Coronavirus (OLD)

Originally Posted by Mad Max

Are the numbers up not due to the fact that thousands more people are being tested?

Not this current level. If you look here at the % of positive tests we've gone up from 0.6 to 0.8 in a week: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus-testing

But compared to March/April the testing is dramatically higher so 3000 cases is nowhere near as bad now than then when almost every case was a hospitalisation.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Still clinging on to it being different for us on the basis of no evidence whatsoever. When we get the second wave, as it’s now inevitable due to the inadequacy of test, trace, isolate it’ll be just as bad.

We’re simply on delay and not learning the lessons from what we are seeing.

This is the latest “multigenerational households”, “it’ll go away in the summer” or similar speculative nonsense. The good news is though the back to the office campaign has died off before it started.

Well, we don't know yet, do we? The later lockdown we entered into may have come too late to avoid the peak, and that being the case, we should not get the substantial second wave that other countries who locked down earlier are experiencing.

If we do get a big second wave, it would clarify that the only way to avoid the virus is a permanent lockdown, which no-one in their right minds would support.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, we don't know yet, do we? The later lockdown we entered into may have come too late to avoid the peak, and that being the case, we should not get the substantial second wave that other countries who locked down earlier are experiencing.

If we do get a big second wave, it would clarify that the only way to avoid the virus is a permanent lockdown, which no-one in their right minds would support.

We didn’t know all of your previous speculative efforts, but any reasonably intelligent person would accept that Covid-19 doesn’t care about the British stiff upper lip and that what we see elsewhere, all things being equal, would happen here. What is going to make the difference?

There’s no evidence that supports your contention that locking down a week, or two, later than other counties prevents a second wave. Unless we developed herd immunity (no laughing at the back!) by our chance as a result of that extra week or two.

The good news is a second lockdown, or regional lockdowns to the extent many can’t really tell the difference, are inevitable regardless of what those in denial think. Companies will continue to work from home, and the economy will tank in any case for longer and the rental incomes of property magnates that own the Daily Mail will be done. So every cloud has a silver lining.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

When we get the second wave, as it’s now inevitable due to the inadequacy of test, trace, isolate it’ll be just as bad.

You’re predicting 35000+. Deaths?

I don’t think so.

Infection rates can go up all they want, the death rate is the key metric. I don’t see death rates getting anywhere near the initial wave.

When this whole thing started scientists ( and I posted it in here) said a second wave was unlikely and that it would plateau and would possibly be followed by the odd “ripple“, and I don’t see anything to disagree with that.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

You’re predicting 35000+. Deaths?

I don’t think so.

Infection rates can go up all they want, the death rate is the key metric. I don’t see death rates getting anywhere near the initial wave.

When this whole thing started scientists ( and I posted it in here) said a second wave was unlikely and that it would plateau and would possibly be followed by the odd “ripple“, and I don’t see anything to disagree with that.

We will see where we are in a month or so. We've got near exponential growth in some areas, test, trace, isolate not identifying the majority of close contacts. We're now fudging the figures against counting Covid-19 deaths - while counting everyone who has ever tested positive was clearly not the best way to do so we are now in a position where unless you get tested again between initial diagnosis and death at greater than 29 days you aren't counted on the totals. The onset of symptoms, complications and time spent on a ventilator can easily extend life past this arbitrary cut off. The ONS (and excess death rates) will provide a better metric as a result.

We are however better at treatments - which kills off the myth that they'd die anyway once and for all - which could improve mortality. Either way, numbers are going up and the demand side of the economy are staying home.

Numbers go up, numbers go down, that's life for you.

You really do sound like the paranoia about CV19 has got to you.

Despite the best efforts of the Media and Social Networks to convince you otherwise.

1. There is little chance you will catch it.
2. If you do, there is little chance it will do anything more than annoy you.

Far more people are dying of other causes than the 'virus'.
No one is worried about the Flu now the winter months are coming.
Yet you are almost certainly more likely to catch that, and it can be just as fatal, especially in the same high risk groups.

[Kushan]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Well, we don't know yet, do we? The later lockdown we entered into may have come too late to avoid the peak, and that being the case, we should not get the substantial second wave that other countries who locked down earlier are experiencing.

Can you explain how going into lockdown later means we get a less substatial second wave?

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

If we do get a big second wave, it would clarify that the only way to avoid the virus is a permanent lockdown, which no-one in their right minds would support.

There's plenty of ways to avoid the virus without going into permanent lockdown:

Practice social distancing. Wear a mask. Wash your hands.

Super simple stuff, but too many people aren't doing it, too many people think they know better, or that it's a scam, or that there's worse things to get. If you want to avoid lockdown after lockdown, get people to do the super simple stuff and fine/arrest those who refuse.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Paul

Numbers go up, numbers go down, that's life for you.

You really do sound like the paranoia about CV19 has got to you.

Despite the best efforts of the Media and Social Networks to convince you otherwise.

1. There is little chance you will catch it.
2. If you do, there is little chance it will do anything more than annoy you.

Far more people are dying of other causes than the 'virus'.
No one is worried about the Flu now the winter months are coming.
Yet you are almost certainly more likely to catch that, and it can be just as fatal, especially in the same high risk groups.

I really don’t believe almost all the countries in the world are simply acting out of paranoia. Italian hospital beds weren’t filled by paranoid people in February, they were filled by pneumonia patients.

I do recognise that on a personal level my risks are extremely low. However that isn’t true of everyone in my social circle, family and friends (or indeed, for a significant amount of purchasing power in the economy). If the herd immunity advocates got their way statistically the chances would be that some of them would catch it with a higher mortality level based on age and underlying health issues.

If this was just a flu we are back to the circular conversation where nobody would have noticed. Hospitals wouldn’t have been busier, it’d just be normal, as generally they are equipped to cope with flu every year.

Numbers go down because of significant effort and mitigation. They go up without. At £210bn in cost to date, that’s a lot of Government paranoia. Would have been cheaper with a super-injunction, a D-Notice and hoping nobody noticed.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Paul

Numbers go up, numbers go down, that's life for you.

You really do sound like the paranoia about CV19 has got to you.

Despite the best efforts of the Media and Social Networks to convince you otherwise.

1. There is little chance you will catch it.
2. If you do, there is little chance it will do anything more than annoy you.

Far more people are dying of other causes than the 'virus'.
No one is worried about the Flu now the winter months are coming.
Yet you are almost certainly more likely to catch that, and it can be just as fatal, especially in the same high risk groups.

We have a vaccine for flu. That's the difference.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

I really don’t believe almost all the countries in the world are simply acting out of paranoia. Italian hospital beds weren’t filled by paranoid people in February, they were filled by pneumonia patients.

I do recognise that on a personal level my risks are extremely low. However that isn’t true of everyone in my social circle, family and friends (or indeed, for a significant amount of purchasing power in the economy). If the herd immunity advocates got their way statistically the chances would be that some of them would catch it with a higher mortality level based on age and underlying health issues.

If this was just a flu we are back to the circular conversation where nobody would have noticed. Hospitals wouldn’t have been busier, it’d just be normal, as generally they are equipped to cope with flu every year.

Numbers go down because of significant effort and mitigation. They go up without. At £210bn in cost to date, that’s a lot of Government paranoia. Would have been cheaper with a super-injunction, a D-Notice and hoping nobody noticed.

Yep - that's right.

[Mr K]

This doesn't sound good, not being reported here yet even though it's the UK vaccine.
https://www.news.com.au/world/corona...71da8a135ac814

The Covid vaccine Australia has invested in has been dealt a major setback after researchers uncovered a suspected serious adverse reaction in a trial participant.

The vaccine, being developed by pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford, is being tested at dozens of sites around the world.

The stage 3 trial — the final stage before safety and efficacy data can be submitted to regulators for approval — has tens of thousands of participants.

The adverse reaction — which AstraZeneca says is an unexplained illness — is believed to have affected a single participant in the UK.

A suspected “serious adverse reaction” means the participant may require hospitalisation. It could result in a life-threatening illness or even death.

Originally Posted by Mr K

We have a vaccine for flu. That's the difference.

The majority of the UK do not have/get the vaccine, and at best, its generally about 30 - 40% effective.

Originally Posted by jfman

If this was just a flu we are back to the circular conversation where nobody would have noticed.

Well, except that isnt what I said.

[Carth]

The Covid vaccine Australia has invested in has been dealt a major setback after researchers uncovered a suspected serious adverse reaction in a trial participant.

The vaccine, being developed by pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca and the University of Oxford, is being tested at dozens of sites around the world.

The stage 3 trial — the final stage before safety and efficacy data can be submitted to regulators for approval — has tens of thousands of participants.

The adverse reaction — which AstraZeneca says is an unexplained illness — is believed to have affected a single participant in the UK.

A suspected “serious adverse reaction” means the participant may require hospitalisation. It could result in a life-threatening illness or even death.

Doesn't actually tell us much does it?
One person in 'tens of thousands' has had a suspected adverse reaction . . that may require hospital treatment, and could result in death

Pretty poor attempt at instigating mass panic, but will probably draw the usual crowd in for some hysterical doom laden wittering

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Carth

Doesn't actually tell us much does it?
One person in 'tens of thousands' has had a suspected adverse reaction . . that may require hospital treatment, and could result in death

Pretty poor attempt at instigating mass panic, but will probably draw the usual crowd in for some hysterical doom laden wittering

Originally Posted by Mr K

This doesn't sound good, not being reported here yet even though it's the UK vaccine.
https://www.news.com.au/world/corona...71da8a135ac814

Possibly because the Australian news website chose not to wait for experts located in the U.K. to get back to them with a bit more context, given the time difference. The Beeb on the other hand went with the story first thing this morning, with a little added analysis:

At first glance this may seem alarming. A vaccine trial - and not just any vaccine, but one receiving massive global attention - is put on hold due to a suspected serious adverse reaction. But such events are not unheard of. Indeed the Oxford team describe it as "routine". Any time a volunteer is admitted to hospital and the cause of their illness is not immediately apparent it triggers a study to be put on hold.
This is actually the second time it has happened with the Oxford University/AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine trial since the first volunteers were immunised in April. An Oxford University spokesperson said: "In large trials, illnesses will happen by chance but must be independently reviewed to check this carefully."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-54082192