect on the figures, but it suggests that the vaccination effect of our level of vaccination some weeks ago, was to reduce the number of deaths by a factor of 5.7 in the population as a whole (including the unvaccinated), compared to where they would be without vaccination.
This reduces the estimated IFR for Covid from ~1% to ~0.17%, and we still have more benefit from the vaccination program to come.
There is suggestion via big US antibody survey that IFR could be quite a bit higher than 1%.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
The 7 day average is 12.
Which is saying that the CFR is 2.7% of what it was last October.
????????????????????????????
Absolutely bizarre.
Why? Given that we've vaccinated the vulnerable. Why would you not expect that to happen?
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
So what are you saying the fatality rate is now?
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
What are you on about? Of course the fatality rate is lower, that's the whole point of the vaccines.
Maybe you have a reading impediment.
What I'm doingn is asking you what you think the fatality rate is now? I've asked you twice, and you don't seem able to understand. What's the problem?
Comparing the 7-day average of deaths in England with the 7-day average of cases 17 days earlier gives a CFR of about 0.3%.
One would expect from the ONS figures that the number of infections should be two to three times the number of cases, so the IFR should be down to c. 0.1% to 0.15%
Perhaps if we were doing less testing, espsealy mass asymptomatic testing is schools, collages, and university's, would we know we had a new wave?
Indeed, if there were no data, the COVID-denialists here would have nothing at all to deny.
Not that the existence of data seems to hinder them or their apologists overmuch, even when it's there staring them in the face.
I'm not sure who theses denialists are of which you speak, I've never met a person who is not aware that Covid is a real thing and is dangers especially to to old people who have not been vaccinated.
but the number of people diing form COVID is now a tenth of the number dying form Flow and Pneumonia, the number being hospitalised is about 95% less than in January.
I quite like hospitals and doctors and nurses, and I would quite like them to be around for some years to come, and to achieve that we need an economy that functions not a mountain of debut.
As we are today, Government borrowing, is a much bigger threat to the futcher of the NHS than COVID. its time to stop this madness.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
I think Chris is arguing that we have an infinite population.
After all we did just discover another 2m EU citizens we didn’t know we had...
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
But the absolute numbers are a lot lower, and the situation will continue to improve as more and more people are vaccinated. Of course people will still go to hospital with covid, and people will still die from covid, especially amongst vaccine refusers. But we can't wait around for those to get vaccinated, as they never will.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
But we're not going to get to millions of cases a day, are we? There is an upper limit - I.e.all the people without antibodies.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
In a worst-case scenario, how many more people in Britain do you think would die, if we did nothing, and let cases rise unhindered by nothing except vaccines and hand-washing?
Galloway immediately snapped back, haranguing Leadbeater for being “as clear as mud” on the issue, and insisting that the teacher shouldn’t have shown the cartoon in the first place. Apparently, had he been in charge, the whole thing “never would have happened“.
If I had a vote, I think I’d lend it to Labour to deny Galloway the satisfaction of stopping Labour from winning.
If it was a choice of Galloway or Labour I'd vote Labour. Its not so that's fine, but if it was, then unless Labour were nominating Chris Williamson I'd hold my nose and vote Labour.
I'm beginning to think that Galloways attacks on the Labour candidate, may backfire, and produce some sympathy vote, for people who might otherwise of voted Con.
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
The 7 day average is 12.
Which is saying that the CFR is 2.7% of what it was last October.
????????????????????????????
Absolutely bizarre.
Why? Given that we've vaccinated the vulnerable. Why would you not expect that to happen?
Because of pretty much all the data we have on vaccine efficacy. It is an absolutely absurd thing to say. If you look at what Malmesbury has just posted, it bears no relation to that 2.7% claim. It's ridiculous.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
You don't exactly add anything to the quality of debate on this subject. There are people who post here who quite plainly do understand statistics, like Robert Smithson, Andy Cooke, Max PB, Malmesbury, but you aren't interested in engaging with them.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
You don't exactly add anything to the quality of debate on this subject. There are people who post here who quite plainly do understand statistics, like Robert Smithson, Andy Cooke, Max PB, Malmesbury, but you aren't interested in engaging with them.
You mean telling people they are morons or that they can't read isn't adding to the debate? Who'd have thunk it.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
In a worst-case scenario, how many more people in Britain do you think would die, if we did nothing, and let cases rise unhindered by nothing except vaccines and hand-washing?
That's the question that should be answered by the people who want to remove all the counter-,measures, for heaven's sake!
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
? It is absolutely fundamental to the arguments made for opening up made by people on here that
1) there isn’t a large enough pool of people to justify treating Covid (with the vaccines) as a virus that justifies exceptional measures being taken to tackle it and;
2) with the exception of the unfortunate few who are immune suppressed, those who are most vulnerable are those who are choosing not to be vaccinated. We can’t keep society shut down for these people
I wonder what planet anyone talking about UEFA officials is on.
Cases up 44% week-on-week, and deaths up 53%. So much for the link having been broken.
How many bloody times do we have to keep going through the same cycle before people learn better?
The last time the UK was at 15k cases a day deaths were at about 450 a day. What are they now?
You're saying the fatality rate has dropped by how much exactly?
You were comparing the rises of cases and deaths, I was comparing the absolute number. There are fewer deaths now than at the same point in the cycle last October.
The 7 day average is 12.
Which is saying that the CFR is 2.7% of what it was last October.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
Look, you shouldn't do yourself down. You're a valuable member of the community, and you should have more confidence in your intellectual abilities.
That being said, the number of people in hospital with Covid is growing dramatically less quickly than the number of people being diagnosed with Covid.
In the past three weeks, the number of people being diagnosed with Covid has risen from around, 1,800 to 16,000 today. That's a roughly ten-fold increase.
By contrast, the number in hospital hasn't even doubled: it's gone from a low of 750 in England to 1,255. Furthermore the increase in "in hospital" numbers has slowed to its lowest rate in ten days.
Now it's entirely possible that reverses, and we see a dramatic increase. But right now, the number in hospital is growing at around one fifth the rate of the number of Covid cases.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
In a worst-case scenario, how many more people in Britain do you think would die, if we did nothing, and let cases rise unhindered by nothing except vaccines and hand-washing?
That's the question that should be answered by the people who want to remove all the counter-,measures, for heaven's sake!
I've seen lots of people on here do calculations of various kinds, which lead them to conclude that vaccines now make the risk manageable.
What I haven't seen from you is any counter-argument to this analysis of data, except for appeals to an infinite population.
Galloway immediately snapped back, haranguing Leadbeater for being “as clear as mud” on the issue, and insisting that the teacher shouldn’t have shown the cartoon in the first place. Apparently, had he been in charge, the whole thing “never would have happened“.
If I had a vote, I think I’d lend it to Labour to deny Galloway the satisfaction of stopping Labour from winning.
If it was a choice of Galloway or Labour I'd vote Labour. Its not so that's fine, but if it was, then unless Labour were nominating Chris Williamson I'd hold my nose and vote Labour.
I'm beginning to think that Galloways attacks on the Labour candidate, may backfire, and produce some sympathy vote, for people who might otherwise of voted Con.
I loathe Galloway with every bone in my body. The temptation to vote tactically against him would be enormous.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
Except that we can have confidence that cases, hospitalisations and deaths will not simply continue to multiply out of control without lockdowns, as in previous waves, because sooner or later they'll run up against the barrier of the vaccinated population. Which was not a factor in those previous waves, of course.
If this is untrue then why has a runaway healthcare catastrophe not occurred in Bolton, Blackburn or the other localities in the vanguard of Delta? And where, with vaccine take-up looking so stellar and the effectiveness of the vaccines against Delta proven, are the mountains of dead bodies meant to come from this time around? Moreover, even the patients who are in hospital are, on average, younger and less ill than in previous waves.
It's not even as if the positive noises are all coming from the lockdown sceptics. Far from it: the Chief Exec of NHS Providers has already come out and said that the link between cases and hospital admissions appears to have been broken. The Editor of the Health Service Journal stated tonight via Twitter that "Growth in Covid hospitalisation slowing sharply now. Actually falling in London [calculated on a week on week basis]." Even Professor Ferguson is sounding broadly optimistic about how things are going.
We can confidently expect that more people will be infected, more will end up in hospital and some more will even kick the bucket, but there is no particular reason to suppose that there will be another death tsunami, or that the hospitals will be swamped: the sole original justification for restrictions. So, then one has to consider whether or not the limited number of serious illnesses and deaths that will be prevented by months more of precautionary restrictions is worth the continuing sacrifice in terms of the non-Covid harms which are caused. It looks as if, unless something goes badly wrong in the next few weeks, the Government might actually decide that they aren't worth it, and scrap most of the restrictions. And if so, then why is this not something to be celebrated?
Covid is a serious matter, but life really shouldn't be lived around it for any longer than is strictly necessary.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
You don't exactly add anything to the quality of debate on this subject. There are people who post here who quite plainly do understand statistics, like Robert Smithson, Andy Cooke, Max PB, Malmesbury, but you aren't interested in engaging with them.
I think any one of my posts today contributes more to the debate than a post that says "You don't add anything - I prefer to believe A, B and C because I'm convinced they know what they're talking about"!
Galloway immediately snapped back, haranguing Leadbeater for being “as clear as mud” on the issue, and insisting that the teacher shouldn’t have shown the cartoon in the first place. Apparently, had he been in charge, the whole thing “never would have happened“.
If I had a vote, I think I’d lend it to Labour to deny Galloway the satisfaction of stopping Labour from winning.
If it was a choice of Galloway or Labour I'd vote Labour. Its not so that's fine, but if it was, then unless Labour were nominating Chris Williamson I'd hold my nose and vote Labour.
I'm beginning to think that Galloways attacks on the Labour candidate, may backfire, and produce some sympathy vote, for people who might otherwise of voted Con.
One can only hope so. The fewer media-savvy, charismatic, dishonest egotistical sh1ts in politics, the better.
Galloway immediately snapped back, haranguing Leadbeater for being “as clear as mud” on the issue, and insisting that the teacher shouldn’t have shown the cartoon in the first place. Apparently, had he been in charge, the whole thing “never would have happened“.
If I had a vote, I think I’d lend it to Labour to deny Galloway the satisfaction of stopping Labour from winning.
If it was a choice of Galloway or Labour I'd vote Labour. Its not so that's fine, but if it was, then unless Labour were nominating Chris Williamson I'd hold my nose and vote Labour.
I'm beginning to think that Galloways attacks on the Labour candidate, may backfire, and produce some sympathy vote, for people who might otherwise of voted Con.
I loathe Galloway with every bone in my body. The temptation to vote tactically against him would be enormous.
Vote tactically against fruit loops? You've lost your mind RCS.
The other point about the Covid situation is that once everyone has been given the opportunity to get the vaccine we’ve done pretty much all we can. If you continue to argue for restrictions at that point you are pretty much arguing for restrictions to be permanent, or at least for the foreseeable future. Which understandably large numbers of people do not accept. All it does is prolong the time for everyone who is going to catch it to catch it. At vast cost to the economy. There comes a point at which restrictions serve literally no viable purpose.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
You don't exactly add anything to the quality of debate on this subject. There are people who post here who quite plainly do understand statistics, like Robert Smithson, Andy Cooke, Max PB, Malmesbury, but you aren't interested in engaging with them.
I think any one of my posts today contributes more to the debate than a post that says "You don't add anything - I prefer to believe A, B and C because I'm convinced they know what they're talking about"!
You aren't actually putting forward a case. You're just calling people who disagree with you moronic. That does not contribute towards any meaningful debate.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
Except that we can have confidence that cases, hospitalisations and deaths will not simply continue to multiply out of control without lockdowns, as in previous waves, because sooner or later they'll run up against the barrier of the vaccinated population. Which was not a factor in those previous waves, of course.
If this is untrue then why has a runaway healthcare catastrophe not occurred in Bolton, Blackburn or the other localities in the vanguard of Delta? And where, with vaccine take-up looking so stellar and the effectiveness of the vaccines against Delta proven, are the mountains of dead bodies meant to come from this time around? Moreover, even the patients who are in hospital are, on average, younger and less ill than in previous waves.
It's not even as if the positive noises are all coming from the lockdown sceptics. Far from it: the Chief Exec of NHS Providers has already come out and said that the link between cases and hospital admissions appears to have been broken. The Editor of the Health Service Journal stated tonight via Twitter that "Growth in Covid hospitalisation slowing sharply now. Actually falling in London [calculated on a week on week basis]." Even Professor Ferguson is sounding broadly optimistic about how things are going.
We can confidently expect that more people will be infected, more will end up in hospital and some more will even kick the bucket, but there is no particular reason to suppose that there will be another death tsunami, or that the hospitals will be swamped: the sole original justification for restrictions. So, then one has to consider whether or not the limited number of serious illnesses and deaths that will be prevented by months more of precautionary restrictions is worth the continuing sacrifice in terms of the non-Covid harms which are caused. It looks as if, unless something goes badly wrong in the next few weeks, the Government might actually decide that they aren't worth it, and scrap most of the restrictions. And if so, then why is this not something to be celebrated?
Covid is a serious matter, but life really shouldn't be lived around it for any longer than is strictly necessary.
So what are your estimates of those vital numbers?
It's all very well saying "things aren't as bad as they were because of vaccines", but the point is - if we let cases just carry on increasing by 30% or 40% a week without any attempt to control them - and perhaps remove such restrictions as are still in place next month - just what percentage of those cases do YOU think will end up in hospital, and what level of confidence do you have that it won't exceed the capacity of the NHS?
The other point about the Covid situation is that once everyone has been given the opportunity to get the vaccine we’ve done pretty much all we can. If you continue to argue for restrictions at that point you are pretty much arguing for restrictions to be permanent, or at least for the foreseeable future. Which understandably large numbers of people do not accept. All it does is prolong the time for everyone who is going to catch it to catch it. At vast cost to the economy. There comes a point at which restrictions serve literally no viable purpose.
Exactly.
It might even be better for everyone who isn't vaxxed to get this now rather than later when variant Omega+ comes along. _Nobody_ is going to escape it forever unless they die of something else soon.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
You don't exactly add anything to the quality of debate on this subject. There are people who post here who quite plainly do understand statistics, like Robert Smithson, Andy Cooke, Max PB, Malmesbury, but you aren't interested in engaging with them.
I think any one of my posts today contributes more to the debate than a post that says "You don't add anything - I prefer to believe A, B and C because I'm convinced they know what they're talking about"!
You aren't actually putting forward a case. You're just calling people who disagree with you moronic. That does not contribute towards any meaningful debate.
It seems you haven't read more than one single word of my posts.
That's the kind of behaviour I'm describing when I talk about people being moronic!
I heard a bloke from the WHO today saying that we are going to need to continue to wear masks and social distance for a long time to come.
Looking at the various sporting events, I don't think the west is going to be embracing the mask wearing in the way is so common in the Far East, despite COVID.
There is little sign of mask wearing at the football or the cricket. Now you could say its outdoors etc, which is much lower risk and that's true. But I don't think we are going to see this societal change.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
Except that we can have confidence that cases, hospitalisations and deaths will not simply continue to multiply out of control without lockdowns, as in previous waves, because sooner or later they'll run up against the barrier of the vaccinated population. Which was not a factor in those previous waves, of course.
If this is untrue then why has a runaway healthcare catastrophe not occurred in Bolton, Blackburn or the other localities in the vanguard of Delta? And where, with vaccine take-up looking so stellar and the effectiveness of the vaccines against Delta proven, are the mountains of dead bodies meant to come from this time around? Moreover, even the patients who are in hospital are, on average, younger and less ill than in previous waves.
It's not even as if the positive noises are all coming from the lockdown sceptics. Far from it: the Chief Exec of NHS Providers has already come out and said that the link between cases and hospital admissions appears to have been broken. The Editor of the Health Service Journal stated tonight via Twitter that "Growth in Covid hospitalisation slowing sharply now. Actually falling in London [calculated on a week on week basis]." Even Professor Ferguson is sounding broadly optimistic about how things are going.
We can confidently expect that more people will be infected, more will end up in hospital and some more will even kick the bucket, but there is no particular reason to suppose that there will be another death tsunami, or that the hospitals will be swamped: the sole original justification for restrictions. So, then one has to consider whether or not the limited number of serious illnesses and deaths that will be prevented by months more of precautionary restrictions is worth the continuing sacrifice in terms of the non-Covid harms which are caused. It looks as if, unless something goes badly wrong in the next few weeks, the Government might actually decide that they aren't worth it, and scrap most of the restrictions. And if so, then why is this not something to be celebrated?
Covid is a serious matter, but life really shouldn't be lived around it for any longer than is strictly necessary.
So what are your estimates of those vital numbers?
It's all very well saying "things aren't as bad as they were because of vaccines", but the point is - if we let cases just carry on increasing by 30% or 40% a week without any attempt to control them - and perhaps remove such restrictions as are still in place next month - just what percentage of those cases do YOU think will end up in hospital, and what level of confidence do you have that it won't exceed the capacity of the NHS?
It can't be done by platitudes and handwaving.
Why don't you give us your estimates, for future case numbers, hospitalisations, and deaths, and the reasoning upon which you base your estimates?
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
You don't exactly add anything to the quality of debate on this subject. There are people who post here who quite plainly do understand statistics, like Robert Smithson, Andy Cooke, Max PB, Malmesbury, but you aren't interested in engaging with them.
I think any one of my posts today contributes more to the debate than a post that says "You don't add anything - I prefer to believe A, B and C because I'm convinced they know what they're talking about"!
You aren't actually putting forward a case. You're just calling people who disagree with you moronic. That does not contribute towards any meaningful debate.
It seems you haven't read more than one single word of my posts.
That's the kind of behaviour I'm describing when I talk about people being moronic!
I heard a bloke from the WHO today saying that we are going to need to continue to wear masks and social distance for a long time to come.
Looking at the various sporting events, I don't think the west is going to be embracing the mask wearing in the way is so common in the Far East, despite COVID.
There is little sign of mask wearing at the football or the cricket. Now you could say its outdoors etc, which is much lower risk and that's true. But I don't think we are going to see this societal change.
Wearing masks and staying away from people would help to suppress infections.
Whether it is worth the hassle is another question.
Most people AFAICS would rather have a couple of days’ illness every year than wear a stupid, usually ineffective piece of cloth over their mouth and nose every day.
Especially given most people don’t wear it properly anyway, rendering it useless.
In the Far East, the heavy air pollution makes the equation rather different.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
In a worst-case scenario, how many more people in Britain do you think would die, if we did nothing, and let cases rise unhindered by nothing except vaccines and hand-washing?
That's the question that should be answered by the people who want to remove all the counter-,measures, for heaven's sake!
No, you're the one proposing to restrictions people's liberty and cause huge economic damage. The onus to explain how bad you think it's going to get to justify doing so lies with you.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
I just don't get your point. If you reduce the case fatality rate enough then it matter much less how many people get it. If the case fatality rate is 2.5% of what it was then effectively COVID becomes another illness. Instead of a 120,000 deaths a year illness it is a 2400 deaths a year illness. We should be able to both live with a disease of that impact and more importantly the NHS should be able to cope.
And whilst I appreciate the concern around absolute numbers we are currently running at 12 deaths a day - approx 4000 a year, which is a fraction of all deaths
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
Except that we can have confidence that cases, hospitalisations and deaths will not simply continue to multiply out of control without lockdowns, as in previous waves, because sooner or later they'll run up against the barrier of the vaccinated population. Which was not a factor in those previous waves, of course.
If this is untrue then why has a runaway healthcare catastrophe not occurred in Bolton, Blackburn or the other localities in the vanguard of Delta? And where, with vaccine take-up looking so stellar and the effectiveness of the vaccines against Delta proven, are the mountains of dead bodies meant to come from this time around? Moreover, even the patients who are in hospital are, on average, younger and less ill than in previous waves.
It's not even as if the positive noises are all coming from the lockdown sceptics. Far from it: the Chief Exec of NHS Providers has already come out and said that the link between cases and hospital admissions appears to have been broken. The Editor of the Health Service Journal stated tonight via Twitter that "Growth in Covid hospitalisation slowing sharply now. Actually falling in London [calculated on a week on week basis]." Even Professor Ferguson is sounding broadly optimistic about how things are going.
We can confidently expect that more people will be infected, more will end up in hospital and some more will even kick the bucket, but there is no particular reason to suppose that there will be another death tsunami, or that the hospitals will be swamped: the sole original justification for restrictions. So, then one has to consider whether or not the limited number of serious illnesses and deaths that will be prevented by months more of precautionary restrictions is worth the continuing sacrifice in terms of the non-Covid harms which are caused. It looks as if, unless something goes badly wrong in the next few weeks, the Government might actually decide that they aren't worth it, and scrap most of the restrictions. And if so, then why is this not something to be celebrated?
Covid is a serious matter, but life really shouldn't be lived around it for any longer than is strictly necessary.
So what are your estimates of those vital numbers?
It's all very well saying "things aren't as bad as they were because of vaccines", but the point is - if we let cases just carry on increasing by 30% or 40% a week without any attempt to control them - and perhaps remove such restrictions as are still in place next month - just what percentage of those cases do YOU think will end up in hospital, and what level of confidence do you have that it won't exceed the capacity of the NHS?
It can't be done by platitudes and handwaving.
How many will end up in hospital etc? In general, for any particular area, fewer than in the recent hotspots of Bolton and Greater Manchester. Most of us don’t see that as presenting an insurmountable problem.
How many do you think? You just keep saying “30%, 40%” week on week increase. But make no acknowledgement of the possibility of a ceiling on that rise.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
Look, you shouldn't do yourself down. You're a valuable member of the community, and you should have more confidence in your intellectual abilities.
That being said, the number of people in hospital with Covid is growing dramatically less quickly than the number of people being diagnosed with Covid.
In the past three weeks, the number of people being diagnosed with Covid has risen from around, 1,800 to 16,000 today. That's a roughly ten-fold increase.
By contrast, the number in hospital hasn't even doubled: it's gone from a low of 750 in England to 1,255. Furthermore the increase in "in hospital" numbers has slowed to its lowest rate in ten days.
Now it's entirely possible that reverses, and we see a dramatic increase. But right now, the number in hospital is growing at around one fifth the rate of the number of Covid cases.
You think the probability of a particular COVID-19 case ending in hospitalisation is somehow inversely proportional to the total number of COVID-19 cases in the country?
I think if you're putting your faith in such a remarkable proposition as that, you should at least have some kind of idea why the normal laws of statistics don't apply to COVID-19 cases.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyong most of the people here.
But the absolute numbers are much better, suggesting that the vaccines are successfully reducing the chance of someone dying from it. Isn't that the link that was supposed to be broken?
Look.
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
Look, you shouldn't do yourself down. You're a valuable member of the community, and you should have more confidence in your intellectual abilities.
That being said, the number of people in hospital with Covid is growing dramatically less quickly than the number of people being diagnosed with Covid.
In the past three weeks, the number of people being diagnosed with Covid has risen from around, 1,800 to 16,000 today. That's a roughly ten-fold increase.
By contrast, the number in hospital hasn't even doubled: it's gone from a low of 750 in England to 1,255. Furthermore the increase in "in hospital" numbers has slowed to its lowest rate in ten days.
Now it's entirely possible that reverses, and we see a dramatic increase. But right now, the number in hospital is growing at around one fifth the rate of the number of Covid cases.
You think the probability of a particular COVID-19 case ending in hospitalisation is somehow inversely proportional to the total number of COVID-19 cases in the country?
I think if you're putting your faith in such a remarkable proposition as that, you should at least have some kind of idea why the normal laws of statistics don't apply to COVID-19 cases.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
Except that we can have confidence that cases, hospitalisations and deaths will not simply continue to multiply out of control without lockdowns, as in previous waves, because sooner or later they'll run up against the barrier of the vaccinated population. Which was not a factor in those previous waves, of course.
If this is untrue then why has a runaway healthcare catastrophe not occurred in Bolton, Blackburn or the other localities in the vanguard of Delta? And where, with vaccine take-up looking so stellar and the effectiveness of the vaccines against Delta proven, are the mountains of dead bodies meant to come from this time around? Moreover, even the patients who are in hospital are, on average, younger and less ill than in previous waves.
It's not even as if the positive noises are all coming from the lockdown sceptics. Far from it: the Chief Exec of NHS Providers has already come out and said that the link between cases and hospital admissions appears to have been broken. The Editor of the Health Service Journal stated tonight via Twitter that "Growth in Covid hospitalisation slowing sharply now. Actually falling in London [calculated on a week on week basis]." Even Professor Ferguson is sounding broadly optimistic about how things are going.
We can confidently expect that more people will be infected, more will end up in hospital and some more will even kick the bucket, but there is no particular reason to suppose that there will be another death tsunami, or that the hospitals will be swamped: the sole original justification for restrictions. So, then one has to consider whether or not the limited number of serious illnesses and deaths that will be prevented by months more of precautionary restrictions is worth the continuing sacrifice in terms of the non-Covid harms which are caused. It looks as if, unless something goes badly wrong in the next few weeks, the Government might actually decide that they aren't worth it, and scrap most of the restrictions. And if so, then why is this not something to be celebrated?
Covid is a serious matter, but life really shouldn't be lived around it for any longer than is strictly necessary.
So what are your estimates of those vital numbers?
It's all very well saying "things aren't as bad as they were because of vaccines", but the point is - if we let cases just carry on increasing by 30% or 40% a week without any attempt to control them - and perhaps remove such restrictions as are still in place next month - just what percentage of those cases do YOU think will end up in hospital, and what level of confidence do you have that it won't exceed the capacity of the NHS?
It can't be done by platitudes and handwaving.
Official modelling has been useless throughout. The best estimates have come from looking at what happens in one place and expecting it to follow elsewhere.
At the very beginning we all saw what happened in Bergamo, and despite assurances, it did show exactly what could happen everywhere.
In the case of Delta, we've seen what is happening in Bolton. No ever increasing rate, no NHS disaster.
We'll see the same (or better, given more vaccinations) elsewhere in the UK. It might affect more places at the same time across the country (hence the currently increasing case rate), but locally the effect won't be any worse.
The summer is the best time to get this over with. What are we waiting for?
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something?
Why on earth should you think something so stupid?
Incomprehensible.
I'm not sure where you are coming from then. What's your beef about the claim that there are fewer deaths now than there were in October?
Where on earth did you get such a stupid idea as that?
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
Except that we can have confidence that cases, hospitalisations and deaths will not simply continue to multiply out of control without lockdowns, as in previous waves, because sooner or later they'll run up against the barrier of the vaccinated population. Which was not a factor in those previous waves, of course.
If this is untrue then why has a runaway healthcare catastrophe not occurred in Bolton, Blackburn or the other localities in the vanguard of Delta? And where, with vaccine take-up looking so stellar and the effectiveness of the vaccines against Delta proven, are the mountains of dead bodies meant to come from this time around? Moreover, even the patients who are in hospital are, on average, younger and less ill than in previous waves.
It's not even as if the positive noises are all coming from the lockdown sceptics. Far from it: the Chief Exec of NHS Providers has already come out and said that the link between cases and hospital admissions appears to have been broken. The Editor of the Health Service Journal stated tonight via Twitter that "Growth in Covid hospitalisation slowing sharply now. Actually falling in London [calculated on a week on week basis]." Even Professor Ferguson is sounding broadly optimistic about how things are going.
We can confidently expect that more people will be infected, more will end up in hospital and some more will even kick the bucket, but there is no particular reason to suppose that there will be another death tsunami, or that the hospitals will be swamped: the sole original justification for restrictions. So, then one has to consider whether or not the limited number of serious illnesses and deaths that will be prevented by months more of precautionary restrictions is worth the continuing sacrifice in terms of the non-Covid harms which are caused. It looks as if, unless something goes badly wrong in the next few weeks, the Government might actually decide that they aren't worth it, and scrap most of the restrictions. And if so, then why is this not something to be celebrated?
Covid is a serious matter, but life really shouldn't be lived around it for any longer than is strictly necessary.
So what are your estimates of those vital numbers?
It's all very well saying "things aren't as bad as they were because of vaccines", but the point is - if we let cases just carry on increasing by 30% or 40% a week without any attempt to control them - and perhaps remove such restrictions as are still in place next month - just what percentage of those cases do YOU think will end up in hospital, and what level of confidence do you have that it won't exceed the capacity of the NHS?
It can't be done by platitudes and handwaving.
I don't have one, but of course I don't need to have one.
Firstly, I can read the local data from the first and worst affected areas - which are also localities with below average vaccination rates - and conclude that the rest of the country, even if similarly affected by an initial rise in case rates, will be hit gradually and, on average, is unlikely to suffer even so much. The hospitals aren't swamped and people aren't dying in huge numbers. Indeed, as a proportion of all deaths, the numbers being killed by Covid are very small indeed. So where's the problem?
Secondly, in any event, I'm just a bloke on a web forum. I don't have to make the decision on getting rid of the restrictions (thank God.) The Government does that, advised by its scientists. If ministers junk masks and social distancing and their official advisers aren't up in arms (ISAGE will almost certainly howl, but they don't count for these purposes,) then where's the problem with that?
Thirdly, reversing the burden of proof, what level of confidence do YOU have that hospitalisations WILL exceed the capacity of the NHS - or have you started from an assumption that history's repeating, and then worked backwards from that? Again, given very high vaccination rates - especially amongst the more vulnerable half of the population - and the evidence of the stalled waves in the council areas first hit by Delta, how are the burning hospitals and overflowing morgues meant to happen?
Comments
Look gentlemen - you can't fight in the War Room......
The disition to stop using the AZ on the under 40s is looking more questionable by the day!
But once we end all domestic restrictions, then perhaps we should consider stopping testing for the purpose of isolating the infectious. You might replace it with a standard public health message asking people to stay at home when they have symptoms of any respiratory infection, or at least wear a mask if they have to go out while having symptoms of a respiratory infection.
You could maintain, perhaps even expand, population-level testing to keep an eye on the big picture, e.g. with the ONS survey testing, and perhaps with testing of sewage. Then if you detect a particular surge in a location you might want to do some enhanced testing for the purpose of monitoring variants.
One of the problems with testing in the UK is that the purpose of our testing was always to test lots of people in order to reach a public commitment to test lots of people. But we never did anything useful with that ability to test lots of people.
year of your ages.
They also benefit from having their school summer breaks being earlier than in the UK, which will dramatically reduce transmission.
It's worth looking at the charts for - for example- France: https://covid19.who.int/region/euro/country/fr
Yes, we're leading, but the gap is down to about six weeks now. So long as they keep up their pace of vaccinations, they shouldn't do any worse in this wave than we've done.
Absolute scenes.
So small that we can happily sail on towards a million cases a week, without even trying to do anything to limit the growth?
Indeed, that we can remove all limits on the spread of the virus altogether next month?
Which is saying that the CFR is 2.7% of what it was last October.
What I'm doingn is asking you what you think the fatality rate is now? I've asked you twice, and you don't seem able to understand. What's the problem?
Absolutely bizarre.
Do you think the fatality rate is unchanged or something? That would only be the case if the vaccines were equally effective at preventing you catching it as they are preventing you from dying from it. Which we know isn't the case.
And, honestly, you'd be well served being a bit less abrasive with people.
Click Send, then quickly shut down because you know the readers aren't going to like the content. You'll deal with the fallout on Monday.
Summit like that I reckon.
Perhaps if we were doing less testing, espsealy mass asymptomatic testing is schools, collages, and university's, would we know we had a new wave?
Caviat 1:for some reason this only goes u to 13 June, and things have changed a bit in last 10 days
Caviat 2: ours is rising (slowly) most others, (but not all) are going down.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/football/market/1.182714171
Incomprehensible.
When Foxjr2 went for a proper test he was the only one in the place, like something in a zombie flick.
Galloway immediately snapped back, haranguing Leadbeater for being “as clear as mud” on the issue, and insisting that the teacher shouldn’t have shown the cartoon in the first place. Apparently, had he been in charge, the whole thing “never would have happened“.
If I had a vote, I think I’d lend it to Labour to deny Galloway the satisfaction of stopping Labour from winning.
Not that the existence of data seems to hinder them or their apologists overmuch, even when it's there staring them in the face.
The mass vaccination centres opened in parts of London over the past couple of weekends have been incredibly popular so demand doesn't seem to be an issue.
They weren't "walk-in" centres - some form of booking needed to be made - and there were variations, Stratford, for instance, provides first doses of Pfizer for those aged 25-39 from five east London boroughs plus the City - other venues provided second vaccinations for older people.
We never really got to the notion of "24/7" vaccination centres for which some on here argued - perhaps now id the time to have some centres operating through the night and throughout the weekend to get to as many as possible.
As I said last week, there were 110,000 adults over 30 in Newham who had not received any vaccinations - hopefully this week's figures will look better.
I really cannot fathom the level of confusion.
What I am pointing out is simply that both cases and deaths are rising at roughly the same rate. The link has not been broken. It's just that the constant of proportionality has changed.
That means that we cannot simply let cases rip and witter on about "50% of nothing being nothing".
It is so simple, and yet it seems completely beyond most of the people here.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/23/cdc-reports-more-than-1200-cases-of-rare-heart-inflammation-after-covid-vaccine-shots.html
Not good news.
Our most recent 7-day average for deaths is 11, on the 15th June, so we should compare this to cases 18 days previously, which would be 28th May, when the 7-day average was 3435.1 cases.
Last autumn cases reached a 7-day average of 3433.1 on 14th September, so we should look at deaths 18 days after that, which would be 2nd October, when the 7-day average was 62.7 deaths.
This comparison isn't perfect, because the pace of increase in case rates would also have an effect on the figures, but it suggests that the vaccination effect of our level of vaccination some weeks ago, was to reduce the number of deaths by a factor of 5.7 in the population as a whole (including the unvaccinated), compared to where they would be without vaccination.
This reduces the estimated IFR for Covid from ~1% to ~0.17%, and we still have more benefit from the vaccination program to come.
I think the other Galloway story linked to in that one, where he's harassing and threatening a parody account ran by a schoolkid is awful. I see the parody account which I believe is one that's been quoted here a few times has been deleted now in response too. https://order-order.com/2021/06/23/galloway-suing-school-kid-over-parody-twitter-account/
Vaccines minister says extending lockdown has saved 'thousands of lives'
Deaths so low ‘you can't see increase on graph', vaccine chief tells No 10 briefing
Hmmm
One would expect from the ONS figures that the number of infections should be two to three times the number of cases, so the IFR should be down to c. 0.1% to 0.15%
It's quite crude - cases vs deaths 14 days later. Will have a look at using the more advanced CFR generator I was using before to do a plot.
But it really shows what the vaccines have done for us.
but the number of people diing form COVID is now a tenth of the number dying form Flow and Pneumonia, the number being hospitalised is about 95% less than in January.
I quite like hospitals and doctors and nurses, and I would quite like them to be around for some years to come, and to achieve that we need an economy that functions not a mountain of debut.
As we are today, Government borrowing, is a much bigger threat to the futcher of the NHS than COVID. its time to stop this madness.
The drumbeat starts...
The rate of hospitalisation per infection has maybe halved.
That is reducing the rate of hospitalisation per infection. It is not "breaking the link" between infection and hospitalisation. If one doubles, the other still doubles. If one increases exponentially, the other still increases exponentially.
If you want to argue that the rate of infection doesn't matter any more, you need to estimate how high infections are going to go, and you need to estimate what proportion of infections are going to lead to hospitalisations, and then you need to check that is manageable.
None of which is done by any of you people. All we have is an endless barrage of mindless mantras and straw man misrepresentations, ranging from "Vaccines will make it all OK", through "Oh so you want to keep us in lockdown for ever", to "Oh so you don't think the rate of hospitalisation has dropped at all".
I make no apology whatsoever for characterising the standard of debate here as absolutely moronic!
After all we did just discover another 2m EU citizens we didn’t know we had...
While cases continue to rise.
1) there isn’t a large enough pool of people to justify treating Covid (with the vaccines) as a virus that justifies exceptional measures being taken to tackle it and;
2) with the exception of the unfortunate few who are immune suppressed, those who are most vulnerable are those who are choosing not to be vaccinated. We can’t keep society shut down for these people
That being said, the number of people in hospital with Covid is growing dramatically less quickly than the number of people being diagnosed with Covid.
In the past three weeks, the number of people being diagnosed with Covid has risen from around, 1,800 to 16,000 today. That's a roughly ten-fold increase.
By contrast, the number in hospital hasn't even doubled: it's gone from a low of 750 in England to 1,255. Furthermore the increase in "in hospital" numbers has slowed to its lowest rate in ten days.
Now it's entirely possible that reverses, and we see a dramatic increase. But right now, the number in hospital is growing at around one fifth the rate of the number of Covid cases.
What I haven't seen from you is any counter-argument to this analysis of data, except for appeals to an infinite population.
If this is untrue then why has a runaway healthcare catastrophe not occurred in Bolton, Blackburn or the other localities in the vanguard of Delta? And where, with vaccine take-up looking so stellar and the effectiveness of the vaccines against Delta proven, are the mountains of dead bodies meant to come from this time around? Moreover, even the patients who are in hospital are, on average, younger and less ill than in previous waves.
It's not even as if the positive noises are all coming from the lockdown sceptics. Far from it: the Chief Exec of NHS Providers has already come out and said that the link between cases and hospital admissions appears to have been broken. The Editor of the Health Service Journal stated tonight via Twitter that "Growth in Covid hospitalisation slowing sharply now. Actually falling in London [calculated on a week on week basis]." Even Professor Ferguson is sounding broadly optimistic about how things are going.
We can confidently expect that more people will be infected, more will end up in hospital and some more will even kick the bucket, but there is no particular reason to suppose that there will be another death tsunami, or that the hospitals will be swamped: the sole original justification for restrictions. So, then one has to consider whether or not the limited number of serious illnesses and deaths that will be prevented by months more of precautionary restrictions is worth the continuing sacrifice in terms of the non-Covid harms which are caused. It looks as if, unless something goes badly wrong in the next few weeks, the Government might actually decide that they aren't worth it, and scrap most of the restrictions. And if so, then why is this not something to be celebrated?
Covid is a serious matter, but life really shouldn't be lived around it for any longer than is strictly necessary.
The Queen referred to Health Secretary Matt Hancock as "poor man" at a meeting with Boris Johnson.
"I've just been talking to your secretary of state for health, poor man. He came for Privy Council," she told the prime minister.
"He's full of...", she added. "Full of beans?", offered Mr Johnson.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-57584417
It's all very well saying "things aren't as bad as they were because of vaccines", but the point is - if we let cases just carry on increasing by 30% or 40% a week without any attempt to control them - and perhaps remove such restrictions as are still in place next month - just what percentage of those cases do YOU think will end up in hospital, and what level of confidence do you have that it won't exceed the capacity of the NHS?
It can't be done by platitudes and handwaving.
It might even be better for everyone who isn't vaxxed to get this now rather than later when variant Omega+ comes along. _Nobody_ is going to escape it forever unless they die of something else soon.
That's the kind of behaviour I'm describing when I talk about people being moronic!
Looking at the various sporting events, I don't think the west is going to be embracing the mask wearing in the way is so common in the Far East, despite COVID.
There is little sign of mask wearing at the football or the cricket. Now you could say its outdoors etc, which is much lower risk and that's true. But I don't think we are going to see this societal change.
They’re going to need to bowl like Kyle Jamieson only better to recover this.
Or England to bat like idiots.
The latter is of course much more likely...
Covid is as much a vascular disease as a respiratory one, perhaps more.
Whether it is worth the hassle is another question.
Most people AFAICS would rather have a couple of days’ illness every year than wear a stupid, usually ineffective piece of cloth over their mouth and nose every day.
Especially given most people don’t wear it properly anyway, rendering it useless.
In the Far East, the heavy air pollution makes the equation rather different.
And whilst I appreciate the concern around absolute numbers we are currently running at 12 deaths a day - approx 4000 a year, which is a fraction of all deaths
How many do you think? You just keep saying “30%, 40%” week on week increase. But make no acknowledgement of the possibility of a ceiling on that rise.
I think if you're putting your faith in such a remarkable proposition as that, you should at least have some kind of idea why the normal laws of statistics don't apply to COVID-19 cases.
Do you?
At the very beginning we all saw what happened in Bergamo, and despite assurances, it did show exactly what could happen everywhere.
In the case of Delta, we've seen what is happening in Bolton. No ever increasing rate, no NHS disaster.
We'll see the same (or better, given more vaccinations) elsewhere in the UK. It might affect more places at the same time across the country (hence the currently increasing case rate), but locally the effect won't be any worse.
The summer is the best time to get this over with. What are we waiting for?
Firstly, I can read the local data from the first and worst affected areas - which are also localities with below average vaccination rates - and conclude that the rest of the country, even if similarly affected by an initial rise in case rates, will be hit gradually and, on average, is unlikely to suffer even so much. The hospitals aren't swamped and people aren't dying in huge numbers. Indeed, as a proportion of all deaths, the numbers being killed by Covid are very small indeed. So where's the problem?
Secondly, in any event, I'm just a bloke on a web forum. I don't have to make the decision on getting rid of the restrictions (thank God.) The Government does that, advised by its scientists. If ministers junk masks and social distancing and their official advisers aren't up in arms (ISAGE will almost certainly howl, but they don't count for these purposes,) then where's the problem with that?
Thirdly, reversing the burden of proof, what level of confidence do YOU have that hospitalisations WILL exceed the capacity of the NHS - or have you started from an assumption that history's repeating, and then worked backwards from that? Again, given very high vaccination rates - especially amongst the more vulnerable half of the population - and the evidence of the stalled waves in the council areas first hit by Delta, how are the burning hospitals and overflowing morgues meant to happen?