Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[Ohmisterporter]

23 hours ago, Ohmisterporter said:

Sticking to the covid-19 theme. our granddaughter's partner has been ill with covid for the last week. He is a strong, fit young man made very ill by the virus although still at home in bed. Granddaughter repeatedly tests negative with pcr tests although she has to stay off work for ten days. Her nine year old son still goes to school; though that will stop as his last pcr test came back positive today. None of them had a vaccine. 

 

Just been told that granddaughter tested positive yesterday. So that is the whole household. Not unexpected really; she works in the hospital theatres but during the pandemic there have been many fewer operations and staff have been moved onto covid wards to help out. The only surprise is that it has taken so long to catch it.

[Neil]

Oh dear. Looks like lots may have been wrongly given the all clear from Covid tests.

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, Neil said:

Oh dear. Looks like lots may have been wrongly given the all clear from Covid tests.

It is, I think, inevitable that among the many millions of tests conducted through multiple processing labs, something would go wrong. At this stage we haver no idea whether the chemicals in the testing kit, the lab tests of sample swabs, or even the computer doing the reporting is adrift. 

 

And I had no idea Newbury was in the SouthWest. Stupid boy. 

[StuAllen]

So, my son (14) usually catches the bus home from school but today I decided to pick him up instead and I’m glad he did. The road and school gate were surrounded by anti vaxers protesting about giving children the jab. The police and staff were doing their best to support the students leaving school but there is no excuse to harass and intimidate school children. 

[Neil]

Another very interesting piece from the Guardian 'Why Britons are tolerating sky high Covid rates - and why this may not last'.  I was particularly struck by this comment from Linda Bauld, professor of public health at Edinburgh University, talking about the scientific community "Growing division in the community means that scientists are no longer providing a coherent argument – and to some extent the government can pick and choose which views it amplifies."

Edited October 16, 2021 by Neil
punctuation

[alastairq]

33 minutes ago, Neil said:

and to some extent the government can pick and choose which views it amplifies."

 Erm.......don't we all?

[Nearholmer]

Neil,

 

I read the way you phrase that to imply that you believe there can be a ‘scientific’ answer to what we, or perhaps HMG, should do about Covid rates etc.

 

If that is what you mean, I don’t think I agree - in a sense we are past the stage where the science gives fairly unequivocal indicators of what should be done.

 

How so?

 

‘Hard’ science can predict outcomes in numerical terms, express degrees of uncertainty around that, and not much more. But, it can’t, and effectively doesn’t seek, to tell anyone what to do about it - it’s just that when the situation is totally stark, as it was in March 2020, the choice to be made on the basis of the information is blindingly obvious.

 

’Soft’ science, the humanities, deal even more than ‘hard’ science in probabilities, fuzzy-edged understandings of how people are likely to react or behave in given circumstances etc. It doesn’t deal in determinism, and rarely if ever is in a position to offer predictions with the sort of certainty that the ‘hard’ disciplines sometimes can.

 

Upshot? Diversity of predicted outcomes is to be expected at this stage, and it is the job of our elected leaders to weigh and balance, the make judgements based on it. We actually pay them to “pick and choose”, so we might disagree with their choices, but it’s unfair to whack them for choosing.

 

Kevin

[alastairq]

The important thing is to be able to change one's mind, or 'view', as the science changes. {Which it inevitably does, over time?}

 

It seems, the idea of herd immunity isn't quite giving the percentages it originally was thought to be able to do?

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, Neil said:

Another very interesting piece from the Guardian 'Why Britons are tolerating sky high Covid rates - and why this may not last'.  I was particularly struck by this comment from Linda Bauld, professor of public health at Edinburgh University, talking about the scientific community "Growing division in the community means that scientists are no longer providing a coherent argument – and to some extent the government can pick and choose which views it amplifies."

 

Neil

 

I have just started to read this and they seem to have taken a snap shot of deaths over the last 7 days without looking at the situation as a whole. Italy has a higher mortality rate per m than the UK, France and Spain are about 10% lower Germany as we know death rate is about half ours, though a week ago Germany's death rate was higher than the UK. True that the 4 in question had a reduction in deaths. But there may be many reasons for it. One being we left lockdown before the others and are at a more advanced stage than the others. France and Germany have twice as many serious/critical patients than the UK, perhaps their rates may increase in the weeks to come?

 

The biggest difference between the numbers are those being tested. France is the best of those highlighted at about half of ours per million Italy a third and Germany about a fifth. If you don't look for it you will not find it.

 

Listening to those I mix with most are coming to the conclusion that at some point we need to start living with the virus, our vaccination success has resulted in most cases to have dampened the seriousness of the infection. Most of those in hospital seriously ill have not been vaccinated, this is telling the story

 

But this is my take on it, others will come to another conclusion

[Oldddudders]

France has dramatically lower numbers in hospital and ICU than quite recently. And compared to six months ago, each is about one-sixth of the totals then. Infections are rising slowly, though, and we know hospitalisation and death lag by some weeks. We shall see. 

 

Primary schoolchildren no longer need to be masked in class, so shackles are slowly being released. On my early-morning trip to the pharmacie - through the fog - I saw no-one in town who wasn't masked. Our area has 32 cases per 100k pop. Torquay, where I hope to be from Wednesday, has 411! In both countries, I feel the stats nevertheless show that the relationship between infection levels and serious illness is much more limited than before the vax arrived for most of us. 

[Nearholmer]

47 minutes ago, hayfield said:

Most of those in hospital seriously ill have not been vaccinated, this is telling the story

The stats to confirm/deny that seem a bit backward in coming forward, and if that is correct, IMO it would be useful to have those stats widely and prominently published.

 

A widespread understanding of “the demographics of serious illness and death”, age, vaccination status, underlying illness/condition etc might help encourage vaccination, and even encourage positive lifestyle choices, whatever else it might do.

[boxbrownie]

1 hour ago, alastairq said:

The important thing is to be able to change one's mind, or 'view', as the science changes. {Which it inevitably does, over time?}

Surely you mean “do a U turn” ? 

[alastairq]

1 hour ago, boxbrownie said:

Surely you mean “do a U turn” ? 

 MAybe U-turn is a less offensive description than 'fork right' or 'fork left'......?

 

Nowt wrong with U-turns.....the real nasties are those stuck  in scientific  & political dogma...

[Neil]

3 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Neil,

 

I read the way you phrase that to imply that you believe there can be a ‘scientific’ answer to what we, or perhaps HMG, should do about Covid rates etc.

 

If that is what you mean, I don’t think I agree - in a sense we are past the stage where the science gives fairly unequivocal indicators of what should be done. ....

 

Again I should have perhaps expanded on what I posted. I was intrigued to read that scientific consensus seemed to be declining. Right from the outset there has been some disagreement but initially that was pretty much a fringe movement so I'm a little surprised that the coherence of scientific opinion is beginning to fade.  Have scientists begun to accept the rates of infections, hospitalisations and deaths as being 'normal'?

 

3 hours ago, alastairq said:

The important thing is to be able to change one's mind, or 'view', as the science changes. {Which it inevitably does, over time?}

 

It seems, the idea of herd immunity isn't quite giving the percentages it originally was thought to be able to do?

 

I thought that herd immunity had been a discredited strategy fairly early on in the pandemic.

 

2 hours ago, hayfield said:

....Listening to those I mix with most are coming to the conclusion that at some point we need to start living with the virus, our vaccination success has resulted in most cases to have dampened the seriousness of the infection. ...

 

I think that was one of the arguments of the article, that we (the country at large) had started to accept as normal deaths, infections and hospitalisations. In my corner of Wales there are easy reminders that Covid is still with us in the day to day wearing of masks and reminders to maintain social distance. I can't comment with any authority on how things look over the border in England but I get the sense that the awareness in general may be less so.

[hayfield]

2 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

The stats to confirm/deny that seem a bit backward in coming forward, and if that is correct, IMO it would be useful to have those stats widely and prominently published.

 

A widespread understanding of “the demographics of serious illness and death”, age, vaccination status, underlying illness/condition etc might help encourage vaccination, and even encourage positive lifestyle choices, whatever else it might do.

 

The BBC quite often report these numbers, those who have been vaccinated are generally in the older age group and a much smaller percentage of the vaccinated group, than those in the younger age group who are mainly unvaccinated and a higher percentage of the groups they represent. Pregnant women are also of great concern. 

[alastairq]

4 minutes ago, Neil said:

thought that herd immunity had been a discredited strategy fairly early on in the pandemic.

 Not be the many unvaxxers, it seems...?

 

 

[hayfield]

2 minutes ago, alastairq said:

 Not be the many unvaxxers, it seems...?

 

 

 

 

I thought it was not herd immunity that was in question about supressing the affects of the virus, but how you achieved herd immunity, more reliance on vaccines and less on natural resistance

 

 

[Nearholmer]

2 minutes ago, Neil said:

Have scientists begun to accept the rates of infections, hospitalisations and deaths as being 'normal'?

But, at risk of banging on about the same point, it isn’t really their job to ‘accept’ or ‘reject’.

 

The job of the scientists is to say some thing like: if you do X then Y will almost certainly follow / could well follow/ is highly unlikely to follow.

 

Right now, the human behaviours experts might be saying things like “There is probably a threshold of daily deaths beyond which public acceptance of that will very rapidly evaporate, and a clamour for precautions will begin” or “all of our research tends to suggest that the British public will ignore hospitalisation and mortality data unless/until people very close to them are directly affected” (clearly, I made these things up!).
 

It feels more like the job of philosophers, who I don’t think count as ‘scientists’, even if some of them are (my nephew being one who crossed from maths to philosophy at PhD), to promote or lead public debate on thresholds of acceptability - and again, all they can do is advise or advocate.

 

Professional experts propose; elected politicians dispose.

[alastairq]

Watching a recent Zoe, it seems 'herd immunity' refers to the acquisition of natural immunity in a population, by 'encouraging' infections.

 

But, hey [....ll?] I'm not expert, I achieve immunity by not going anywhere near anybody else......which I find very relaxing and calming and pleasant...

The vaccines I've had may help in the medium term, and I'm booked sometime for a booster. I will still not have a flu jab, however.....I don't like the idea of deliberately making myself ill.....[like I don't like getting drink..or taking pain killers....or anything that makes me dizzy.]

[Mark Saunders]

There is a lot of ‘can’t see don’t care’ as till people see something for themselves it is not really happening!

[MJI]

On 14/10/2021 at 12:30, Nearholmer said:

It’s a pretty overt criticism of our ‘political class’, and might be a criticism of the emphasis of our educational system if MPs’ educations are reflective of the whole population.

 

Just over 100/617 MPs have either a STEMM-based education and/or some background in a STEMM-based work environment, and that is too small a proportion for the world we live in. It’s not a party issue, it’s an issue across the piece - we need a good mix of MPs from all sorts of backgrounds, and we are simply under-supplied with STEMM- focused ones.

 

I’ve never for a minute thought that BJ lacked intelligence, but his education was solidly humanities-focused, and that shows in his approach at every turn.

 

One person who I think has shown the value of having STEMM-focused people, and people with some genuine background outside of politics come to that, in the room is Nadim Zahawi, and the fact that he is now Education Minister gives me some hope.

 

 

I am quite relieved that he replaced spiderman.

 

Nadhim is pretty competent.

[hayfield]

This is very interesting reading and giving some hope for the future

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58898085

[monkeysarefun]

9 hours ago, hayfield said:

This is very interesting reading and giving some hope for the future

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58898085

Jeez the antivaxxers will have to give up their day jobs and go full time.

[2750Papyrus]

8 minutes ago, monkeysarefun said:

Jeez the antivaxxers will have to give up their day jobs and go full time.

Are some of them not already full-time protesters?

[Torper]

Today Scotland's vaccine passport scheme became enforceable by law.  Basically it means that nightclubs and large events, like some football matches, will only be able to allow entry to people who can show they have had two doses of a Covid vaccine.   No vaccine passport will be required to access public services or settings where people have no choice over attendance such as shops, public transport, education and medical services, and most of the hospitality industry is, for the moment at least, unaffected.  As cases in Scotland are once again on the rise, it will be interesting to see if this scheme has any great effect.  There are complaints that many people are not aware of the scheme.  As it has had a great deal of publicity up here over the last few weeks, I cannot help but wonder how much attention should be paid to people who for reasons best known to themselves apparently pay no heed to the most basic everyday news.

 

DT