Coronavirus (2021) thread

[PragueBlue]

Are there restrictions and compulsory mask wearing where you are KnaresboroughBlue? The UK have dropped all restrictions and if there are still some restrictions where you are, that may be the difference perhaps? I hoped that the uk cases and hospitalisations would be lower as the summer wore on, but it seems as though the daily numbers are staying pretty flat and not reducing, possibly even starting to increase slightly here.

We have mask wearing on public transport and in shops but not much elsewhere. Otherwise very few restrictions and things are pretty normal with lots of tourists here over the Summer which I thought might cause a spike. I just can't work out why we haven't seen the same level of increases.

It'll be interesting to see what happens when schools go back in a weeks time.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

We have mask wearing on public transport and in shops but not much elsewhere. Otherwise very few restrictions and things are pretty normal with lots of tourists here over the Summer which I thought might cause a spike. I just can't work out why we haven't seen the same level of increases.

It'll be interesting to see what happens when schools go back in a weeks time.

If I recall rightly, Czech track and trace got a lot of praise first wave?

No idea if that's true, but if it is, and still very effective, could make a very big difference particularly if cases are low.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Steady rise in all indicators continues.

 

[PragueBlue]

If I recall rightly, Czech track and trace got a lot of praise first wave?

No idea if that's true, but if it is, and still very effective, could make a very big difference particularly if cases are low.

No idea how effective it is to be honest. There's very little mention of it here.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Anyone know if @Healdplace is OK?

 

[roubaixtuesday]

There is a great deal that puzzles me and troubles me in equal measure:
we are one of the most advanced vaccinated nation in the world yet our infection rate is one of the worst. How come?
our over 50's are pretty much double jabbed yet in Scotland, just last week, 180 people from that age segment were hospitalised. How come?
Dumfries and Galloway is one of the most vaccinated areas of Scotland yet just now it has one of the worst infection rates in Europe. How come?
If anyone has the answer please tell me because I am really starting to feel uneasy about the level of protection the vaccination programme is giving us. And I know that being vaccinated is supposed to cut your chance of infection by approx 70% and then even if you are infected the symptoms are reduced and the chances of hospitalisation or death are almost eliminated. You can pass on the virus if you have been vaccinated and subsequently are infected. That is what we are being told.

All the indications from here, and Israel where there's really good data is that protection against infection is good (~70%) and against severe disease excellent (90%+). These are not as good as against earlier variants, but actually still better than people originally thought likely.

I've no idea about Dumfries specifics, but generally we opened up with an already very high infection rate, which implies a high hospitalisation rate, even if 90% of people are vaccinated and the vaccine is 90% effective against hospitalisation.

 

[Len Rum]

Human nature, certainly in this country anyway. No one wearing a mask at City yesterday.

This.
Post match the lack of alternative facilities meant the Summerbee bar was rammed making it a nice mini Covid breeding ground.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

No one wearing a mask at City yesterday.

I saw quite a few, even outside. But a minority for sure.

The concourses are a breeding ground, I'd like to see drinks allowed in the stands to reduce crowding. And I'm sure they could do a lot more on ventilating those areas. And doubtless there are many other small things that added up make a worthwhile difference.

Until hospitalisation is lower, I think we should be taking sensible, low impact measures to reduce transmission. Masking in poorly ventilated crowded areas is one of those, IMO.

What we want to avoid is hospitalisation rising so high as to get really restrictive measures like limiting or eliminating crowds again.

 

[BLUEMATT23]

This.
Post match the lack of alternative facilities meant the Summerbee bar was rammed making it a nice mini Covid breeding ground.

I was in East stand upper
Pre match I got a bite to eat wore my mask
Saw nobody else at all wear one apart from the staff.

 

[Mr Coopz]

The rising numbers just keep bringing me back to a state of mind where I feel we’re gonna need permanent restrictions in place so hospitals still don’t fill up despite the vaccinations given. I’m aware vaccines have worked in some capacity, as deaths I’m sure would have been much more than they are right now but it still feels like it’ll never be enough. I want to enjoy myself with everything available now and yet I can’t shake this depressing feeling that we’re gonna be fucked no matter what we do. Either the hospitals get overwhelmed again and we’re gonna be back into a long lockdown or we’re gonna suffer shitty social restrictions. Fucking sick of it all.

 

[Rammy Blue]

I saw quite a few, even outside. But a minority for sure.

The concourses are a breeding ground, I'd like to see drinks allowed in the stands to reduce crowding. And I'm sure they could do a lot more on ventilating those areas. And doubtless there are many other small things that added up make a worthwhile difference.

Until hospitalisation is lower, I think we should be taking sensible, low impact measures to reduce transmission. Masking in poorly ventilated crowded areas is one of those, IMO.

What we want to avoid is hospitalisation rising so high as to get really restrictive measures like limiting or eliminating crowds again.

Yeah, of course my “no masks” was a slight exaggeration but there were very few around.

People don’t care for now, if it rockets again people will deal with it but most are enjoying what looks closest to normality they’ve had for 18 months.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Yeah, of course my “no masks” was a slight exaggeration but there were very few around.

People don’t care for now, if it rockets again people will deal with it but most are enjoying what looks closest to normality they’ve had for 18 months.

I think that's spot on. I certainly enjoyed being back!

I'm not so sure about "deal with it", I fear we've given the message that it's all over bar the shouting and a big resurgence like Israel has would come as a huge shock to many.

 

[Saddleworth2]

All the indications from here, and Israel where there's really good data is that protection against infection is good (~70%) and against severe disease excellent (90%+). These are not as good as against earlier variants, but actually still better than people originally thought likely.

I've no idea about Dumfries specifics, but generally we opened up with an already very high infection rate, which implies a high hospitalisation rate, even if 90% of people are vaccinated and the vaccine is 90% effective against hospitalisation.

Numbers don’t make sense though.
if you take 100,000 people in the U.K. and assume that 80% are vaccinated that means of the original 100,000, 56,000 won’t get the virus (70% protection for the vaccinated) leaving 44,000 that are susceptible to infection. At a relatively high infection rate of say 500 per 100,000 in a seven week period then the number of cases should be around 220. In fact take Dumfries and Galloway with a population of just under 150,000 and based on those assumptions, cases in the last week should be 300 -350. In fact they are over 800. Something really doesn’t add up. Either infection rates are far higher than quoted or the virus s passing through the unvaccinated in a disproportionate way or the vaccine isn’t giving the level of protection quoted. The point is I’m not hearing explanations or experts relating the case numbers to vaccine protection in an intellegent and logical way.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

Numbers don’t make sense though.
if you take 100,000 people in the U.K. and assume that 80% are vaccinated that means of the original 100,000, 56,000 won’t get the virus (70% protection for the vaccinated) leaving 44,000 that are susceptible to infection. At a relatively high infection rate of say 500 per 100,000 in a seven week period then the number of cases should be around 220. In fact take Dumfries and Galloway with a population of just under 150,000 and based on those assumptions, cases in the last week should be 300 -350. In fact they are over 800. Something really doesn’t add up. Either infection rates are far higher than quoted or the virus s passing through the unvaccinated in a disproportionate way or the vaccine isn’t giving the level of protection quoted. The point is I’m not hearing explanations or experts relating the case numbers to vaccine protection in an intellegent and logical way.

I don't think you can use the numbers like that at all, and I'm afraid I don't fully understand your meaning eg "At a relatively high infection rate of say 500 per 100,000 in a seven week period then the number of cases should be around 220"

The standard model is called SEIR: susceptible, exposed, infected, recovered.

You can't say how many people have been exposed to the virus, which depends on behaviour.

I've not seen any modelling which suggests vaccination effectiveness is wildly different to the numbers quoted.

 

[west didsblue]

Has anyone heard from @Healdplace ?
Is she ok?

 

[Saddleworth2]

I don't think you can use the numbers like that at all, and I'm afraid I don't fully understand your meaning eg "At a relatively high infection rate of say 500 per 100,000 in a seven week period then the number of cases should be around 220"

The standard model is called SEIR: susceptible, exposed, infected, recovered.

You can't say how many people have been exposed to the virus, which depends on behaviour.

I've not seen any modelling which suggests vaccination effectiveness is wildly different to the numbers quoted.

Back to, if 80% are vaccinated and they have 70% protection, we shouldn’t be seeing those case numbers. Full stop. Have a look at the travelling tabby data you can see localised infection per 100,000. 500 is very high rate. I simply applied that to the numbers that would not have protection (all unvaccinated and 30% of vaccinated). Seems logical to me but I’m not a mathematician or virologist.

 

[Saddleworth2]

Has anyone heard from @Healdplace ?
Is she ok?

He/she last seen viewing this thread earlier today. I note that he/she hasn’t posted since Tuesday which is unusual. Hope all is ok.

 

[BlueMonkey79]

Had my second jab yesterday (moderna) and today feels like the devil is inside me.! Hot, sweating, chills and aches and pains like the worst flu I've ever had. How long does this last for?

 

[14aguero]

Everyone is different, but with Moderna, I had shoulder ache on the first day and a slight fever on the second day. From the third day, some fatigue remained. The fever with the second dose was a bit higher, but not too concerning. A lot of eating, yoga and sleeping did the trick. Sleeping is the key, I think.

 

[NJ Blue]

Numbers don’t make sense though.
if you take 100,000 people in the U.K. and assume that 80% are vaccinated that means of the original 100,000, 56,000 won’t get the virus (70% protection for the vaccinated) leaving 44,000 that are susceptible to infection. At a relatively high infection rate of say 500 per 100,000 in a seven week period then the number of cases should be around 220. In fact take Dumfries and Galloway with a population of just under 150,000 and based on those assumptions, cases in the last week should be 300 -350. In fact they are over 800. Something really doesn’t add up. Either infection rates are far higher than quoted or the virus s passing through the unvaccinated in a disproportionate way or the vaccine isn’t giving the level of protection quoted. The point is I’m not hearing explanations or experts relating the case numbers to vaccine protection in an intellegent and logical way.

I agree that the infection numbers do seem relatively high in the uk based on our levels of vaccination compared to infection numbers in some other countries. I don’t know what the numbers of vaccinated are in the Czech Republic as mentioned earlier in the thread, but they started on their vaccinations later than in the uk. Perhaps we have waining antibody levels compared to the Czech Republic due to this, allowing for greater uk infections? One things for sure, the government have moved on now, fighting a different fire about the Afghanistan situation. In two weeks time, there will be something else that they will have to fire fight. COVID has dropped down the list of priorities now, and if and when it goes pear shaped, they will start fire fighting it again.