|
Re: Coronavirus
This is the bit that seems to get lost on some every time. 6 hospitalisations isn’t high - nobody claims that figure is in it’s own right.
Off how many infections given they were likely infected two weeks ago is the rough estimate everyone is looking for. With that variant doubling every four days in some areas do hospitalisations follow in the next two weeks? Or, was it pure bad luck that these individuals got infected shortly after vaccination.
If it’s the former, despite vaccination, we are firmly into another lockdown territory. It’s only a matter of time until it spreads into more areas. If however vaccines have broken the link between the two figures - a doubling of cases only sees a 10% growth in hospitalisations - that is more manageable with other non-pharmaceutical interventions (masks, distancing, vaccine certificates). If one dose hasn’t broken the link but two has, or they both have to varying degree (either through time/second dose) that changes the dynamic again.
The proposal to sit back, wait and see what happens only triggering the alarm when hospitalisations is high leaves enough cases out there to keep adding pressure for weeks to come, and only drags the inevitable lockdown out longer as cases remain stubbornly high.
|