The case for Labour making an electoral pact – politicalbetting.com

alex_ said:

Anabobazina said:

MarqueeMark said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

another_richard said:

Andy_Cooke said:

I saw the paranoia on the modelling earlier.
People do know that when they're demanding answers like "what are they assuming?!?", the models are published on line, with the assumptions up front?eg here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984533/S1229_Warwick_Road_Map_Scenarios_and_Sensitivity_Steps_3_and_4.pdf )

And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."

... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.

And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).

And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).

The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.

I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.

The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.

Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.

I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.

The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?

We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.

Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.

Your whole premise is flawed.

So you assert, but you cite no evidence.

My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?

Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.

How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.

69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.

This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.

Indeed. How many healthy under 40s have died of Covid since the pandemic began?

I’ve not seen the latest figures, but as of August 2020 that figure stood at 38 individuals.

Ah but... Long Covid...

ydoethur said:

Just to make sure this is posted:

Utterly disgusting. Antisemitism, misogyny and hate have no place on our streets or in our society. There must be consequences.

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1393950984058068993

Anabobazina said:

Maffew said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.

You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?

(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and
(2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60%
(3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.

And you completely fail to understand what the vaccines are here to achieve. It's to stop people going to hospital, whatever they do beyond that is merely a bonus. Both AZ and Pfizer prevent hospitalisation with both doses to a very high degree.

No. The problem is that your attention span is apparently so short that you can't remember more than the first part of the post you started to argue with in the first place.

It's not a question of herd immunity per se. It's a question of (1) whether we reach herd immunity, (2) how many more infections there will be if we don't and (3) what the case fatality rate will be after vaccination.

Too hard to grasp?

1. You're literally contradicting the first line of the paragraph, does herd immunity matter or doesn't it, make up your mind.
2. No one cares about the infection rate if it isn't feeding through to hospitals.
3. We already know from studies done in the US, UK, Israel and Europe based on actual real world fucking data that the CFR for vaccinated people is extremely low.

Once again, the PHE Siren study showed that a single dose of AZ or Pfizer resulted in a cumulative reduction of 80% in the hospitalisation rate, for two doses of Pfizer this rises to around 95% and the AZ study is ongoing. You're making this about efficacy against asymptomatic infection, but that's never been what vaccines are here to do. I'll keep saying it until you understand it, vaccines are here to stop people from going to hospital for COVID, what they do beyond that is a bonus.

Honestly, you seem to think you're always the smartest guy in the room, people who think that way are prone to making idiotic mistakes just as you are on this whole "yeah but it doesn't stop people getting infected" idea.

Agreed. Slightly tangentially positive tests also appear to be falling on the Zoe app, which I hadn’t expected. It’s too soon to call a trend but worth keeping an eye on (it tends to be a fortnight or so ahead of government data IIRC).

Usual caveats of I'm a lawyer not an epidemologist, but the more I see about the Indian variant, the more I think it's going to fizzle, just like the South African variant etc. It may become dominant here, but I strongly suspect that it'll be dominant in the same way Kent variant was a month ago - small numbers and not really a threat.

Do you mean SA variant in your final sentence?

ydoethur said:

Carnyx said:

ydoethur said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

MattW said:

MattW said:

another_richard said:

Any PB experts of the detailed demographics of Asian populations in Britain ?

AIUI in Bolton and Blackburn the Asian population is predominantly Muslim and I would assume of Pakistani heritage.

Yet both have had outbreaks of the Indian variant.

Whereas places associated with Asians of Indian heritage - Leicester, Harrow, Brent, Hounslow - have only seen increases of at most marginal levels.

Would the Asians in Bolton be possibly more Muslims of Indian heritage rather than Pakistani heritage compared with other northern mill towns ?

Or perhaps the Indian heritage population in Bolton would be more likely to live in multi generational homes than those in London and Leicester ?

Or maybe its just been 'the luck of the draw'.

There's a fair amount here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Indians#:~:text=0.6%-,Population,of the total UK population).

Remember that many Indians came via Uganda. Also that India is approx 15% Muslim (a little less at the period of high migration). The Muslim populations of Bangladesh, Pakistan and India are quite similar in numbers.

Also:

One that surprised me last week is that no other EU countries have significant Indian-origin populations.

UK is 1.4m. Next on the list is Italy at 10% of that.

Isn't that down to the UK hiring doctors from that part of the world and you know being the pre-eminent colonial power in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh?

The latter explains why we have so much immigration from that part of the world, for good or ill British colonialism/immigration/conquest of other countries explains why we went for mass immigration from that part of the world

The likes of Portuguese India consisted of a few goat herders whilst the British Raj controlled everything.

Apparently those goat herders may have been few in number but they were real Goas.

Very on topic given the header's author too.

The header was arguably the real Macao.

ydoethur said:

Carnyx said:

ydoethur said:

Just to make sure this is posted:

Utterly disgusting. Antisemitism, misogyny and hate have no place on our streets or in our society. There must be consequences.

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1393950984058068993

Interestingly, unlike at least one other senior politician, he's not prejudging the result of any trial. 'Consequences' could cover anything from a Royal Commission downward.

You would hope that a former DPP would avoid prejudging the result of a trial. It would render the process rather pointless if he did.

ydoethur said:

Just to make sure this is posted:

Utterly disgusting. Antisemitism, misogyny and hate have no place on our streets or in our society. There must be consequences.

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1393950984058068993

dixiedean said:

Anabobazina said:

Casino_Royale said:

Interesting. A couple of WWC blokes in their early 40s (I'm in Basingstoke) miffed that they can't give "English" as their nationality, and have to give British instead.

Seems to be a thing.

I’m pretty sure I gave both English and British as mine on the census. I can’t remember the choice on the vax - you might be right. In any case, I think one should be able to say English/Scots etc. It should be the same as the census IMO.

I don't remember being asked for the Vax.

Andy_JS said:

Leon said:

Floater said:

Leon said:

Taz said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/gunnerpunner/status/1393920559243829248

Horrifying stuff. Quadruply worse because it's on Finchley road, one of the main places of residence for British Jews

It’s vile, it’s disgusting. You can support the Palestinian cause without resorting to such foul anti Semitic slurs.

It's outrageous. And it is an obvious threat of great violence, with a specific target: so it is surely illegal

And they have been filmed and the Met Police can identify them by the Car Reg

Arrest and prosecute, hard

If only - mind you plod would be straight round after some 78 year old street preacher quoting from the bible or someone making a "hurtful" (but lawful) tweet

Boils my piss

Took them all of 5 minutes to arrest the doddery old Christian quoting the Bible. These guys are driving through Jewish districts of London demanding rape and threatening murder. FFS

This is why the police are not as respected by ordinary people as they used to be.

Maffew said:

Anabobazina said:

Maffew said:

Anabobazina said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.

You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?

(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and
(2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60%
(3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.

And you completely fail to understand what the vaccines are here to achieve. It's to stop people going to hospital, whatever they do beyond that is merely a bonus. Both AZ and Pfizer prevent hospitalisation with both doses to a very high degree.

No. The problem is that your attention span is apparently so short that you can't remember more than the first part of the post you started to argue with in the first place.

It's not a question of herd immunity per se. It's a question of (1) whether we reach herd immunity, (2) how many more infections there will be if we don't and (3) what the case fatality rate will be after vaccination.

Too hard to grasp?

1. You're literally contradicting the first line of the paragraph, does herd immunity matter or doesn't it, make up your mind.
2. No one cares about the infection rate if it isn't feeding through to hospitals.
3. We already know from studies done in the US, UK, Israel and Europe based on actual real world fucking data that the CFR for vaccinated people is extremely low.

Once again, the PHE Siren study showed that a single dose of AZ or Pfizer resulted in a cumulative reduction of 80% in the hospitalisation rate, for two doses of Pfizer this rises to around 95% and the AZ study is ongoing. You're making this about efficacy against asymptomatic infection, but that's never been what vaccines are here to do. I'll keep saying it until you understand it, vaccines are here to stop people from going to hospital for COVID, what they do beyond that is a bonus.

Honestly, you seem to think you're always the smartest guy in the room, people who think that way are prone to making idiotic mistakes just as you are on this whole "yeah but it doesn't stop people getting infected" idea.

Agreed. Slightly tangentially positive tests also appear to be falling on the Zoe app, which I hadn’t expected. It’s too soon to call a trend but worth keeping an eye on (it tends to be a fortnight or so ahead of government data IIRC).

Usual caveats of I'm a lawyer not an epidemologist, but the more I see about the Indian variant, the more I think it's going to fizzle, just like the South African variant etc. It may become dominant here, but I strongly suspect that it'll be dominant in the same way Kent variant was a month ago - small numbers and not really a threat.

Do you mean SA variant in your final sentence?

No, I meant Kent. SA was never dominant here. Kent variant a month ago was dominant, but low numbers, not a threat to opening up due to the vaccine program etc. So what I meant to say was instead of Kent variant it may be Indian variant making up 80%+ of our cases, but if numbers of cases/hospitalisations are low, it doesn't really matter which variant is dominant. Obviously I'm not saying it wouldn't be a horrific threat in an unvaccinated population with no restrictions.

ydoethur said:

Gallowgate said:

I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.

If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.

The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.

Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.

And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.

MarqueeMark said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

another_richard said:

Andy_Cooke said:

I saw the paranoia on the modelling earlier.
People do know that when they're demanding answers like "what are they assuming?!?", the models are published on line, with the assumptions up front?eg here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984533/S1229_Warwick_Road_Map_Scenarios_and_Sensitivity_Steps_3_and_4.pdf )

And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."

... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.

And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).

And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).

The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.

I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.

The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.

Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.

I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.

The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?

We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.

Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.

Your whole premise is flawed.

So you assert, but you cite no evidence.

My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?

Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.

How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.

69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.

This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.

MarqueeMark said:

ydoethur said:

Just to make sure this is posted:

Utterly disgusting. Antisemitism, misogyny and hate have no place on our streets or in our society. There must be consequences.

https://twitter.com/Keir_Starmer/status/1393950984058068993

This from a guy who sat three years in a Shadow Cabinet as antisemitism ran riot in the Party around him.

There must be consequences indeed.

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

TimT said:

DougSeal said:

Chris said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

Maybe he's got a point? Who knows, as he never actually makes it. just keeps saying that everyone - except him of course - is an idiot.

You baffle me. What is it you don't understand about this?

(1) If the R0 of the Indian variant is 5-6 and
(2) if the efficacy of AstraZeneca against infection is 50-60%
(3) then vaccination isn't going to give us herd immunity.

Can you give me some data that shows the efficacy of AstraZenica is 50%-60% in all cohorts (not just the over 70s) as in a discussion about herd immunity that is vital.

Chris read some data 4 months ago and doesn't seem to think anything has changed since then. No point in engaging until he updates his data sets.

This forum seems to be full of people who don't see the point of engaging with the facts!

As for recent "real world" data on efficacy against infections, here's the preprint from just three weeks ago from the ONS infection survey, which is based on random PCR tests, and therefore picks up all infections, not just symptomatic ones:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.22.21255913v1.full.pdf

It shows an efficacy of 61% for asymptomatic and 63% for asymptomatic, 21 days or more after the first dose of AstraZeneca (insufficient data so far on the effect of two doses).

Not that I'm under any illusion that anyone wants to know that.

Single dose for asymptomatic infection, that study doesn't look into the hospitalisation rate for those people. Even at 61/63% it's higher than your range of 50-60% and it's with a single dose. I don't know if you read or watch the news at all, we're currently doing around 400k second doses per day.

ydoethur said:

Gallowgate said:

I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.

If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.

The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.

Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.

And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.

rcs1000 said:

@Chris

I think there's one important thing your analysis misses.

Real world efficacy data for AstraZeneca is dramatically better than that achieved in Phase 3 trials.

Why?

Because trials measured people getting CV19 relative to the placebo pretty much immediately after getting vaccinated. But we now know that efficacy builds over quite a long period of time for AstraZeneca (and for J&J). Simply, after four weeks you don't have that much protection; but after 14 weeks (i.e. two weeks after your second dose) you have lots.

Let me give you an example. Phase 3 trials pegged AZ efficacy at something in the 60s. But in Italy this week, they released real world data showing AZ with 95% efficacy against symptomatic and 99% against severe Covid.

There was similarly promising data out of India this week, looking at healthcare workers who'd been double jabbed, and which showed very high levels of protection (again, above 90%) against the new variant.

Now, sure, there's more work that needs to be done. But it's very important to realise that - in the real world - the vaccines are proving very efficacious.

Malmesbury said:

ydoethur said:

Gallowgate said:

I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.

If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.

The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.

Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.

And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.

Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

@Chris

I think there's one important thing your analysis misses.

Real world efficacy data for AstraZeneca is dramatically better than that achieved in Phase 3 trials.

Why?

Because trials measured people getting CV19 relative to the placebo pretty much immediately after getting vaccinated. But we now know that efficacy builds over quite a long period of time for AstraZeneca (and for J&J). Simply, after four weeks you don't have that much protection; but after 14 weeks (i.e. two weeks after your second dose) you have lots.

Let me give you an example. Phase 3 trials pegged AZ efficacy at something in the 60s. But in Italy this week, they released real world data showing AZ with 95% efficacy against symptomatic and 99% against severe Covid.

There was similarly promising data out of India this week, looking at healthcare workers who'd been double jabbed, and which showed very high levels of protection (again, above 90%) against the new variant.

Now, sure, there's more work that needs to be done. But it's very important to realise that - in the real world - the vaccines are proving very efficacious.

The Oxford team looks to have made an incredible vaccine that was trialled extremely poorly. Hopefully AZ/Oxford will have learned a lot from this experience and the next time they need to trial a vaccine they will do it properly like Pfizer and Moderna rather than the disjointed trial they had.

ydoethur said:

Malmesbury said:

ydoethur said:

Gallowgate said:

I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.

If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.

The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.

Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.

And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.

Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.

I think, to somewhat misquote Team America, you’re just an inch and a half away with that analogy.

MarqueeMark said:

moonshine said:

MarqueeMark said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

MaxPB said:

Chris said:

another_richard said:

Andy_Cooke said:

I saw the paranoia on the modelling earlier.
People do know that when they're demanding answers like "what are they assuming?!?", the models are published on line, with the assumptions up front?eg here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/984533/S1229_Warwick_Road_Map_Scenarios_and_Sensitivity_Steps_3_and_4.pdf )

And the models aren't firm predictions, but "if it's transmissible to this degree, or that degree, or that degree, this is what happens," "if vaccine rollout speeds are this, or if they are that..." and "If vaccine efficacy is this, or if it is that..."

... and they also have "optimistic combination" and "pessimistic combination" answers.

And I'm a bit sick of the "either the vaccine works or it doesn't" line. It's either 100% or 0%, right? Or maybe it's neither? And the degree to which it is neither is one of the factors in the models (with varying assumptions, most of which are based on published studies).

And, of course, we have the "everyone vulnerable is already vaccinated" line, ignoring that even a 20-year-old in excellent health has a greater than 1% chance of hospitalisation if infected and unvaccinated, increasing from there (so about a 1% to 2% hospitalisation chance on average of all the 30 million currently left unvaccinated - so even without breakthrough infections, that'd be 300,000-600,000 possible hospitalisations).

The implications of the assumptions lead me to assume that the chances of things going very wrong are very low, as B1.617.2 is susceptible to vaccination. But the incessant "It's all a conspiracy!", "What are they thinking!?" (go and look?), "Well, the vaccines work or they don't, right?" lines do rather pall after a while.

I mean, yes, the media are bloody awful in amplifying the most dramatic possible "coulds" and "possiblys" in trying to imply that [INSERT_GROUP] are preacing disaster, but that doesn't mean we need to fall for it every bloody time.

The 30 million unvaccinated will be predominantly under 20 so at even less risk.

Plus millions of them will already have immunity from prior infection.

I think the answer to the conundrum is undoubtedly that the modelling is more reliable than the people on social media who barely understand the basic scientific concepts and would be severaly arithmetically handicapped even if they did understand the science.

The questions are: (1) will the vaccination programme take us to herd immunity, (2) if not, how many more people will need to be infected to get us to herd immunity, and (3) what percentage of those people will be hospitalised and what percentage will die?

We don't really have the information to do more than guess at the answers to those questions. But if the Indian variant really had an R0 of 5-6, and if AstraZeneca were only 50-60% effective against infection (and that is for the original version of the virus), as trials suggest, then the answer to (1) would be "no, nothing like". In that case, the key question would be how much more effective AstraZeneca was against death than against infection. That is even less certain, but probably the answer is more effective but not hugely more effective. In which case it's not at all surprising that the modelling is suggesting the possibility of a lot more deaths.

Your numbers are wrong, AZ is around 90% effective against infection of the original strain with a large gap between doses. Efficacy with a single dose is 76% after 4 weeks. Efficacy against severe symptoms is around 95%+ with two doses and with a single dose it reduces spread by around 40% the study for two doses will be out soon but it is expected to come in around 80% reduction in spread.

Your whole premise is flawed.

So you assert, but you cite no evidence.

My numbers came from the AstraZeneca Phase III trial. Where did yours come from?

Mine comes from the real world PHE study. COV001/2 has been superceded by two new studies and by lots and lots of real world data. Fwiw, a single dose of AZ vaccine is 85% effective at preventing death for patients of all ages against the Kent strain three weeks after the initial dose. That number keeps on rising.

How do people still keep getting away with making calculations divorced from a raft of the latest data? It is just scaremongering of the most base kind.

69.4% of the UK adult population have now had one dose. That is 7 in 10 of them where the ability to contract the disease, be hospitalised by the disease, pass on the disease - the roll-call of potential targets for the virus has massively reduced since September. 38% - the cohort most at risk - have now had two jabs. Not exactly immortal - but hugely protected.

This past winter, the hospitals were full of the unjabbed elderly. They weren't full of people under 40. The idea they will be now overwhelming the NHS with Indian Variant Covid has no logical basis.

Some people have PTSD from the government’s deliberate scare messaging. Some were burned by hugely underplaying covid back in Feb / March 2020 and hence now lap up doom porn to compensate for their prior error. Others predicted covid was going to be Disease X and we’d never have effective vaccines. They are annoyed that their clairvoyance was wrong and are driven by confirmation bias.

Truth is, this was a generationally nasty virus but nowhere near as bad as was feared early on. Some of the restrictions were helpful, many were not and some were actively harmful even against the narrow goal of reducing covid deaths, yet alone broader measures. And finally, the UK is now through it, a bit poorer and with society much changed. But it’s done.

The average weekly death toll in the UK in recent years is around 12,500.

Last week, 74 died with Covid.

That number may rise a little. But only because a number of people who were offered protection from it chose not to take it. And will die as a consequence of that decision.

Normal life cannot now be prevented just because people take the bet it will not get them - and lose.

HYUFD said:

For Labour doing a deal with the LDs whereby Labour focuses on London, the North and Midlands and the LDs focus on most of the South would make sense from their perspective

Malmesbury said:

ydoethur said:

Malmesbury said:

ydoethur said:

Gallowgate said:

I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.

If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.

The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.

Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.

And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.

Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.

I think, to somewhat misquote Team America, you’re just an inch and a half away with that analogy.

I like your thinking.

Malmesbury said:

TimT said:

Malmesbury said:

TimT said:

Malmesbury said:

ydoethur said:

Gallowgate said:

I've just spent the past hour arguing about Israel and Palestine with some old muslim friends on Facebook. They are far closer to out-and-out supporting Hamas than I think they care to admit. I find it very worrying.

If Palestine ever holds democratic elections again (which it won’t) I wonder what percentage of the vote Hamas would get? My guess is it would be north of 60% and they’d sweep both Gaza and the West Bank.

The problem is, while they are violent murderous Nazi crooks whom the world would be considerably happier without, Israel gives them a perfect alibi for every single one of their failures. No food? Blame Israel’s blockade. No water? Blame Israel’s bombs. No housing? Blame both. No money? Blame Israel’s sanctions and the sanctions the US impose at their behest.

Never mind that all the aid is used for military purposes, or vanishes into the back pockets of Ismail Haniyeh and his mates. Just point at Israel and it will all be fine.

And Israel is unfortunately seemingly going out of its way to make that narrative credible, and has been for a long time.

Yes - Hamas are competing with worst elements in Israel to see who can be the bigger arsehole.

Also, at some point, Hamas were marginally less corrupt than Arafat's successors' PLO.

To be less corrupt than Arafat is a very, very low bar.

Indeed. But you don't have to be able to run faster than the predator - only faster than the slowest prey.

With Arafat et al, it wasn't a matter of running faster than anyone. He had the Palestinian Authority and Palestinian people to plunder, without any recourse for anyone else.

rottenborough said:

Michael Levitt
@MLevitt_NP2013
The current outbreak of COVID-19 in India is ending faster than expected.

Exponential growth factor H(t) continues decreasing linearly for both cases & deaths.

Daily cases peaked & daily deaths peak soon.

From this outbreak, deaths will be ~300,000, cases ~30,000,000.

https://twitter.com/MLevitt_NP2013/status/1393962628641218561



Will India follow Gompertz?

CarlottaVance said:

Theuniondivvie said:

isam said:

...

Stark_Dawning said:

isam said:

Leon said:

Leon said:

Taz said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/gunnerpunner/status/1393920559243829248

Horrifying stuff. Quadruply worse because it's on Finchley road, one of the main places of residence for British Jews

It’s vile, it’s disgusting. You can support the Palestinian cause without resorting to such foul anti Semitic slurs.

It's outrageous. And it is an obvious threat of great violence, with a specific target: so it is surely illegal

And they have been filmed and the Met Police can identify them by the Car Reg

Arrest and prosecute, hard

Here is a clearer photo. The number plate is entirely visible. No reason not to arrest and prosecute

https://twitter.com/AAPrager/status/1393926282711347207?s=20

The similar posts beneath are unreal - the megaphone shouting "F the Jews" and talking of rape, the three young boys, one with the Israeli flag on the sole of his shoes, saying "Israel is not real"

https://twitter.com/Elad_Si/status/1393634620663640064?s=20

Incredible scenes, one of the major unthought of down sides of multiculturalism. The people who introduced the concept - Roy Jenkins, Lord Lester etc - arrogantly thought that the commonwealth immigrants and their descendants would be so happy to be called British they'd forget their roots

I dare say a few hearty white Englishmen who can trace their ancestry back to Ethelred aren't wholly immune from such bigotry.

Of course, I agree. I don't know that we see them in their thousands parading the streets telling reporters that other ethnic/religious groups don't exist, or that their daughters should be raped though. The anti BLM demos last year? I dont know that they were openly racist, although maybe the people on them just dont shout about it anymore

And even if we did, why invite millions of new people with similarly strong views against other religions and races into the country?

In my city we had a few thousand white Brits bellowing about being up to their knees in Fenian blood yesterday.

That would be a city in Scotland would it?

So not "white Scots"?

TimT said:

CarlottaVance said:

Theuniondivvie said:

isam said:

...

Stark_Dawning said:

isam said:

Leon said:

Leon said:

Taz said:

Chameleon said:

https://twitter.com/gunnerpunner/status/1393920559243829248

Horrifying stuff. Quadruply worse because it's on Finchley road, one of the main places of residence for British Jews

It’s vile, it’s disgusting. You can support the Palestinian cause without resorting to such foul anti Semitic slurs.

It's outrageous. And it is an obvious threat of great violence, with a specific target: so it is surely illegal

And they have been filmed and the Met Police can identify them by the Car Reg

Arrest and prosecute, hard

Here is a clearer photo. The number plate is entirely visible. No reason not to arrest and prosecute

https://twitter.com/AAPrager/status/1393926282711347207?s=20

The similar posts beneath are unreal - the megaphone shouting "F the Jews" and talking of rape, the three young boys, one with the Israeli flag on the sole of his shoes, saying "Israel is not real"

https://twitter.com/Elad_Si/status/1393634620663640064?s=20

Incredible scenes, one of the major unthought of down sides of multiculturalism. The people who introduced the concept - Roy Jenkins, Lord Lester etc - arrogantly thought that the commonwealth immigrants and their descendants would be so happy to be called British they'd forget their roots

I dare say a few hearty white Englishmen who can trace their ancestry back to Ethelred aren't wholly immune from such bigotry.

Of course, I agree. I don't know that we see them in their thousands parading the streets telling reporters that other ethnic/religious groups don't exist, or that their daughters should be raped though. The anti BLM demos last year? I dont know that they were openly racist, although maybe the people on them just dont shout about it anymore

And even if we did, why invite millions of new people with similarly strong views against other religions and races into the country?

In my city we had a few thousand white Brits bellowing about being up to their knees in Fenian blood yesterday.

That would be a city in Scotland would it?

So not "white Scots"?

A "reverse Andy Murray"?

MaxPB said:

rcs1000 said:

Re herd immunity: it is worth remembering that Pfizer and Moderna offer much *quicker* protection than AZ. Therefore, the coming weeks, when the UK is highly likely to get up to 3m+ first doses a week, are going to see a massive drop in the number of individuals likely to transmit CV19.

I'd also point to Israel where new CV19 cases dropped to just 20 yesterday (https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/coronavirus-in-israel-20-new-cases-04-percent-of-tests-positive-668288). That Israeli CV19 number just keeps on droppin'.

Yes, switching over to Pfizer for 18-39 is going to make a huge short term difference in the run up to June 21st.

Theuniondivvie said:

You can't even call Union flag waving, anti Scottish independence fanatical supporters of the UK Brits any more. It's political correctness gone mad I tells ye.

OldKingCole said:

Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’.
Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India.
Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.

OldKingCole said:

Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’.
Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India.
Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.

rcs1000 said:

tlg86 said:

OldKingCole said:

Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’.
Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India.
Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.

Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.

The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.

Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.

And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.

Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.

Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.

Pagan2 said:

On topic, the assumption that a progressive alliance would sweep the board is bollocks. If one came about I would come out for example and vote tory purely on I don't want pr and I have abstained since 2010 as there is never anyone worth voting for in my constituency only having con lab ld to vote for.
The progressive alliance would try and bring in pr without a referendum which frankly I think is shit. Any major constitutional change should get the ok from voters. However they know voters wouldn't support PR anymore than they did av.
Bring in PR and I walk away totally as I refuse to give my vote to anyone when I dont know what I am voting for. The coalition left a bad enough taste in my mouth when they claimed my vote was part of a mandate for a manifesto I wouldn't have voted for

Gallowgate said:

So the conclusion to my "debate" on Israel vs Palestine is that I've been blocked. I guess I've been cancelled. 🤷‍♂️

rcs1000 said:

tlg86 said:

OldKingCole said:

Somewhat O/t, but I went to one of our two local pubs for a pre- dinner drink. Discussion was around tomorrow’s ‘freedom’.
Spoke to about ten people, including the landlord. No-one, absolutely no-one, expected the ‘total liberation’ promised for June to come to pass, and everybody put the blame on the PM and the the Government for pausing the restrictions on people coming from India.
Normal political opinions range from Left to Right.

Just imagine how potent attacks from the LotO would be if he wasn’t also in favour of open borders.

The funny bit is: it probably doesn't really matter at this point.

Like in Israel (and parts of the US) we're rapidly moving to a point where there won't be any hosts for the virus to infect. Before the month is out, we'll be vaccinating people in their 20s.

And by the middle of June, pretty much all adults will have had at least one dose.

Unfortunately, SAGE seems to think that 10s of thousands of people could end up in hospital.

Have they not looked to the US or Israel, the former of which is probably just behind is, and the latter just in front? In both places, normality has pretty much resumed, and cases continue to fall.

Pulpstar said:

Gallowgate said:

So the conclusion to my "debate" on Israel vs Palestine is that I've been blocked. I guess I've been cancelled. 🤷‍♂️

Who has blocked you ?

Gallowgate said:

Pulpstar said:

Gallowgate said:

So the conclusion to my "debate" on Israel vs Palestine is that I've been blocked. I guess I've been cancelled. 🤷‍♂️

Who has blocked you ?

Ah, this was just in reference to the debate I was having on Facebook with some muslim friends/acquaintances that I mentioned earlier.