Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[dsr-burnley]

Yes but it isn't a board and you can't combine it. If I, and other identifiable people get Covid they have a strong risk of dying. The average (age- and comorbidity-uncorrected) risk of death if you get Covid is about as useful a statistic as the annual average temperature on Earth would be to someone planning to spend a week in the Sahara or a week in Yakutsk.

https://covid-101.org/science/whats-the-chance-of-dying-if-you-get-covid-19/

That report is dated from before delta variant and before vaccinations kicked in, which makes it of limited value to most of us.

I'll try and be more specific. For Mr. or Mrs. Average, if they choose to go out and about living their lives under current rules, their risk of dying of covid appears to be about 5% higher than it would have been pre-covid. This takes into account both the risk of catching it and the risk of dying as a result. So if Mrs.Average aged 85 has a 10% chance of dying in the next year if she stops at home and isolates, then she increases that to 10.5% if she goes out and meets people. That's based on empirical evidence of death certificates over the past 3 months.

Obviously someone who is not Mr or Mrs Average, someone who is especially vulnerable to covid, in a way that perhaps they aren't vulnerable to other respiratory diseases, will be more at risk simply because of the unique threat of covid as it applies to them. Eg. immune deficiency and/or inability to take a vaccine. But although we are all individuals, if we want to assess risk in any way we need to look at the average as a starting point at least, because we're unlikely to have specific personalised data.

 

[vegster]

you'll notice there hasnt been any further variants of concern. i saw something, probably on CNBC, that Delta is outcompeting and crowding out other variants. there has been a couple of variants of interest in South America that haven't spread.

Very hard to know the truth these days due to competing groups of scientists with differing views, however, some of them must be right. The basics I believe are that the more cases there are, the more chances of mutations and we are chugging along at 40K + a day at the moment. They are saying there is no need to worry about this variant but, its another variant to muddy the waters.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/19/fears-grow-in-england-over-rise-of-new-covid-delta-variant

 

[Fat Boy Fat]

Case numbers are only an issue to the unvaxxed/anti-vaxxers.

Oh dear, you were doing so well until this last sentence, conveniently forgetting the 600,000 clinically extremely vulnerable people, for whom there is little current knowledge of vaccine efficacy!

 

[vegster]

Really don't know why the Guardian peddles fear so much these days.

New variants are happening all the time already, all over the world, and will do for the rest of time.

Descendents of the Spanish Flu are still around today... and even though it was over 100 years ago, modern flu vaccines are still somewhat effective against it.

We really don't need to worry about new variants - a greater concern would be the emergence of a new virus that we don't have immunity to.

Yes, the several versions of Bird Flu doing the rounds which is just starting to jump to humans.

 

[A1X]

Highest number of daily deaths recorded since March today

 

[Weststander]

Really don't know why the Guardian peddles fear so much these days.

New variants are happening all the time already, all over the world, and will do for the rest of time.

Descendents of the Spanish Flu are still around today... and even though it was over 100 years ago, modern flu vaccines are still somewhat effective against it.

We really don't need to worry about new variants - a greater concern would be the emergence of a new virus that we don't have immunity to.

Ummmm … I wonder?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

That report is dated from before delta variant and before vaccinations kicked in, which makes it of limited value to most of us.

I'll try and be more specific. For Mr. or Mrs. Average, if they choose to go out and about living their lives under current rules, their risk of dying of covid appears to be about 5% higher than it would have been pre-covid. This takes into account both the risk of catching it and the risk of dying as a result. So if Mrs.Average aged 85 has a 10% chance of dying in the next year if she stops at home and isolates, then she increases that to 10.5% if she goes out and meets people. That's based on empirical evidence of death certificates over the past 3 months.

Obviously someone who is not Mr or Mrs Average, someone who is especially vulnerable to covid, in a way that perhaps they aren't vulnerable to other respiratory diseases, will be more at risk simply because of the unique threat of covid as it applies to them. Eg. immune deficiency and/or inability to take a vaccine. But although we are all individuals, if we want to assess risk in any way we need to look at the average as a starting point at least, because we're unlikely to have specific personalised data.

Cheers for that. Interesting conversation but not an easy one to have via this medium.

Stay well

 

[beorhthelm]

Very hard to know the truth these days due to competing groups of scientists with differing views, however, some of them must be right. The basics I believe are that the more cases there are, the more chances of mutations and we are chugging along at 40K + a day at the moment. They are saying there is no need to worry about this variant but, its another variant to muddy the waters.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/oct/19/fears-grow-in-england-over-rise-of-new-covid-delta-variant

same as one linked earlier, and speculation. almost as if people want to find a new nasty variant. there are hundred of variants, we are only interested/concerned in those that have a significant difference in transmisability or effect of diesease. they are called variants of interest and concern, which is handy. the other hundreds are of no consequence.

 

[A1X]

[tweet]1450500948720291843[/tweet]

Staggering recklessness

 

[Yoda]

Oh dear, you were doing so well until this last sentence, conveniently forgetting the 600,000 clinically extremely vulnerable people, for whom there is little current knowledge of vaccine efficacy!

Okay, so I forgot to word it mostly rather than only. I posted a few days ago about the most recent ONS data regarding true breakthrough deaths (where someone is either fully vaccinated or had previously been infected).

How about encouraging as many unvaccinated people to take up the offer of one? On the most up to date ONS report, in total, only 256 deaths were classed as breakthrough deaths. Of those there were 193 classed as already clinically extremely vulnerable.

In the grand scheme of things, those numbers are now tiny compared to the unvaxxed.

Even though those dying who are clinically extremely vulnerable are a high percentage of breakthrough deaths, that number compared to the total is still being dwarfed by those that haven't taken it up.

 

[nicko31]

[tweet]1450500948720291843[/tweet]

Staggering recklessness

The SAGE minutes from the 9th of September reiterated the importance of "acting early to slow a growing epidemic" and that early low-cost interventions may reduce the need for more disruptive measures.

Its still not too late to wake up, we still have a chance to avoid the worse

 

[Fat Boy Fat]

Okay, so I forgot to word it mostly rather than only. I posted a few days ago about the most recent ONS data regarding true breakthrough deaths (where someone is either fully vaccinated or had previously been infected).



Even though those dying who are clinically extremely vulnerable are a high percentage of breakthrough deaths, that number compared to the total is still being dwarfed by those that haven't taken it up.

Agree and thanks for the considered reply.

The government have clearly lost interest now, even to the point where the clinically extremely vulnerable now no longer exist - now renamed as just higher risk - well that’s ok then!

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The SAGE minutes from the 9th of September reiterated the importance of "acting early to slow a growing epidemic" and that early low-cost interventions may reduce the need for more disruptive measures.

Its still not too late to wake up, we still have a chance to avoid the worse

The worse was 300k cases a day by now.

 

[W.C.]

In all likelihood the current level of cases/deaths is normality, or at least not far from it.

This is EXACTLY what I mean. What on earth are you measuring normality by? I'll say it again, from the outside looking in, the rates of infections and deaths in the UK look insane whilst people go about as if it's all over.
Here in Japan we haven't had anything like the serious lockdowns that people in the UK have endured, and yet so many of you over there complain about wearing masks. It's mental

 

[W.C.]

Yes, it's weird how some people were saying a while ago that many of the public appeared to be suffering Stockholm Syndrome as they were scared of their captors.

Now it's in complete reverse! The government say "run free" and the public do with gay abandon and little thought for the consequences for them or others.

There's a post over on the Colin Powell thread from a poster who suffers from the same cancer CP did I believe. To read that and see people not even make simple adjustments to their lives is saddening.

 

[Rugrat]

Here in Japan we haven't had anything like the serious lockdowns that people in the UK have endured, and yet so many of you over there complain about wearing masks. It's mental

I've had the misfortune of having to spend several of the last few days in and out of hospital. Apart from reinforcing my enormous admiration for anyone that works in that environment, it also highlighted that they all go about their work wearing masks {not just over the mouth, chin or ear either) 100% of the time. But a significant proportion of our population can't be bothered to wear them for a short while when in a shop or on public transport. I find it shameful

 

[crodonilson]

Good Morning Britain lead story this morning that we need to urgently speed up booster jabs in order to save Christmas. It's so frustrating that we didn't have to find ourselves in this position, when the media are again questioning if we need another lockdown.

Matthew Taylor chief of the NHS confederation scathing of the governments lack of action compared to our European friends and neighbours.

“The government ought to not just announce that we’re moving to plan B, but it should be plan B plus. We should do what’s in plan B in terms of masks … working from home, but also we should try to achieve the kind of national mobilisation that we achieved in the first and second waves, where the public went out of their way to support and help the health service.”

 

[sparkie]

I'm absolutely gagging for my booster but the 6 months qualification delay means I have to wait until November.

Bring it on next month.

 

[Weststander]

The graphics other than cases shown by Jenny Harries in the big picture didn’t seem alarming at all. Low plateauing by contrast to mountainous numbers in Waves 1 and 2. 4m have had booster doses already, 3.8m was yesterday’s total.

Calm before the storm?

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

The graphics other than cases shown by Jenny Harries in the big picture didn’t seem alarming at all. Low plateauing by contrast to mountainous numbers in Waves 1 and 2. 4m have had booster doses already, 3.8m was yesterday’s total.

Calm before the storm?

Your inbox is full hun.