CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 15)
Discussion
johnboy1975 said:
Surely it would slow all the way, not speed up, then drop off? I think that's Isaldiri's point, and I agree.
I'm sure there's a positive spin that could be put on the robustness of a prior infection, but I've been brainwashed to believe that you are only truly safe with 2 doses plus a booster......
Well, we are going to find out within the next 3-4 weeks who's right!I'm sure there's a positive spin that could be put on the robustness of a prior infection, but I've been brainwashed to believe that you are only truly safe with 2 doses plus a booster......
EddieSteadyGo said:
johnboy1975 said:
Surely it would slow all the way, not speed up, then drop off? I think that's Isaldiri's point, and I agree.
I'm sure there's a positive spin that could be put on the robustness of a prior infection, but I've been brainwashed to believe that you are only truly safe with 2 doses plus a booster......
Well, we are going to find out within the next 3-4 weeks who's right!I'm sure there's a positive spin that could be put on the robustness of a prior infection, but I've been brainwashed to believe that you are only truly safe with 2 doses plus a booster......
The school (and I think the area) has done no vaccinations at all (not yet offered)
This is Off Topic...
... or not, depending on if there actually is graphene oxide in the injectables
https://twitter.com/Kukicat7/status/14490939244847...
Graphene nanobots, anyone?
... or not, depending on if there actually is graphene oxide in the injectables
https://twitter.com/Kukicat7/status/14490939244847...
Graphene nanobots, anyone?
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Did you see that basketball player Kyrie Irving has basically been banned from playing due to not getting injected, and the Press have worked out he's probably putting something like $200m of income at risk by refusing to change his position?https://clutchpoints.com/nets-rumors-kyrie-irving-...
https://twitter.com/TheAthletic/status/14486560371...
I think that's some pretty strong principles right there... lol
EddieSteadyGo said:
Well, we are going to find out within the next 3-4 weeks who's right!
Not really. Transmission falling below 1 may or may not be related that X% infection rate being reached but any number of other factors as well.
20-24 has remained stable for weeks and if anything is going up again now with R>1 again when lilico's herd immunity guff should mean it should be steadily decreasing even if slowly due to lack of hosts. That susceptible hosts for the time being will run out at some point is obvious but that's not at all necessarily related to his supposed 70% figure.
At risk of repeating myself, if at 55-60% infection transmission could increase substantially such that supposedly 1/8 of the entire susceptible population of 10-14 can be infected currently, it is very implausible that at 70% (and in 2 weeks) that transmission gets so substantially reduced from that extra 10% of infections that it drops from well over 1 to 0.8 especially given the supposed R0 levels being estimated at something silly like 6+.
Edited by isaldiri on Tuesday 19th October 23:18
isaldiri said:
Not really.
Transmission falling below 1 may or may not be related that X% infection rate being reached but any number of other factors as well.
20-24 has remained stable for weeks and if anything is going up again now with R>1 again when lilico's herd immunity guff should mean it should be steadily decreasing even if slowly due to lack of hosts. That susceptible hosts for the time being will run out at some point is obvious but that's not at all necessarily related to his supposed 70% figure.
At risk of repeating myself, if at 55-60% infection transmission could increase substantially such that supposedly 1/8 of the entire susceptible population of 10-14 can be infected currently, it is very implausible that at 70% (and in 2 weeks) that transmission gets so substantially reduced from that extra 10% of infections that it drops from well over 1 to 0.8 especially given the supposed R0 levels being estimated at something silly like 6+.
If the actual R0 value was around 6 then I would assume the threshold before infections would tail off would be somewhere around 85%. I personally don't think R0 is as high as that either.Transmission falling below 1 may or may not be related that X% infection rate being reached but any number of other factors as well.
20-24 has remained stable for weeks and if anything is going up again now with R>1 again when lilico's herd immunity guff should mean it should be steadily decreasing even if slowly due to lack of hosts. That susceptible hosts for the time being will run out at some point is obvious but that's not at all necessarily related to his supposed 70% figure.
At risk of repeating myself, if at 55-60% infection transmission could increase substantially such that supposedly 1/8 of the entire susceptible population of 10-14 can be infected currently, it is very implausible that at 70% (and in 2 weeks) that transmission gets so substantially reduced from that extra 10% of infections that it drops from well over 1 to 0.8 especially given the supposed R0 levels being estimated at something silly like 6+.
The ONS prevalence infection figures for the 20-24 age group haven't remained stable - there were around 4% of this age group who would have tested positive around the 3rd week of July. That has dropped by a factor of 4 to be just now around 1%. So cases in that age group have already dropped substantially. At their current levels I think it is likely they will bounce around and even possible increase a bit.
If the ONS figures are right and we are seeing ~5% per week of young teenagers being newly infected with covid, then there are only three scenarios once we get into November - either they continue during November at the same rate, or we see a gradual slow down in the rate of new infections or a faster slowdown. I define a faster slowdown being an R value of ~0.8 which is what I think we will see. What do think will happen?
Delta? Pah, old news.
Delta Plus is where it's at
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/dr-gottlieb-war...
Wake me up when we get to Delta Extreme!
Delta Plus is where it's at
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/dr-gottlieb-war...
Wake me up when we get to Delta Extreme!
EddieSteadyGo said:
The ONS prevalence infection figures for the 20-24 age group haven't remained stable - there were around 4% of this age group who would have tested positive around the 3rd week of July. That has dropped by a factor of 4 to be just now around 1%. So cases in that age group have already dropped substantially. At their current levels I think it is likely they will bounce around and even possible increase a bit.
Stable as in... fairly constant since mid September.....Why would it increase a bit from now if sufficient immunity levels (70% or whatever it might be) was reached that was the primary cause of infections in the 20-25 age group falling since July? If hitting 70% was the main trigger in July for infections to turn around and start falling, infection levels now would only be higher than 70% (perhaps 75% by now 3 months after) and even further beyond the HiT point so infections should not be increasing....
EddieSteadyGo said:
If the ONS figures are right and we are seeing ~5% per week of young teenagers being newly infected with covid, then there are only three scenarios once we get into November - either they continue during November at the same rate, or we see a gradual slow down in the rate of new infections or a faster slowdown. I define a faster slowdown being an R value of ~0.8 which is what I think we will see. What do think will happen?
Well, whatever I think may or may not happen isn't really relevant to whether 70% (or whatever level you might want to use) is the probable current infection rate. Yes it'll probably fall off but very high infection levels have simply not been sustained for long times for all manner of reasons (behaviour that drove the increase initially changes, those most likely to get infected get infected early leaving a big tail of laggards etcetc). Epidemic maths in a very simplistic model is pretty clear that infection/susceptible population changes will not within a 10% band be the reason for transmission rate to change from ~1.5 to 0.8 within of 2-3 infection cycles. And as I keep saying, if you really only have 40% of the population susceptible, 1/8th of all of those who could be infected actually being infected would be an incredibly high number. If infection levels were the main cause of transmission changes the rate of change of infections as it gets closer to HiT should be gradually decreasing rather than remaining high up to HiT then dropping off very quickly.
RSTurboPaul said:
Delta? Pah, old news.
Delta Plus is where it's at
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/dr-gottlieb-war...
Wake me up when we get to Delta Extreme!
Im actually surprised that we've spent 18 months saying "beware deadly variants" and yet we are in a position where 10% of all new infections are Delta+, without hardly a word from Boris, SKS, Whitty, JvT, indy sage, Sage, Tim S, Sturgeon, Sridhar - basically the usual suspects. Plus the MSMDelta Plus is where it's at
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/dr-gottlieb-war...
Wake me up when we get to Delta Extreme!
Has it mutated within the UK? In which case, even more surprising that those cautioning against "running hot" this summer should omit to mention it, as one of the main reasons against doing so was "more cases, more risk of variants". (And entirely understandable that Boris would want to avoid it)
BBC said:
Covid: Bring back rules amid rising cases, urge NHS chiefs
Some Covid restrictions must immediately be reintroduced if England is to avoid "stumbling into a winter crisis", health leaders have warned.
The NHS Confederation said ministers' "Plan B" back-up strategy, including mandatory face coverings in crowded and enclosed spaces, should be implemented.
UK cases have been rising sharply but deaths are well below the winter peak.
The government says it has "absolutely no plan" for further measures but is keeping a "very close eye" on the data.
...
The government's Plan A for dealing with Covid in England this winter is currently in place - with booster jabs offered to about 30 million people, a single dose of a vaccine available for healthy 12 to 15-year-olds and people advised to wear face coverings in crowded places.
If these measures are not enough to prevent "unsustainable pressure" on the NHS, then steps like making face coverings mandatory in some settings, asking people to work from home and introducing vaccine passports could be considered as part of Plan B.
Matthew Taylor, head of the NHS Confederation, which represents health service organisations, is urging the government to roll out these extra measures to avoid hospitals becoming overwhelmed.
"The NHS is preparing for what could be the most challenging winter on record," he said.
"It is time for the government to enact Plan B of its strategy without delay because without pre-emptive action, we risk stumbling into a winter crisis."
Ministers "should not wait for Covid infections to rocket and for NHS pressures to be sky high before the panic alarm is sounded", he added.
Source; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58976577Some Covid restrictions must immediately be reintroduced if England is to avoid "stumbling into a winter crisis", health leaders have warned.
The NHS Confederation said ministers' "Plan B" back-up strategy, including mandatory face coverings in crowded and enclosed spaces, should be implemented.
UK cases have been rising sharply but deaths are well below the winter peak.
The government says it has "absolutely no plan" for further measures but is keeping a "very close eye" on the data.
...
The government's Plan A for dealing with Covid in England this winter is currently in place - with booster jabs offered to about 30 million people, a single dose of a vaccine available for healthy 12 to 15-year-olds and people advised to wear face coverings in crowded places.
If these measures are not enough to prevent "unsustainable pressure" on the NHS, then steps like making face coverings mandatory in some settings, asking people to work from home and introducing vaccine passports could be considered as part of Plan B.
Matthew Taylor, head of the NHS Confederation, which represents health service organisations, is urging the government to roll out these extra measures to avoid hospitals becoming overwhelmed.
"The NHS is preparing for what could be the most challenging winter on record," he said.
"It is time for the government to enact Plan B of its strategy without delay because without pre-emptive action, we risk stumbling into a winter crisis."
Ministers "should not wait for Covid infections to rocket and for NHS pressures to be sky high before the panic alarm is sounded", he added.
isaldiri said:
Why would it increase a bit from now if sufficient immunity levels (70% or whatever it might be) was reached that was the primary cause of infections in the 20-25 age group falling since July?...
Changing behaviors resulting in increased mixing as more people return to normal, and possibly some waning immunity, could result in modest increases in this age group.isaldiri said:
Well, whatever I think may or may not happen isn't really relevant to whether 70% (or whatever level you might want to use) is the probable current infection rate. Yes it'll probably fall off but very high infection levels have simply not been sustained for long times for all manner of reasons (behaviour that drove the increase initially changes, those most likely to get infected get infected early leaving a big tail of laggards etcetc).
....
The current rules which affect the behavioural interactions between children in school are minimal to non-existent. So I think we can say broadly speaking that children playing and interacting with other should be consistent, unless any new policies are introduced. Although actually maybe you could expect some increase in spread possibly due to seasonal effects with less outdoor play over winter. ....
Obviously most children also don't really get the ability to decide the general quantity of interactions with other children, at least to the same extent as an adult who can choose the type of job they do, and the amount of socialising they prefer.
So if we see a significant drop in infection rate (with R ~0.8) in this age group within the next three weeks, then the most obvious cause would be lack of new hosts.
isaldiri said:
...
Epidemic maths in a very simplistic model is pretty clear that infection/susceptible population changes will not within a 10% band be the reason for transmission rate to change from ~1.5 to 0.8 within of 2-3 infection cycles. And as I keep saying, if you really only have 40% of the population susceptible, 1/8th of all of those who could be infected actually being infected would be an incredibly high number. If infection levels were the main cause of transmission changes the rate of change of infections as it gets closer to HiT should be gradually decreasing rather than remaining high up to HiT then dropping off very quickly.
So using your maths, and if behaviours e.g. mixing between children is likely to be broadly consistent during November (assuming no new government policies are introduced) then you would not expect an R value of ~0.8 for the 10-14 age group by the time we get to mid November. We will need to wait and see what happens. Epidemic maths in a very simplistic model is pretty clear that infection/susceptible population changes will not within a 10% band be the reason for transmission rate to change from ~1.5 to 0.8 within of 2-3 infection cycles. And as I keep saying, if you really only have 40% of the population susceptible, 1/8th of all of those who could be infected actually being infected would be an incredibly high number. If infection levels were the main cause of transmission changes the rate of change of infections as it gets closer to HiT should be gradually decreasing rather than remaining high up to HiT then dropping off very quickly.
RSTurboPaul said:
Delta? Pah, old news.
Delta Plus is where it's at
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/dr-gottlieb-war...
Wake me up when we get to Delta Extreme!
Or Delta Insane or even Delta Ludicrous!Delta Plus is where it's at
https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/dr-gottlieb-war...
Wake me up when we get to Delta Extreme!
g3org3y said:
BBC said:
Covid: Bring back rules amid rising cases, urge NHS chiefs
Some Covid restrictions must immediately be reintroduced if England is to avoid "stumbling into a winter crisis", health leaders have warned.
The NHS Confederation said ministers' "Plan B" back-up strategy, including mandatory face coverings in crowded and enclosed spaces, should be implemented.
UK cases have been rising sharply but deaths are well below the winter peak.
The government says it has "absolutely no plan" for further measures but is keeping a "very close eye" on the data.
...
The government's Plan A for dealing with Covid in England this winter is currently in place - with booster jabs offered to about 30 million people, a single dose of a vaccine available for healthy 12 to 15-year-olds and people advised to wear face coverings in crowded places.
If these measures are not enough to prevent "unsustainable pressure" on the NHS, then steps like making face coverings mandatory in some settings, asking people to work from home and introducing vaccine passports could be considered as part of Plan B.
Matthew Taylor, head of the NHS Confederation, which represents health service organisations, is urging the government to roll out these extra measures to avoid hospitals becoming overwhelmed.
"The NHS is preparing for what could be the most challenging winter on record," he said.
"It is time for the government to enact Plan B of its strategy without delay because without pre-emptive action, we risk stumbling into a winter crisis."
Ministers "should not wait for Covid infections to rocket and for NHS pressures to be sky high before the panic alarm is sounded", he added.
Source; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-58976577Some Covid restrictions must immediately be reintroduced if England is to avoid "stumbling into a winter crisis", health leaders have warned.
The NHS Confederation said ministers' "Plan B" back-up strategy, including mandatory face coverings in crowded and enclosed spaces, should be implemented.
UK cases have been rising sharply but deaths are well below the winter peak.
The government says it has "absolutely no plan" for further measures but is keeping a "very close eye" on the data.
...
The government's Plan A for dealing with Covid in England this winter is currently in place - with booster jabs offered to about 30 million people, a single dose of a vaccine available for healthy 12 to 15-year-olds and people advised to wear face coverings in crowded places.
If these measures are not enough to prevent "unsustainable pressure" on the NHS, then steps like making face coverings mandatory in some settings, asking people to work from home and introducing vaccine passports could be considered as part of Plan B.
Matthew Taylor, head of the NHS Confederation, which represents health service organisations, is urging the government to roll out these extra measures to avoid hospitals becoming overwhelmed.
"The NHS is preparing for what could be the most challenging winter on record," he said.
"It is time for the government to enact Plan B of its strategy without delay because without pre-emptive action, we risk stumbling into a winter crisis."
Ministers "should not wait for Covid infections to rocket and for NHS pressures to be sky high before the panic alarm is sounded", he added.
ked up yet again in preparing the NHS for winter despite having plenty of warning and bags of cash - well done anonymous said:
[redacted]
And they can fk aaaall the way off. The cracks are starting to show in this whole thing so it’s inevitable a deterrent/incentive offensive is due.
Remember, the government and authorities have consistently lied, misled and backtracked. They’ve destroyed any credibility in anything they say for me.
V1nce Fox said:
And they can fk aaaall the way off.
The cracks are starting to show in this whole thing so it’s inevitable a deterrent/incentive offensive is due.
Remember, the government and authorities have consistently lied, misled and backtracked. They’ve destroyed any credibility in anything they say for me.
Totally agree, but I think Joe Public will still go along with it. The brainwashing has been pretty successful thus far.k aaaall the way off. The cracks are starting to show in this whole thing so it’s inevitable a deterrent/incentive offensive is due.
Remember, the government and authorities have consistently lied, misled and backtracked. They’ve destroyed any credibility in anything they say for me.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff