Coronavirus - Data Analysis Thread

[Elysium]

havoc said:

Elysium said:

Think of the R number as an accelerator on a machine that makes widgets.
...
So what are our options:
1. Try to stop it
2. Slow it down / stay as we are
3. Continue to unlock

Interesting perspective...and statistically persuasive.

I would throw a few challenges at that though:-
1) We're dealing with individuals, who aren't (at all) logical, on both sides. So you'll have those deliberately getting in other people's faces because they can, and at the other end of the scale it will lead to those individuals feeling vulnerable or suffering from anxiety being effectively pushed back into isolating in their homes (which will exacerbate any pre-existing mental health issues) because they can no longer rely on their fellow countrymen behaving reasonably. Worse would be where they cannot do this as they need to go to work...so force themselves into a stressful situation day after day.

I agree this is all a bit of a mess, but my experience is that most people are quite pragmatic about it. I'm not detecting the overwhelming sense of dread that we saw over the winter and which led to the last long and painful lockdown.

havoc said:

2) Given the vaccine efficacy rates, can anyone really see the NHS even approaching overload next winter? If not, then where is the NEED for this approach? If it's not medical (and the BMA seem against it), and it's going beyond what's economically necessary (no need to remove ALL mask-wearing and social-distancing requirements if we just want to open up hospitality etc.), then it's just populism...which is a frankly stty way to lead!

As I understand it the NHS approaches overload every winter. This time we also have:

a. A massive backlog to clear
b. A potential resurgence of other respiratory viruses, which have been suppressed, either through interaction with SARS-CoV-2 or through restrictions

As a result, the NHS has essentially zero capacity for any COVID in the winter. Which creates a public health need to get COVID done now. The alternative is a further lockdown, which drags this out by a full 12 months.

havoc said:

3) (Most critically) Given what we already know about this virus (and similar viruses), isn't accelerating the spread also accelerating the risk of further mutation into an Echo or Foxtrot variant, potentially (partly or wholly) sidestepping existing immune responses and creating a much bigger problem and many more fatalities...either late-summer/early-Autumn, or (worse) late-Autumn just in time to cause the NHS problems over Winter?


This last one, to me, is the big gamble - we've seen it mutate at least 3x already, and we've seen (in other countries where Delta is still small beer) how restricting the spread of the virus also restricts the ability of any mutation to gain a foothold. So deliberately allowing a virus to run wild on the grounds that "it won't kill that many people" , while ignoring the very real possibility of adverse mutation seems like a bad mix of:-
- Populism
- Optimism
- ...and ignoring medical advice

I understand there is an argument that restrictions limit transmission, which in turn limits mutations. I am not convinced that is what we have seen in practice. The two variants that have caused difficulty in the UK each evolved while restrictions were in place and succeeded because they were able to cut through those restrictions. They prevailed because of natural selection.

The underlying difficulty I have with your analysis of the situation is that you are taking the current situation as a starting point. The starting point should be the old normal. Thats how we should be living unless there are overwhelming public health reasons why that is impossible. If those overwhelming reasons do not exist, then the restrictions should be dropped.

Its not an optimisation problem.

[red_slr]

RSTurboPaul said:

There are thousands of different mutations already sequenced. They just don't mention that because it will make it sound like they have no way of controlling it. (Which they don't.)

Has there been any previous coronavirus that has got more virulent/fatal over time? Or have they all got easier to spread but less deadly, which benefits the virus because it has more hosts and can 'live' longer?

I read from some professor that all viruses need to strike a balance because as they become easier to spread they also give their hosts increased immunity. Such as measles or something else I cant remember. Really really easy to spread but once you have had it you get virtually life time immunity.

So most viruses will try and reach an equilibrium where they can spread (thus not killing their host) and not give too much immunity. Apparently this process can take many years.....

[havoc]

Elysium said:

I agree this is all a bit of a mess, but my experience is that most people are quite pragmatic about it. I'm not detecting the overwhelming sense of dread that we saw over the winter and which led to the last long and painful lockdown.

OK, this is completely unscientific, but I've exchanged messages with friends and family since last night, and had a few quick conversations with other parents on the school run...

...and the majority DO feel it's rather premature / too quick to can ALL restrictions. Most (working age) are being pragmatic and accepting that they can't control it, but that's different to welcoming it.

So I guess it depends on your peer group as to what the consensus is.

Elysium said:

As a result, the NHS has essentially zero capacity for any COVID in the winter. Which creates a public health need to get COVID done now. The alternative is a further lockdown, which drags this out by a full 12 months.

I think you're exaggerating there on both counts, and using a straw-man argument as well:-
- The NHS WILL cope. As well as it does with any winter virus. (And I also question why delays now will cause more problems in winter...unless you're banking all your hopes on herd immunity, which has already been shown to be of questionable validity given (a) the vaccine isn't 100% protection; and (b) we're seeing repeat infections)
- Why should it drag anything out by 12 months? We let people go back to hospitality and events/entertainment, but require masks in crowded indoor spaces. That's a sensible amendment to the gov't proposals without any further lockdown requirements. So lockdown ends but (un)common courtesy continues to be legally required...

Elysium said:

The underlying difficulty I have with your analysis of the situation is that you are taking the current situation as a starting point. The starting point should be the old normal. Thats how we should be living unless there are overwhelming public health reasons why that is impossible. If those overwhelming reasons do not exist, then the restrictions should be dropped.

Its not an optimisation problem.

I get your point. But I'm not sure we're there yet...and by all accounts neither is the head of the BMA nor several other senior medical professionals who have voiced real concerns since Boris' pronouncements.

I'm also yet to see ANY good reason why mask-wearing should have been dropped completely?

Opening everything up - I agree with...it's about time. Getting people back to 99% normal is fine...but what's this faux outrage about mask wearing?
(It DOES work...multiple studies by organisations across the world have shown it has a positive effect...while those studies questioning the efficacy have either relied on pointing out it's not 100% effective (as if that's ever been claimed) or have been disproven/shown to be questionable.)

[the-photographer]

This is from 11th June, anyone got updated numbers? More cases means more chance for it to find the unvaccinated

[404 Page not found]

Haboc...It's a shame, but it's up to you now to manage your perceived risk. Stay indoors as much as possible. If you do go out, wear a proper mask (not a flimsy disposable one), and avoid busy times or places. Wash when you get home etc etc. There are probably other things people of high risk like yourself can do.

[CarlosFandango11]

the-photographer said:

This is from 11th June, anyone got updated numbers? More cases means more chance for it to find the unvaccinated

For England, there's about 2m over 50s who have been vaccinated at all, and another 0.7m who have just had their first dose. That's at 3rd July.

[RSTurboPaul]

the-photographer said:

This is from 11th June, anyone got updated numbers? More cases means more chance for it to find the unvaccinated

Many of the unvaccinated will already have immunity through exposure.

Most of the unvaccinated are in age groups where Covid presents zero issues.

Covid is always going to be around - it is going to 'find' everyone, jabbed or unjabbed, and we will exist with it as we have the other coronaviruses.

And, of course, people's right to choose to 'take the risk' of illness instead of taking medication should be respected.

[spikeyhead]

the-photographer said:

This is from 11th June, anyone got updated numbers? More cases means more chance for it to find the unvaccinated

A quick look tells me that on the 11th June

First jabs second jab
41,297,016 29,472,332 78.4% 56%

and now we're at
First jabs second jab
45,351,719 33,726,362 86.1% 64%

So we've gone from 21.8% unprotected to 13.9% and from 46% partially to 36% partially.

...and a few more partially protected from those catching it recently

[havoc]

404 Page not found said:

Havoc...It's a shame, but it's up to you now to manage your perceived risk.

So it boils down to "fk anyone who's uncomfortable with this, who's got a compromised immune system* or is otherwise unwell, who's got mental health issues, or who is old and infirm!" does it?

...because that's the message I'm getting from Boris and from a few people on here...

What exactly happened to "we're all in this together"? What about actually being a society, rather than a loose collection of selfish individuals?

(...and what's most ridiculous is that most of those complaining about these changes AREN'T asking for an ongoing lockdown...)



* Simple straw poll - you or your partner has just been diagnosed with early stage cancer. Usually quite survivable, but the recommended treatment will fk with your immune system for a while, and catching Covid during that period could be lethal, vaccine or not. You both need to go into your place of work to keep your job. How do you feel now about the changes that Boris has announced?
(Currently c.2.5% of the country have cancer - 1 in 40, and c.50% of us will be diagnosed with it in our lifetime)

[Jinx]

havoc said:

So it boils down to "fk anyone who's uncomfortable with this, who's got a compromised immune system* or is otherwise unwell, who's got mental health issues, or who is old and infirm!" does it?

...because that's the message I'm getting from Boris and from a few people on here...

What exactly happened to "we're all in this together"? What about actually being a society, rather than a loose collection of selfish individuals?

(...and what's most ridiculous is that most of those complaining about these changes AREN'T asking for an ongoing lockdown...)



* Simple straw poll - you or your partner has just been diagnosed with early stage cancer. Usually quite survivable, but the recommended treatment will fk with your immune system for a while, and catching Covid during that period could be lethal, vaccine or not. You both need to go into your place of work to keep your job. How do you feel now about the changes that Boris has announced?
(Currently c.2.5% of the country have cancer - 1 in 40, and c.50% of us will be diagnosed with it in our lifetime)

Cloth masks have done little to nothing to stop the spread of covid 19. The treatment of Covid-19 as having a primarily droplet based infection vector has probably led to more cases of Covid-19 than if the precautions were just removed (the false sense of security around masks wearing and shopping last December was a huge driver in cases). Supermarkets turning off the air con hence reducing ventilation was also most likely a factor in the increased rates of infections in shopping staff during the first lockdown.
Masks have probably helped reduced bacterial and other infections but given the spreads of cases even with the mask law I do not have any faith in the cloth mask law. Get rid of it - keep you distance if you are at risk and avoid crowded spaces.

[Elysium]

havoc said:

* Simple straw poll - you or your partner has just been diagnosed with early stage cancer. Usually quite survivable, but the recommended treatment will fk with your immune system for a while, and catching Covid during that period could be lethal, vaccine or not. You both need to go into your place of work to keep your job. How do you feel now about the changes that Boris has announced?
(Currently c.2.5% of the country have cancer - 1 in 40, and c.50% of us will be diagnosed with it in our lifetime)

I have a family member who is living with long term cancer and a severely depleted immune system.

They have lived for many years with the reality that an 'ordinary' infection could be fatal. COVID is a new variable, but its just more of the same risk.

They are ignoring this and continuing as they have always done. They don't expect the world to change to protect them.

Edit to add: no one who is immune compromised should be expected to be return to a workplace at this moment. We have paid millions of people to stop working. We can find a way to help people in danger work from home.

Edited by Elysium on Tuesday 6th July 13:53

[havoc]

Jinx said:

Cloth masks have done little to nothing to stop the spread of covid 19.

There are a lot of medical and scientific professionals who disagree with you...

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n432
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-...
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-con...
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-19-coron...

...so who should I believe? Jinx on PH because "it's common sense" and "he's heard it down the pub", or dozens of medical professionals who've made their careers studying this stuff???
This isn't governments allegedly pushing a control agenda (and what exactly is controlling about asking people to wear a mask?), this is scientists...you know, people who WANT to find out facts.

[RSTurboPaul]

havoc said:

404 Page not found said:

Havoc...It's a shame, but it's up to you now to manage your perceived risk.

So it boils down to "fk anyone who's uncomfortable with this, who's got a compromised immune system* or is otherwise unwell, who's got mental health issues, or who is old and infirm!" does it?

...because that's the message I'm getting from Boris and from a few people on here...

What exactly happened to "we're all in this together"? What about actually being a society, rather than a loose collection of selfish individuals?

(...and what's most ridiculous is that most of those complaining about these changes AREN'T asking for an ongoing lockdown...)



* Simple straw poll - you or your partner has just been diagnosed with early stage cancer. Usually quite survivable, but the recommended treatment will fk with your immune system for a while, and catching Covid during that period could be lethal, vaccine or not. You both need to go into your place of work to keep your job. How do you feel now about the changes that Boris has announced?
(Currently c.2.5% of the country have cancer - 1 in 40, and c.50% of us will be diagnosed with it in our lifetime)

'We're all in this together'

Unless you're unvaccinated - in which case you can fk off if you think you have the same rights as a jabbed person, apparently.

[RSTurboPaul]

havoc said:

Jinx said:

Cloth masks have done little to nothing to stop the spread of covid 19.

There are a lot of medical and scientific professionals who disagree with you...

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n432
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-...
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-con...
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-19-coron...

...so who should I believe? Jinx on PH because "it's common sense" and "he's heard it down the pub", or dozens of medical professionals who've made their careers studying this stuff???
This isn't governments allegedly pushing a control agenda (and what exactly is controlling about asking people to wear a mask?), this is scientists...you know, people who WANT to find out facts.

It's a good job everyone's Lord and Saviour Fauci has been so consistent and clear about masks.


Errrrrr...

[havoc]

Elysium said:

COVID is a new variable, but its just more of the same risk.

They are ignoring this and continuing as they have always done. They don't expect the world to change to protect them.

Very stoic of them, and you all have my empathy.

However...
- Covid isn't more of the same risk, it's increased risk, and potentially significantly so, given the current rate of spread and power of the virus.
- Shouldn't "the world" (the UK) change ever-so-slightly (wearing masks in crowds etc.) to protect the 1.8m cancer sufferers in this country? And the diabetics, those with severe asthma and related disorders, those with other conditions that put them at increased risk? Got to be getting on for 4 million people on that list. Maybe quite a few more.

And yes, most of them probably WOULD survive Covid, especially once vaccinated. But if even 1% don't, that's another 30-40,000 deaths that could have been prevented if we hadn't been sent hurtling headlong towards 'herd immunity' against the advice of the BMA. I mean...masks are no longer compulsory in hospitals and care homes FFS...have we learned nothing?

RSTurboPaul said:

'We're all in this together'

Unless you're unvaccinated - in which case you can fk off if you think you have the same rights as a jabbed person, apparently.

I agree with you wholeheartedly on that - another example of unbridled populism by Boris, and about as helpful to social cohesion (which we badly need right now) as a chocolate fireguard.

PS - Fauci is a political animal, and I suspect the initial "don't need them" was (like in the UK) to prevent panic buying and preserve the supply chain to the emergency services and other medical professionals...it was a politically-necessary lie.

Edited by havoc on Tuesday 6th July 15:40

[Elysium]

havoc said:

Elysium said:

COVID is a new variable, but its just more of the same risk.

They are ignoring this and continuing as they have always done. They don't expect the world to change to protect them.

Very stoic of them, and you all have my empathy.

However...
- Covid isn't more of the same risk, it's increased risk, and potentially significantly so, given the current rate of spread and power of the virus.
- Shouldn't "the world" (the UK) change ever-so-slightly (wearing masks in crowds etc.) to protect the 1.8m cancer sufferers in this country? And the diabetics, those with severe asthma and related disorders, those with other conditions that put them at increased risk? Got to be getting on for 4 million people on that list. Maybe quite a few more.

And yes, most of them probably WOULD survive Covid, especially once vaccinated. But if even 1% don't, that's another 30-40,000 deaths that could have been prevented if we hadn't been sent hurtling headlong towards 'herd immunity' against the advice of the BMA. I mean...masks are no longer compulsory in hospitals and care homes FFS...have we learned nothing?

1. "More of the same" = "increased"

2. No the world should not change.

3. These are not preventable deaths.

This is supposed to be a thread about the data, not another thread where people argue about masks, so I am bowing out of the discussion at this point.

[Steve vRS]

What is the latest split of deaths vs. age?
I’ve tried searching the ONS site and can find great data for Wales but not the uk. Google finds lots of history but not current figures.

I want to understand how out of kilter keeping 500k kids out of school versus the hazard to them is, never mind the cost to society, fiscal and mental.

[Jinx]

havoc said:

There are a lot of medical and scientific professionals who disagree with you...

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n432
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-...
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02801-8
https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2020/06/417906/still-con...
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-19-coron...

...so who should I believe? Jinx on PH because "it's common sense" and "he's heard it down the pub", or dozens of medical professionals who've made their careers studying this stuff???
This isn't governments allegedly pushing a control agenda (and what exactly is controlling about asking people to wear a mask?), this is scientists...you know, people who WANT to find out facts.

Step by step the medical field is moving away from droplet and fomite transmission to the airborne transmission vector (<5 ?m)

https://www.journalofhospitalinfection.com/article...

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n1030

https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1319378/...
("A mask alone, even when it is used correctly, is insufficient to provide adequate protection or source control.")

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33633490/

You may notice that the pro mask articles all reference work with particle sizes above 5 ?m. This is not a coincidence.

So no, don't believe the man down the pub but read up on the current state of research and check what the supporting papers are actually saying. Science moves very slowly especially if the zeitgeist needs changing (there is undeniable evidence of Covid-19 being airborne (and therefore cloth mask wearing is worthless) but the prevalent medical knowledge was that Covid-19 as a corona virus spreads via droplets and fomites (the latter of which has only just been rescinded).

It has been the protocols that focused on the droplet and fomites based infection vectors that have increased exposure to and spread of Covid-19 (especially in the early stages) and I suspect similar protocols were in place in the labs in Wuhan.


[edited to add] we had a 2 week period where masks were not mandatory (1st to 14th July) but social distancing was and all other restrictions were the same. During this 2 week period there was an average week on week drop of cases (around -4%) - as soon as masks were introduced this switched to an increase (average 12%) over the next 2 week period. Prior to masks being introduced super markets kept people socially distant post mask rule - free for all.

Edited by Jinx on Tuesday 6th July 15:07

[NerveAgent]

havoc said:

404 Page not found said:

Havoc...It's a shame, but it's up to you now to manage your perceived risk.

So it boils down to "fk anyone who's uncomfortable with this, who's got a compromised immune system* or is otherwise unwell, who's got mental health issues, or who is old and infirm!" does it?

...because that's the message I'm getting from Boris and from a few people on here...

What exactly happened to "we're all in this together"? What about actually being a society, rather than a loose collection of selfish individuals?

(...and what's most ridiculous is that most of those complaining about these changes AREN'T asking for an ongoing lockdown...)



* Simple straw poll - you or your partner has just been diagnosed with early stage cancer. Usually quite survivable, but the recommended treatment will fk with your immune system for a while, and catching Covid during that period could be lethal, vaccine or not. You both need to go into your place of work to keep your job. How do you feel now about the changes that Boris has announced?
(Currently c.2.5% of the country have cancer - 1 in 40, and c.50% of us will be diagnosed with it in our lifetime)

“We’re all in this together”

Well unless you are one of the many that have had livelihoods/education screwed over. “Society” didn’t give a fk for many unless it’s covid.

[the-photographer]

Steve vRS said:

What is the latest split of deaths vs. age?
I’ve tried searching the ONS site and can find great data for Wales but not the uk. Google finds lots of history but not current figures.

I want to understand how out of kilter keeping 500k kids out of school versus the hazard to them is, never mind the cost to society, fiscal and mental.

Here is scotland, can't find a nice dashboard for England/UK

https://www.travellingtabby.com/scotland-coronavir...