How many have been vaccinated so far?
Discussion
EddieSteadyGo said:
Israel have stated specifically they will not and are not pursuing a zerocovid strategy. However, they left restrictions in place far longer than was necessary which artificially limited close contacts. So inevitably, as they reopen fully, you are going to get clustered outbreaks as the virus works to find its way to infect the last 10% of adults and a big chunk of the teenage population in Israel..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-57594...And as I was saying...... So 90+% vaccinated adults but now back to restrictions because 'infections' are up again. You tell me if the 'not pursuing zero covid' guff actually matches to reality.
isaldiri said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
Israel have stated specifically they will not and are not pursuing a zerocovid strategy. However, they left restrictions in place far longer than was necessary which artificially limited close contacts. So inevitably, as they reopen fully, you are going to get clustered outbreaks as the virus works to find its way to infect the last 10% of adults and a big chunk of the teenage population in Israel..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-57594...And as I was saying...... So 90+% vaccinated adults but now back to restrictions because 'infections' are up again. You tell me if the 'not pursuing zero covid' guff actually matches to reality.
They are facing an inevitable exit wave, which can't be avoided. All they are doing now is delaying it to some future point. Their main issue is the lack of candour from their government to explain this to the population.
isaldiri said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
Israel have stated specifically they will not and are not pursuing a zerocovid strategy. However, they left restrictions in place far longer than was necessary which artificially limited close contacts. So inevitably, as they reopen fully, you are going to get clustered outbreaks as the virus works to find its way to infect the last 10% of adults and a big chunk of the teenage population in Israel..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-57594...And as I was saying...... So 90+% vaccinated adults but now back to restrictions because 'infections' are up again. You tell me if the 'not pursuing zero covid' guff actually matches to reality.
Hang on a minute - Israel have pretty much slammed the borders shut, yet they are now having a Delta wave from abroad? I thought turning the country into a fortress and not letting people leave was guaranteed to keep out the new scary variants? Next you'll be telling me it's appeared in places like Australia and Singapore.
Oh.
bodhi said:
isaldiri said:
EddieSteadyGo said:
Israel have stated specifically they will not and are not pursuing a zerocovid strategy. However, they left restrictions in place far longer than was necessary which artificially limited close contacts. So inevitably, as they reopen fully, you are going to get clustered outbreaks as the virus works to find its way to infect the last 10% of adults and a big chunk of the teenage population in Israel..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-57594...And as I was saying...... So 90+% vaccinated adults but now back to restrictions because 'infections' are up again. You tell me if the 'not pursuing zero covid' guff actually matches to reality.
Hang on a minute - Israel have pretty much slammed the borders shut, yet they are now having a Delta wave from abroad? I thought turning the country into a fortress and not letting people leave was guaranteed to keep out the new scary variants? Next you'll be telling me it's appeared in places like Australia and Singapore.
Oh.
NRS said:
MOTORVATOR said:
isaldiri said:
plasticpig said:
NRS said:
They never care about stopping the transmission rate in the past with flu, and that kills lot of old people who were not jabbed or who didn't have enough protection. Why change strategy now?
And I'd have to say if old vulnerable people have not had the jab now and get seriously sick/die it is their own choice. We shouldn't keep lots of restrictions to protect people who won't help themselves.
R0 of flu is a lot lower than Covid. And I'd have to say if old vulnerable people have not had the jab now and get seriously sick/die it is their own choice. We shouldn't keep lots of restrictions to protect people who won't help themselves.
I imagine you actually know all that but choose to argue there is no need for further works to stabilise the infections.
All that said, my answer was in respect of the latest swerve ball attempt to redefine R0. That is a mathematical term that does not alter over time other than by variation of the infection rate of the prevalent strains.
MOTORVATOR said:
Well the answer to your point is the vaccine strategy has a dual role of primary and secondary protection. Infections at a manageable and relatively constant level without external intervention is what determines the virus being endemic rather than epidemic.
I imagine you actually know all that but choose to argue there is no need for further works to stabilise the infections.
All that said, my answer was in respect of the latest swerve ball attempt to redefine R0. That is a mathematical term that does not alter over time other than by variation of the infection rate of the prevalent strains.
Not saying there is no need to further work on it, but I'd say it looks fine to open now as we continue with the rest given the major issues are basically stopped, and most of those who will have issues have chosen not to get protected. Infections don't matter much if there isn't big risks after. That said, it's still better to give the current vaccines being produced to those outside the UK who need it most. I imagine you actually know all that but choose to argue there is no need for further works to stabilise the infections.
All that said, my answer was in respect of the latest swerve ball attempt to redefine R0. That is a mathematical term that does not alter over time other than by variation of the infection rate of the prevalent strains.
NRS said:
MOTORVATOR said:
Well the answer to your point is the vaccine strategy has a dual role of primary and secondary protection. Infections at a manageable and relatively constant level without external intervention is what determines the virus being endemic rather than epidemic.
I imagine you actually know all that but choose to argue there is no need for further works to stabilise the infections.
All that said, my answer was in respect of the latest swerve ball attempt to redefine R0. That is a mathematical term that does not alter over time other than by variation of the infection rate of the prevalent strains.
Not saying there is no need to further work on it, but I'd say it looks fine to open now as we continue with the rest given the major issues are basically stopped, and most of those who will have issues have chosen not to get protected. Infections don't matter much if there isn't big risks after. That said, it's still better to give the current vaccines being produced to those outside the UK who need it most. I imagine you actually know all that but choose to argue there is no need for further works to stabilise the infections.
All that said, my answer was in respect of the latest swerve ball attempt to redefine R0. That is a mathematical term that does not alter over time other than by variation of the infection rate of the prevalent strains.
If we remove every last intervention it's possible that infections could run to similar levels as they were at last peak given there's still sufficient susceptible out there. Undoubtedly that would result in an increased number of hospitalisations and death although how high is anyone's guess.
The last thing any of us need to see is rampant nationwide prevalence causing a problem that then takes a hammer to crack the nut.
All for opening up while continuing to push the vaccine take up but an eye of caution needed until we reintroduce the local environmental / public health systems to deal with outbreaks as is the normal case with infectious agents.
NRS said:
Not saying there is no need to further work on it, but I'd say it looks fine to open now as we continue with the rest given the major issues are basically stopped, and most of those who will have issues have chosen not to get protected. Infections don't matter much if there isn't big risks after. That said, it's still better to give the current vaccines being produced to those outside the UK who need it most.
not entirely sure why pointing out transmission rate amongst a population that is unexposed and susceptible to an emergent virus isn't going to be the same as virus that (much more similarly to influenza) is endemic and circulating amongst the population has proven to rile up some people so much. Transmission rate of covid now is the number that should be compared to flu, not the earlier R0 number as quoted by plasticpig comparing the 2 as that is an obsolete number at this point, certainly in the UK.
isaldiri said:
NRS said:
Not saying there is no need to further work on it, but I'd say it looks fine to open now as we continue with the rest given the major issues are basically stopped, and most of those who will have issues have chosen not to get protected. Infections don't matter much if there isn't big risks after. That said, it's still better to give the current vaccines being produced to those outside the UK who need it most.
not entirely sure why pointing out transmission rate amongst a population that is unexposed and susceptible to an emergent virus isn't going to be the same as virus that (much more similarly to influenza) is endemic and circulating amongst the population has proven to rile up some people so much. Transmission rate of covid now is the number that should be compared to flu, not the earlier R0 number as quoted by plasticpig comparing the 2 as that is an obsolete number at this point, certainly in the UK.
And in playing things down by using the term endemic you are ignoring the fact that the virus has not achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence with simple outbreaks for it to be called that as yet here and is presently balanced between hyperendemic and epidemic just as it was in September when you were making the same claims of it all being over.
One would hope we are a damn sight closer to endemic state and nothing scary about the above but what riles people is when details are manipulated to suit an agenda.
MOTORVATOR said:
The basic reproduction number does not change any more than it does with Flu when we start the annual vaccination rounds. They are directly comparable for what they are particularly as we have no idea of the longevity of protection afforded by either infection or vaccine.
And it seems to have passed you by that flu (pre annual vaccine) has in some form been circulating for eons and there is a meaningful amount of protective cross immunity in the population to different flu variants and the population isn't going to be 100% susceptible (unlike as I said for a newly emergent virus). That would more or less be the case with covid now but not last year.MOTORVATOR said:
And in playing things down by using the term endemic you are ignoring the fact that the virus has not achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence with simple outbreaks for it to be called that as yet here and is presently balanced between hyperendemic and epidemic just as it was in September when you were making the same claims of it all being over.
Perhaps you might want to pay a little more attention to what is actually being written. I made no claims it was 'all over' in September last year. In fact by mid to late summer, antibody levels were very clearly showing not enough people had been infected and even before that, not enough people had died for that to be the case. I made that point pretty clearly that a lot of susceptible people still were around in autumn last year in the other thread. And 'not having achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence' has been addressed by eddiesteadygo previously and in quite a lot of posts. The exit wave of infections as restrictions are lifted is necessary to achieve that. it has to happen come what may unless one believes eradication is possible. Suppressing infections now just moves them later otherwise.
MOTORVATOR said:
what riles people is when details are manipulated to suit an agenda.
Bit rich coming from you of all people.... MOTORVATOR said:
isaldiri said:
NRS said:
Not saying there is no need to further work on it, but I'd say it looks fine to open now as we continue with the rest given the major issues are basically stopped, and most of those who will have issues have chosen not to get protected. Infections don't matter much if there isn't big risks after. That said, it's still better to give the current vaccines being produced to those outside the UK who need it most.
not entirely sure why pointing out transmission rate amongst a population that is unexposed and susceptible to an emergent virus isn't going to be the same as virus that (much more similarly to influenza) is endemic and circulating amongst the population has proven to rile up some people so much. Transmission rate of covid now is the number that should be compared to flu, not the earlier R0 number as quoted by plasticpig comparing the 2 as that is an obsolete number at this point, certainly in the UK.
And in playing things down by using the term endemic you are ignoring the fact that the virus has not achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence with simple outbreaks for it to be called that as yet here and is presently balanced between hyperendemic and epidemic just as it was in September when you were making the same claims of it all being over.
One would hope we are a damn sight closer to endemic state and nothing scary about the above but what riles people is when details are manipulated to suit an agenda.
To sugest that an R0 value is fixed shows a woeful lack of understanding...
This might help...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC63025...
The Basic reproduction number will be different depending where and how you live amongst many other factors. Living in a town or city will result in a higher R number compared to living in a rural location for example as it is a factor of how many people you are able to infect.
Vanden Saab said:
MOTORVATOR said:
isaldiri said:
NRS said:
Not saying there is no need to further work on it, but I'd say it looks fine to open now as we continue with the rest given the major issues are basically stopped, and most of those who will have issues have chosen not to get protected. Infections don't matter much if there isn't big risks after. That said, it's still better to give the current vaccines being produced to those outside the UK who need it most.
not entirely sure why pointing out transmission rate amongst a population that is unexposed and susceptible to an emergent virus isn't going to be the same as virus that (much more similarly to influenza) is endemic and circulating amongst the population has proven to rile up some people so much. Transmission rate of covid now is the number that should be compared to flu, not the earlier R0 number as quoted by plasticpig comparing the 2 as that is an obsolete number at this point, certainly in the UK.
And in playing things down by using the term endemic you are ignoring the fact that the virus has not achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence with simple outbreaks for it to be called that as yet here and is presently balanced between hyperendemic and epidemic just as it was in September when you were making the same claims of it all being over.
One would hope we are a damn sight closer to endemic state and nothing scary about the above but what riles people is when details are manipulated to suit an agenda.
To sugest that an R0 value is fixed shows a woeful lack of understanding...
This might help...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC63025...
The Basic reproduction number will be different depending where and how you live amongst many other factors. Living in a town or city will result in a higher R number compared to living in a rural location for example as it is a factor of how many people you are able to infect.
"Because many researchers using R0 have not been trained in sophisticated mathematical techniques, R0 is easily subject to misrepresentation, misinterpretation, and misapplication. Notable examples include incorrectly defining R0 (1) and misinterpreting the effects of vaccination on R0"
R0 is not affected by vaccination programs and was misrepresented by Isaldiri as having changed as a result of it.
isaldiri said:
MOTORVATOR said:
The basic reproduction number does not change any more than it does with Flu when we start the annual vaccination rounds. They are directly comparable for what they are particularly as we have no idea of the longevity of protection afforded by either infection or vaccine.
And it seems to have passed you by that flu (pre annual vaccine) has in some form been circulating for eons and there is a meaningful amount of protective cross immunity in the population to different flu variants and the population isn't going to be 100% susceptible (unlike as I said for a newly emergent virus). That would more or less be the case with covid now but not last year.MOTORVATOR said:
And in playing things down by using the term endemic you are ignoring the fact that the virus has not achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence with simple outbreaks for it to be called that as yet here and is presently balanced between hyperendemic and epidemic just as it was in September when you were making the same claims of it all being over.
Perhaps you might want to pay a little more attention to what is actually being written. I made no claims it was 'all over' in September last year. In fact by mid to late summer, antibody levels were very clearly showing not enough people had been infected and even before that, not enough people had died for that to be the case. I made that point pretty clearly that a lot of susceptible people still were around in autumn last year in the other thread. And 'not having achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence' has been addressed by eddiesteadygo previously and in quite a lot of posts. The exit wave of infections as restrictions are lifted is necessary to achieve that. it has to happen come what may unless one believes eradication is possible. Suppressing infections now just moves them later otherwise.
MOTORVATOR said:
what riles people is when details are manipulated to suit an agenda.
Bit rich coming from you of all people.... But it seems you now agree that the virus has not achieved endemic status here as yet as you also agree an exit wave(s) of undefined proportion will occur.
How do you then square your incessant claims that efforts to achieve that endemic status is actually a #zerocovid strategy?
MOTORVATOR said:
My stance has never changed once in that reasonable and contained prevalence is the key to final exit.
But it seems you now agree that the virus has not achieved endemic status here as yet as you also agree an exit wave(s) of undefined proportion will occur.
How do you then square your incessant claims that efforts to achieve that endemic status is actually a #zerocovid strategy?
I know you are using a specific, technical definition of the word 'endemic' but I'm seeing scientists and specialists increasing using that term to describe where we now with covid. Here is Prof Spector for example....you should tell him he is using the word incorrectly But it seems you now agree that the virus has not achieved endemic status here as yet as you also agree an exit wave(s) of undefined proportion will occur.
How do you then square your incessant claims that efforts to achieve that endemic status is actually a #zerocovid strategy?
https://twitter.com/timspector/status/140867058373...
MOTORVATOR said:
Vanden Saab said:
MOTORVATOR said:
isaldiri said:
NRS said:
Not saying there is no need to further work on it, but I'd say it looks fine to open now as we continue with the rest given the major issues are basically stopped, and most of those who will have issues have chosen not to get protected. Infections don't matter much if there isn't big risks after. That said, it's still better to give the current vaccines being produced to those outside the UK who need it most.
not entirely sure why pointing out transmission rate amongst a population that is unexposed and susceptible to an emergent virus isn't going to be the same as virus that (much more similarly to influenza) is endemic and circulating amongst the population has proven to rile up some people so much. Transmission rate of covid now is the number that should be compared to flu, not the earlier R0 number as quoted by plasticpig comparing the 2 as that is an obsolete number at this point, certainly in the UK.
And in playing things down by using the term endemic you are ignoring the fact that the virus has not achieved the necessary steady state of prevalence with simple outbreaks for it to be called that as yet here and is presently balanced between hyperendemic and epidemic just as it was in September when you were making the same claims of it all being over.
One would hope we are a damn sight closer to endemic state and nothing scary about the above but what riles people is when details are manipulated to suit an agenda.
To sugest that an R0 value is fixed shows a woeful lack of understanding...
This might help...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC63025...
The Basic reproduction number will be different depending where and how you live amongst many other factors. Living in a town or city will result in a higher R number compared to living in a rural location for example as it is a factor of how many people you are able to infect.
"Because many researchers using R0 have not been trained in sophisticated mathematical techniques, R0 is easily subject to misrepresentation, misinterpretation, and misapplication. Notable examples include incorrectly defining R0 (1) and misinterpreting the effects of vaccination on R0"
R0 is not affected by vaccination programs and was misrepresented by Isaldiri as having changed as a result of it.
I know it is quoted above but here it is again so you can read it...
Isaldiri said:
Transmission rate of covid now is the number that should be compared to flu, not the earlier R0 number as quoted by plasticpig comparing the 2 as that is an obsolete number at this point, certainly in the UK.
Humans have always had some immunity to flu so any measure of R0 used for it will always be reduced compared to a novel virus such as Covid where there is little or no immunity. Comparing the two directly is not possible unless you can go back to a point where we had no immunity to flu. Matty3 said:
Roman Rhodes said:
Matty3 said:
abzmike said:
Matty3 said:
Best of luck to you jabbed peeps. 3 folk I know were admitted to hospital within 3 days of their first jab, dont know one person who has been admitted with 'first degree' Covid of whatever mutation. Delaying my jabbing until it is approved in 2023, think I will pass even then.
Presumably you expect to enjoy the benefits of 80% of the population being jabbed?You really do need to research the facts.
Matty3 said:
Absolutely, hunt it out. 2023 is hopefully when the vaccine will become proven, after the usual due diligence. Good luck to you folk who put your trust in the Pharma industry and their past exemplary conduct!
I'm alive because of the "pharma industry", so yeah I will put my faith in that rather than the fruit loops on the internet who think they're enlightened because they read a Facebook post about a killer vaccine.Vanden Saab said:
No he did not if you had actually read what he posted... Which you obviously did not do. He was pointing out the difference between the R0 number quoted and the effective R0 following vaccination...
If you actually pothered to read what he posted. :rollseyes:isaldiri said:
The R0 of covid when it settles as being endemic with everyone being infected or vaccinated at some point is unclear. You can't properly compare r0 of an emergent virus with most susceptible like covid to flu which has been cycling through the human population for centuries where we don't incessantly test for asymptomatic infection.
Specifically the two things you do not change 'R0' to take account of as the effective rate 'R' is that calculation as stated in your shared document.Well I brought my second jab forward to today ( from July 4th ). I’m fairly sure they used the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine this time, I didn’t get a leaflet so I’m not 100 percent sure, but there was a sign on the wall with Pfizer waiting area written on it, that wasn’t there last time. It was the OAZ last time. The experience was totally different this time. The OAZ burned a bit as it was injected, this one didn’t. My arm hurt after the OAZ, it doesn’t after this one. I’ll see how I feel tomorrow to see if that’s different as well. I guess it could just be a different batch of the OAZ of course, but it feels totally different this time.
EddieSteadyGo said:
MOTORVATOR said:
My stance has never changed once in that reasonable and contained prevalence is the key to final exit.
But it seems you now agree that the virus has not achieved endemic status here as yet as you also agree an exit wave(s) of undefined proportion will occur.
How do you then square your incessant claims that efforts to achieve that endemic status is actually a #zerocovid strategy?
I know you are using a specific, technical definition of the word 'endemic' but I'm seeing scientists and specialists increasing using that term to describe where we now with covid. Here is Prof Spector for example....you should tell him he is using the word incorrectly But it seems you now agree that the virus has not achieved endemic status here as yet as you also agree an exit wave(s) of undefined proportion will occur.
How do you then square your incessant claims that efforts to achieve that endemic status is actually a #zerocovid strategy?
https://twitter.com/timspector/status/140867058373...
It grates with me only because I have spent the last week collating information for this mornings submission to Guernsey Civil Contingencies Authority* as they have in the last week determined that the virus is not presently endemic as expected and they need to continue utilising their categories for those traveling and not fully vaccinated.
Within our submission I avoided trying to argue with them that it actually was endemic according to a PH expert as I didn't think it would help our cause.
- other countries viewing us similarly.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff