Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Does vaccinating a youth mean that cannot transmit COVID? That is the implication of the decision with words such as “reducing transmission”?

I’ve not seen the data but I’d assume a similar reduction in transmissibility as for adults, which IIRC is around 60%. That’s a worthwhile benefit to the population at large, although the CMOs are stressing that it’s the benefit to the individual that’s key to the decision - which is why, if one is following the science and not a gibbering conspiracy nut, you can see the efficacy versus side-effects data support the single dose strategy.

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Do you think that the pandemic is over ?

That really depends on what you are actually asking.

You have Cases & Outbreaks, and if they become large enough within a country, its becomes an Epidemic. A Pandemic is an Epidemic that speads across multiple countries.

Since covid is still affecting pretty much every country, then the 'Pandemic' is obviously not over, and wont be for a long time.

Of course 'large' is ambiguous - in England its currently just over 20,000 per day, which sounds a lot, but is a very small amount of the total population (about 0.04% ish).

Most of those cases are minor, not requiring any hospital treatment (96%).
Its no longer a major issue in England, which is why most restrictions have gone away.

Life around here has largely returned to normal.

---------- Post added at 04:30 ---------- Previous post was at 04:29 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

Side effects may include death...

A side effect of many illnesses can include death, such a statement is just dramatic nonsense.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

This is where the ONS numbers are better than deaths with a positive test within 28 days. The ONS figures use cause of death as noted on the death certificate using WHO guidelines.

Here's the latest data. In the year to date, COVID was the number 1 cause of death. Table 11a is our friend here for the figures for England. Note that cancer is broken down by type but even if you add up the three cancers in the top ten (Lung at 5, colorectal at 8 and leukaemias at 10) they still don't add up to the numbers for COVID
-------------------------------------
Just to add, where each disease ranks shouldn't necessarily mean that's how much effort is put in to treating. Dementia is always way up at the top of the causes of death but that is much more regarded as 'that's just getting old' than, say, certain types of cancer

Yes, that's over the whole year, and obviously includes the period when we were in a wave, with a largely unvaccinated population.

By July 2021, the latest figures shown, Covid was down to the ninth leading cause of death. If we can get something like 95% of the population vaccinated, the number of deaths will be much lower, but frankly, we can already see very clearly the direction in which this is going.

I do think it is important that we roll out the boosters to the over-50s, though, and this should seal our success in tackling this virus in the UK.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

Guessing you didn’t bother to read it then.

The risk/reward analysis with regards to protection against disease and risk of myocarditis is pretty clear. The second dose affords negligible additional protection in this age group while the risk of complications rises significantly.

But by all means, rock that tinfoil hat …

As I’ve said before it’s funny how the UK comes up with a different risks/rewards analysis from the rest of the world if there isn’t a problem with supplies of the Pfizer vaccine.

The reality is we are working on the assumption that the vast majority of kids will have had Covid by the time second doses would be given.

[jonbxx]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, that's over the whole year, and obviously includes the period when we were in a wave, with a largely unvaccinated population.

By July 2021, the latest figures shown, Covid was down to the ninth leading cause of death. If we can get something like 95% of the population vaccinated, the number of deaths will be much lower, but frankly, we can already see very clearly the direction in which this is going.

I do think it is important that we roll out the boosters to the over-50s, though, and this should seal our success in tackling this virus in the UK.

Oh, without a doubt, things are going in the right direction. The big question is at what point do we say 'that's enough, we're all good now'? 969 people died of COVID is July, is this acceptable but can we go further, get better here? Is 500 acceptable, 250 OK?

Those 969 deaths are 969 tragedies for the families involved. I would doubt that they would take much solace in the fact more people died of cancer

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Yes, that's over the whole year, and obviously includes the period when we were in a wave, with a largely unvaccinated population.

Heaven forbid we use complete statistics.

the number of deaths will be much lower, but frankly, we can already see very clearly the direction in which this is going.

That crystal ball must be on all day.

I do think it is important that we roll out the boosters to the over-50s, though, and this should seal our success in tackling this virus in the UK.

So vaccinating 95% of the population isn’t the answer then.

Originally Posted by Paul

That really depends on what you are actually asking.

You have Cases & Outbreaks, and if they become large enough within a country, its becomes an Epidemic. A Pandemic is an Epidemic that speads across multiple countries.

Since covid is still affecting pretty much every country, then the 'Pandemic' is obviously not over, and wont be for a long time.

Of course 'large' is ambiguous - in England its currently just over 20,000 per day, which sounds a lot, but is a very small amount of the total population (about 0.04% ish).

Most of those cases are minor, not requiring any hospital treatment (96%).
Its no longer a major issue in England, which is why most restrictions have gone away.

Life around here has largely returned to normal.

---------- Post added at 04:30 ---------- Previous post was at 04:29 ----------


A side effect of many illnesses can include death, such a statement is just dramatic nonsense.

It was in the context of the statement that catching the disease gave (allegedly) better protection than inoculation - I was pointing out one of the downsides of that approach.

Originally Posted by Hugh

It was in the context of the statement that catching the disease gave (allegedly) better protection than inoculation - I was pointing out one of the downsides of that approach.

It’s also inversely related to actuality … you get a stronger immune response from the vaccine than from the virus itself. Though there is some evidence that vaccination followed by exposure in the wild produces an even better immune response.

[joglynne]

Snippets of to-days announcement. Booster shots.

The government has announced that the nine groups most vulnerable to coronavirus will be eligible for a third booster vaccine no earlier than six months after their second.

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines will be the main ones used in the initial rollout of third doses, which is expected to start in the coming days.

The Oxford-AstraZeneca jab has also been approved for use as a booster, but the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI) will only recommend it for people who are allergic to the other two vaccines.

People who were in the JCVI's original one to nine priority groups to get their first and second doses will get their third doses before anyone else.

They will be eligible for a booster jab when at least six months have passed since their second dose.

The initial booster rollout will be divided into two stages, with the JCVI considering third doses for people under 50 at a later date when more data is available.

The following people are expected to be called in the coming days:

• Adults aged 16 and over who are immunosuppressed

• People living in residential care homes for older adults

• All adults aged 70 and over

• Adults aged 16 and over who are clinically extremely vulnerable

• Frontline health and social care workers

Stage 2

"As soon as is practicable after Stage 1", the following people will be called:

• All adults aged 50 and over

• All adults 16 - 49 years who are in an influenza or COVID at-risk group as outlined in the Green Book

• Adult household contacts of immunosuppressed people

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-...-jabs-12406982

---------- Post added at 13:06 ---------- Previous post was at 12:57 ----------

Other areas which have been covered to-day are all being reported in the following live link.

Quite afew topics including vaccinations for 12 - 15 year olds, social distancing, masks. Testing, tracing and self-isolation support to continue, treatments, Consultation on vaccination of NHS staff. and .... Meeting outdoors and masks recommended to 'keep seasonal illnesses at bay'

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...veals-21565302

[TheDaddy]

Can you get a booster if you don't fall into those categories but have good reason?

[joglynne]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Can you get a booster if you don't fall into those categories but have good reason?

I expect we will get more clarification in the next couple of days. I guess it will also depend on whether your good reason is one that is accepted it seems as though they are closely following the original roll out criteria.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Can you get a booster if you don't fall into those categories but have good reason?

I'm starting to think you can have mine mate . . .

There are no 'proper' pubs to go to, the local library is closed, I don't do cinemas or night clubs, I rarely get to a football game anymore (distance + cost), I won't be going on holiday anytime in the next 6 months, and 'restaurants' seem to be populated by families with screaming kids or people with mobiles grafted onto their hands.

I'll just sit here staring out of the window at the lawn, and wishing it would grow so I can mow it

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Carth

I'm starting to think you can have mine mate . . .

There are no 'proper' pubs to go to, the local library is closed, I don't do cinemas or night clubs, I rarely get to a football game anymore (distance + cost), I won't be going on holiday anytime in the next 6 months, and 'restaurants' seem to be populated by families with screaming kids or people with mobiles grafted onto their hands.

I'll just sit here staring out of the window at the lawn, and wishing it would grow so I can mow it

Crikey, that sounds a bit grim especially as the libraries near me are all back to normal. Surely there must be a decent boozer near you, if nothing else?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Crikey, that sounds a bit grim especially as the libraries near me are all back to normal. Surely there must be a decent boozer near you, if nothing else?

There are some great boozers in Scunthorpe the trick is leaving alive

[Carth]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Crikey, that sounds a bit grim especially as the libraries near me are all back to normal. Surely there must be a decent boozer near you, if nothing else?

All the drinking establishments within walking distance (or staggering distance depending if going or coming) have reverted to selling food . . or have been demolished and are now 'affordable' housing of the rabbit hutch variety.

Venues that have live music are also scarce . . . and have crap bands on anyway

Nah I'm just an old fart that misses the things he used to enjoy before they became unfashionable . . or unsociable . . or unhealthy . . or something


edit:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

There are some great boozers in Scunthorpe the trick is leaving alive

I can get out alive no problem, it's paying for the taxi there and back that pisses me off 'sigh'