When will this shit end?

[Havors]

2 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Also, are they staying long in the hospital, or in and out in a day or two?

Thats another valid point. I think i seen on BBC this morning... X amount admissions a large chunk of them didnt even stay overnight and loads discharged. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

There are basically two options. 

Appease the border shaggers any time a new variant is unveiled and just ban everything again, in which case we might as well just make everyone in the travel industry redundant now. 

Accept variants are a fact of life, stop overpaying them and if we need to, tweak the vaccines to counter them. 

As it stands, the government seems to be doing neither. Instead we just get no end of shrieking about VaRiAnTs and often with no context either - Nepal yesterday being a real low point. The government will reap the consequences of its actions when people (and not those Fake SAGE loonies) start demanding lockdowns etc again. They have made a rod for their own back with their proclamations and it will be harder to ride it out and stick to the plan, or at least avoid rolling it back. 

[steviewevie]

7 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

 

Ready to tune in? Will they recommend a 2 or 3 month total lockdown i wonder...

Good that you're doing their PR

[thewayiam]

1 hour ago, sisco said:

So what would a delay mean to outdoor gigs? Got 1 at Rochester Castle at the start on July.  Literally lost all sense on whether they’re currently allowed or not!

Would like mean a no. I can't grasp the people on that moaned all bloody day every day at the negativity of the situation and now realise it's not that plain and simple.

We can blame the Indian variant and ifs and buts. But fact is from May 17th there was a big restriction change on sizes of groups allowed along with people authorizing their right to not get a jab.

1 hour ago, sisco said:

I’d presumed as they were letting 45,000 into Wembley it’d be fine…. Maybe presuming too much 

They haven't said they are letting 45k in yet I don't think. It's been said they accept it's a more realistic target. Nothing above 21k has been agreed.

[efcfanwirral]

3 hours ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Some talk that 21st June could largely go ahead but face coverings and WFH could stay. I could live with that. 

I'd take that til 2022 if needed if it gets other stuff back to be honest 

 

 

1 hour ago, jimmillen said:

Just as a counterpoint, pretty much everyone I talk to are dubious about the 21st June holding and wouldn’t be at all surprised if it’s pushed back.

Not meaning this as any kind of “gotcha” - my circle of friends, family & colleagues is no more statistically significant than yours! 😉 - but it would be a mistake to assume there is an overwhelming public consensus that the 21st June is set in stone. 

Yeah my friends all laughed at me when I caved and bought festival tickets just in case. 

26 minutes ago, Havors said:

It doesnt look positive but then is that because what we are being told is misleading? For example: "The variant can lead to more hospitalisation" surely this has to be in non vaccinated people? There is no evidence the vaccine does not work perfectly well. 

Its like.. if all things were equal statistitcs. But they arent so it can be very misleading and ignorantly broadcasting the statistics as something they arent is going to only cause panic and hysteria. 

Yeah it's a scary figure but even with no vaccines people under 30 have very little chance of hospitalisation to a level that would put the NHS under threat. 2.6x more chance still shouldn't cause that- statistics show that very few ended up in ICU or dying despite having the most cases. 

We do need to keep perspective here - we're talking destroying entire industries, creating huge unemployment - but the discourse seems to be slipping back to "only covid matters"

To put it into perspective, a delay means we enter July with more restrictions than last year despite the vulnerable fully vaccinated. And there are certain uncomfortable conclusions that will inevitably be drawn from that about IF we get out of this

Edited June 4, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[DeanoL]

17 hours ago, BobWillis2 said:

You overthink things far too much Deano. 

Another case of you and I being polar opposites on something then 😄

 

16 hours ago, Havors said:

You miss the point. They wont get that high because the vaccines work. 

Like I said your premise that the NHS cant cope is all based on the vaccine not working. If the vaccine works then hospitalisations cant go up. The link between infection and severe illness is broken. 

 

The direct link in broken. And the numbers are massively reduced. But the idea that breaking the link between infection and hospitalisation means they're not related is a nonsense.

Think about it. If you have a population of 100 million, and at the start of the month you have 100,000 cases and 100 hospitalisations. Then at the end of the month you have 300,000 cases, how many hospitalisations do you get? It's *almost* 300. It's slightly lower. Because you've vaccinated people. Say you've vaccinated 10 million that month. 10% of your population. They're the only people in a different position at the end of the month compared to the start of the month. If I was already vaccinated at the start of the month, my odds of hospitalisation if I catch it are the same. If I wasn't vaccinated and still am not, my odds are still the same. So the vaccinations only impact on those actual jabbed between the time frames you are looking at.

Now when we were doing the most vulnerable, it had a lopsided effect - because of those 100 hospitalisations, they'd be mostly vulnerable people, so it'd have a greater effect. But now it's the opposite, as most people in hospital are still vulnerable, older vaxxed people, not the youngsters that we're jabbing at the moment.

13 hours ago, zahidf said:

You're saying  jabbed people will be ok with curtailing their freedoms for anti vaxxers? No chance 

The jab doesn't work for everyone. There's no avoiding these people getting it and potentially ending up in hospital, but we just need to make sure that doesn't happen to everyone at the same time. If the jabs are as effective as we hope then we should be fine on that once everyone willing to have one is done - but we do need to monitor it.

[Chapple12345]

Huge news! 🙂

Hopefully indie sage will calm down on the matter too 

[Havors]

1 minute ago, DeanoL said:

Another case of you and I being polar opposites on something then 😄

 

The direct link in broken. And the numbers are massively reduced. But the idea that breaking the link between infection and hospitalisation means they're not related is a nonsense.

Think about it. If you have a population of 100 million, and at the start of the month you have 100,000 cases and 100 hospitalisations. Then at the end of the month you have 300,000 cases, how many hospitalisations do you get? It's *almost* 300. It's slightly lower. Because you've vaccinated people. Say you've vaccinated 10 million that month. 10% of your population. They're the only people in a different position at the end of the month compared to the start of the month. If I was already vaccinated at the start of the month, my odds of hospitalisation if I catch it are the same. If I wasn't vaccinated and still am not, my odds are still the same. So the vaccinations only impact on those actual jabbed between the time frames you are looking at.

Now when we were doing the most vulnerable, it had a lopsided effect - because of those 100 hospitalisations, they'd be mostly vulnerable people, so it'd have a greater effect. But now it's the opposite, as most people in hospital are still vulnerable, older vaxxed people, not the youngsters that we're jabbing at the moment.

The jab doesn't work for everyone. There's no avoiding these people getting it and potentially ending up in hospital, but we just need to make sure that doesn't happen to everyone at the same time. If the jabs are as effective as we hope then we should be fine on that once everyone willing to have one is done - but we do need to monitor it.

I take it you dont work in maths or anything to do with probabilities? 😄 I do and I am struggling with what you are saying haha 

[Fuzzy Afro]

11 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

Huge news! 🙂

Hopefully indie sage will calm down on the matter too 

 

Honestly I’d get on the phone to Albert Bourla and write him a blank cheque for however much it’d cost them to get us 3 doses for all over 12’s by October/November (and 2 ASAP)

 

Pfizer is the absolute daddy of all covid vaccines. 

[fraybentos1]

13 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

Huge news! 🙂

Hopefully indie sage will calm down on the matter too 

Nah they'll just talk about under 12s

[Chapple12345]

1 minute ago, fraybentos1 said:

Nah they'll just talk about under 12s

What you mean they'd move their goalposts?? Whatever makes you think they'll do that...

[DeanoL]

16 minutes ago, Havors said:

I take it you dont work in maths or anything to do with probabilities? 😄 I do and I am struggling with what you are saying haha 

I think what you're missing is what you just posted. The vaccines are very effective but not 100% effective. You can have both doses and still end up in hospital with COVID and die. Your chances are much, much better but vaccines are not a magic forcefield. So no, 2.5x more likely to end up in hospital regardless of vaccine or not with this new variant. We have 7.5 ICU beds per 100,000 of the population. So we have the capacity to have 0.0075% of the population in ICU at one time. So if the virus was left to spread unchecked, and you had 100% of the population infected at the same time, you would need the vaccine to be 99.9925% effective at preventing hospitalisation.

They're good. They're not that good.

The sad truth of it is there's nothing we can do about those hospitalisations - they're going to happen, if the vaccine doesn't work for you, you'll eventually get COVID and if it puts you in hospital there's nothing you do about that. But we do need to make sure there's room for you in hospital to give you the best chance of being okay!

You keep saying I'm assuming the vaccines don't work, and I think the issue is actually I'm assuming they work to the 99.5% efficiency they do in the best case, but you're assuming 100%, which is wrong.

Edited June 4, 2021 by DeanoL

[steviewevie]

Vaccinate the kids, do the 20somethings later.

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, DeanoL said:

I think what you're missing is what you just posted. The vaccines are very effective but not 100% effective. You can have both doses and still end up in hospital with COVID and die. Your chances are much, much better but vaccines are not a magic forcefield. So no, 2.5x more likely to end up in hospital regardless of vaccine or not with this new variant. We have 7.5 ICU beds per 100,000 of the population. So we have the capacity to have 0.0075% of the population in ICU at one time. So if the virus was left to spread unchecked, and you had 100% of the population infected at the same time, you would need the vaccine to be 99.9925% effective at preventing hospitalisation.

They're good. They're not that good.

The sad truth of it is there's nothing we can do about those hospitalisations - they're going to happen, if the vaccine doesn't work for you, you'll eventually get COVID and if it puts you in hospital there's nothing you do about that. But we do need to make sure there's room for you in hospital to give you the best chance of being okay!

You keep saying I'm assuming the vaccines don't work, and I think the issue is actually I'm assuming they work to the 99.5% efficiency they do in the best case, but you're assuming 100%, which is wrong.

 

This is literally impossible to happen and you know it.

 

Let’s ignore vaccines and prior immunity, and we’ll make the crude assumption that the R0 for the Indian variant is 7. 
 

In this case, herd immunity would kick in after 6/7ths. It doesn’t take a full 100% to catch it because there are always a small percentage that don’t catch it at the end of the curve (hence why we don’t get measles outbreaks among anti vaxxers)

 

More importantly though the virus cycle takes a few days. 1 person has it on day 1, 7 on day 5, 49 on day 10, we peak at 40m cases about seven weeks after it was originally seeded. Then it dies a death. 
 

With the slower spreading original variant, if we’d gone for herd immunity it would have taken closer to 3 months, although we could have maintained normality (going for herd immunity doesn’t require restrictions) throughout and beaten the pandemic in just 80 days so we’d have been back to normal for a full year already.

[efcfanwirral]

33 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

Huge news! 🙂

Hopefully indie sage will calm down on the matter too 

It's just another milestone for the goalposts to be wheeled to

Now this is approved, they're not going to stop and say we can open up after all adults have one dose (the 2 doses), we'll need to protect the teenagers so wait til then. Oh and then those under 12 need to be protected. Then we'll need all adults to have their 3rd, and maybe 4th. 

[hodgey123]

3 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

This is literally impossible to happen and you know it.

 

Let’s ignore vaccines and prior immunity, and we’ll make the crude assumption that the R0 for the Indian variant is 7. 
 

In this case, herd immunity would kick in after 6/7ths. It doesn’t take a full 100% to catch it because there are always a small percentage that don’t catch it at the end of the curve (hence why we don’t get measles outbreaks among anti vaxxers)

 

More importantly though the virus cycle takes a few days. 1 person has it on day 1, 7 on day 5, 49 on day 10, we peak at 40m cases about seven weeks after it was originally seeded. Then it dies a death. 
 

With the slower spreading original variant, if we’d gone for herd immunity it would have taken closer to 3 months, although we could have maintained normality (going for herd immunity doesn’t require restrictions) throughout and beaten the pandemic in just 80 days so we’d have been back to normal for a full year already.

We'd have been back to normal with probably at least double the deaths and an economy in tatters anyway. And this is also on the assumption that people would be willing to 'be normal' with a virus in circulation which they know if they get, they are likely to be triaged as to whether they can get hospital treatment. It doesn't work and unsure why this is being brought up this far into the pandemic when it was clearly never, ever a realistic route. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

2 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

We'd have been back to normal with probably at least double the deaths and an economy in tatters anyway. And this is also on the assumption that people would be willing to 'be normal' with a virus in circulation which they know if they get, they are likely to be triaged as to whether they can get hospital treatment. It doesn't work and unsure why this is being brought up this far into the pandemic when it was clearly never, ever a realistic route. 

Oh aye, not saying the government should have done this. Just wanted to reiterate that lockdowns are a political choice and one that Johnson has every right not to do.

[zahidf]

3 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

It's just another milestone for the goalposts to be wheeled to

Now this is approved, they're not going to stop and say we can open up after all adults have one dose (the 2 doses), we'll need to protect the teenagers so wait til then. Oh and then those under 12 need to be protected. Then we'll need all adults to have their 3rd, and maybe 4th. 

I do think you panic a lot.

I'm pessimistic but I'm sure rhe tories won't do that

[efcfanwirral]

Just now, zahidf said:

I do think you panic a lot.

I'm pessimistic but I'm sure rhe tories won't do that

I'm not saying that will happen I'm saying it in response to the independent sage part and their constantly moving goalposts 

[DeanoL]

4 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

 

This is literally impossible to happen and you know it.

 

Let’s ignore vaccines and prior immunity, and we’ll make the crude assumption that the R0 for the Indian variant is 7. 
 

In this case, herd immunity would kick in after 6/7ths. It doesn’t take a full 100% to catch it because there are always a small percentage that don’t catch it at the end of the curve (hence why we don’t get measles outbreaks among anti vaxxers)

 

More importantly though the virus cycle takes a few days. 1 person has it on day 1, 7 on day 5, 49 on day 10, we peak at 40m cases about seven weeks after it was originally seeded. Then it dies a death. 

It was a crude example but it's just to demonstrate the gulf between the efficacy of the vaccine and the theoretical worse case. Using your example we can be more accurate sure - it multiplies by 7 every 5 days. So it's at 10 million at cycle X and then goes to 70 million on cycle X+1. So okay 100% of the population don't get it at once, just 6/7ths. Plus people don't just go into hospital for the day, they're in there weeks so people from previous cycles will still be occupying beds.

Herd immunity doesn't "kick in" because it's not measles - there's no sterilising immunity. You can still catch it and pass it on, so there is no herd immunity. But a mostly vaxxed population will reduce that R0 significantly because the vaccines do help with transmission. 

I'm not saying we can't reopen or anything, just that when we do, people will get sick, and not just anti-vaxxers. And the number of people that get sick will be directly proportional to the number of infections. So we have to be sure that spread will be slow enough hospitals can cope.

[JoeyT]

 

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

 

Well we weren't that interested in variants etc until our very own Kent variant came along and fucked our winter good and proper. And now we have the Indian variant, which could have been kept out as it has been elsewhere but Bojo didn't want to upset his mate Modi...and that's now causing panic stations as Boris might have to do a bit of alassing on prime time tv.

[Ozanne]

11 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

Well we weren't that interested in variants etc until our very own Kent variant came along and fucked our winter good and proper. And now we have the Indian variant, which could have been kept out as it has been elsewhere but Bojo didn't want to upset his mate Modi...and that's now causing panic stations as Boris might have to do a bit of alassing on prime time tv.

That’s ultimately it and partly why I find the dumping on scientists strange, as we wouldn’t be in this position of Johnson had shut the borders to India months ago. He didn’t and that’s why we are having to face the situation of a delay to the roadmap. Blame him and not the scientists. 

[JoeyT]

So are we thinking that come the 14th June we'll be at around 7/8k cases a day or maybe even 10k?

I assume more focus will be placed on hospitalisations / deaths so I wonder what the tipping point for panic stations is for those.

[hodgey123]

4 minutes ago, JoeyT said:

So are we thinking that come the 14th June we'll be at around 7/8k cases a day or maybe even 10k?

I assume more focus will be placed on hospitalisations / deaths so I wonder what the tipping point for panic stations is for those.

Yeah think so. Sustained increasing hospital admissions above 100/day may be enough for Boris to pull the trigger and extend 21 June.