Coronavirus (2021) thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
roubaixtuesday said:
Would really caution against getting too wound up over variants.

Firstly, there are thousands of them.

Secondly, strong scientific consensus that very unlikely to completely bypass vaccine efficacy.

Thirdly, COVID mutates slower than flu, which we control with a new vaccine each year.

Fourthly, the vaccine technologies used make responding to new variants easier than historic technologies used.

The precautionary response against the so-called Brazil one is perfectly sensible, although in huge contrast to our reactive response in everything else!
Click to expand...
Indeed, it’s always better to be cautious about this but it won’t be good for people’s mental health if they get down every-time another variant is discovered.

It’s good that we are able to find and detect all the many different ones which will enable us to adjust vaccines etc when/if needed.
 
BlueAnorak said:
It means it's barely different than the first lockdown.
It is otherwise meaningless unless they tell us the distribution type (binomial, normal, poisson, etc) and the upper quartile age (75% of people in ICU are below this age) and the lower quartile (25% of people in ICU are below this age).
Click to expand...
Precisely!
 
worsleyweb said:
it has allready ripped through the rest. 40 percent of Manchester have had it.
Click to expand...
Where did you get that from? Strikes me as unbelievable and just plain wrong tbh. By mid December the ONS estimated that 4.4m people across the UK (6.6% of the UK population) had been infected. Seems unbelievable to me that in Manchester it is 40%
 
Last edited:
roubaixtuesday said:
Would really caution against getting too wound up over variants.

Firstly, there are thousands of them.

Secondly, strong scientific consensus that very unlikely to completely bypass vaccine efficacy.

Thirdly, COVID mutates slower than flu, which we control with a new vaccine each year.

Fourthly, the vaccine technologies used make responding to new variants easier than historic technologies used.

The precautionary response against the so-called Brazil one is perfectly sensible, although in huge contrast to our reactive response in everything else!
Click to expand...

thanks for this post, as my main worry for future liberties, the country's health and personal freedoms is the variant.

Many 100s of millions around the world will not be vaccinated for a long time, giving more chance for mutation. If a variant is introduced to the UK in the future, from overseas, that has a degree of resistance to vaccine, is the precedent for tackling it now set? lockdowns or removal of liberties every time?

if there exists a known variant of vaccine resistance in, say, southern Africa will I be banned from travelling there to mitigate risk of bringing it back?

if the risk drops to a certain level, to be decided, i'd like that risk to be factored back into every day society, as the flu is. But the thing is, it always carries that higher IFR...

i dont expect you to answer these btw, just airing some concerns.
 
ayrshire_blue said:
these sort of quotes from respected people in such fields are on the scary side.
Click to expand...

Would be interested to see any scary quotes from respected people. I've not seen any such.

Quite a bit of media reporting as scary things that really aren't so much.

For example, that tweet is followed by this one

Deputy CMO says not to 'stay awake' worrying about this though, as effectiveness of vaccines is still very high for all variants.
 
NeilYoungIsBack said:
London has a lower average population age than other English regions.

Not sure if that explains all the difference in vaccination rates or not, but that's where I'd start to look
Click to expand...

Not sure that fully explains the differences. I know people down here who have underlying conditions are in their 70s but have not even been given an appointment. Yet I know if younger people in the north who have been given the vaccine. Rolling out a vaccine by age and health condition contains a lot of variables. I am sure the process is fair and their is nothing untoward.

I don't see it as a big issue but if positions were reversed between North and south, there would be uproar.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Where did you get that from? Strikes me as unbelievable and just plain wrong tbh. By mid December the ONS estimated that 4.4m people across the UK (6.6% of the UK population) had been infected. Seems unbelievable to me that in Manchester it is 40%
Click to expand...
Manchester's Pop score is 7309. That in effect translates to 7.3% of the population of the city have tested positive for Covid.

So that is the bare minimum it can be.

Some places have had almost 10% of people who have tested positive.

It is obviously FAR more who have had it than testing proves as until fairly recently the majority who caught it were not tested unless they got quite sick. Even now unless it becomes a problem plenty never get tested who likely do and rates will differ widely across the regions and much higher in urban areas.

We don't know exactly what the levels are but they are almost certainly over 20% and rising fast with this new variant. And in big cities could well be up to around a third by now even on conservative estimates. The rapid spread of the new variant is accelerating that number daily.

It is obvious even anecdotally. Up until 2 months ago I knew only one or two who might have had it and only one who had tested positive. By November it was suddenly 3 who definitely had it and tested and others likely who never did. As of now I am well into double figures just from family and close friends.

This will be happening all over the UK.
 
Last edited:
roubaixtuesday said:
Would be interested to see any scary quotes from respected people. I've not seen any such.

Quite a bit of media reporting as scary things that really aren't so much.

For example, that tweet is followed by this one

Deputy CMO says not to 'stay awake' worrying about this though, as effectiveness of vaccines is still very high for all variants.
Click to expand...
Thank you and everyone else who takes the time to search and post information regarding some of the scary news articles.
You probably dont realise how much posts such as this really help peoples anxieties.
But believe me . They do.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Where did you get that from? Strikes me as unbelievable and just plain wrong tbh. By mid December the ONS estimated that 4.4m people across the UK (6.6% of the UK population) had been infected. Seems unbelievable to me that in Manchester it is 40%
Click to expand...
Not a car in hell’s chance that 40% of Manchester have had the virus. Closer to 4% I’m sure.
 
Claytop said:
Indeed, it’s always better to be cautious about this but it won’t be good for people’s mental health if they get down every-time another variant is discovered.

It’s good that we are able to find and detect all the many different ones which will enable us to adjust vaccines etc when/if needed.
Click to expand...
Looking forward to a new variant of the government being announced soon!!
 
roubaixtuesday said:
Would be interested to see any scary quotes from respected people. I've not seen any such.

Quite a bit of media reporting as scary things that really aren't so much.

For example, that tweet is followed by this one

Deputy CMO says not to 'stay awake' worrying about this though, as effectiveness of vaccines is still very high for all variants.
Click to expand...
Also, I presume that variants are evolved randomly so it's presumably just as likely to buggar itself up as mutate into some uncontrollable form.
 
Also seems like any Tom, Dick or Harry can sign up to be a volunteer Covid vaccinator, so no guarantee your vaccine will be administered properly by a fully trained healthcare professional.
 
Last March a study found that about 14% of New York residents had had Covid - well above the number of tested cases. Which were in low single figures

10 months on with super spreader variants the numbers cam only have gone upward.
 
Blue Llama said:
Also, I presume that variants are evolved randomly so it's presumably just as likely to buggar itself up as mutate into some uncontrollable form.
Click to expand...

In principle it will randomly mutate but mutations which favour it's own reproduction will tend to be selected for - evolution through natural selection. Those which bugger it up won't survive.

If a mutation makes the virus transmit better, it's likely to be selected for. The current variant of concern is one of those.

You could also speculate that mutations which, just for instance, make the virus last longer on surfaces, make the infection last longer, make it less severe (so you're more likely to be up and about infecting others) are likely to be selected for.

Some mutations, probably most, make little difference. Some which are really important to us - for example how lethal it is - are probably neutral - whether we're killed at the end of the infection probably doesn't make much difference either way to whether the virus transmits to another host!
 
Another huge England hospital deaths number today. 884 - up from 661 last week.

Another over 1000 UK day now certain.

NW though still doing remarkably well with under 10% at 'just' 80 deaths.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top