Coronavirus outbreak

[Milzy]

No. It does not. All regions in the UK with the exceptions of the SW, south and mid Wales are experiencing growth in cases. There is no correlation with ethnicity or poverty.

So you’re saying the vaccine isn’t working then?
Cases are growing the most in local Muslim areas & that is a fact.

 

[vickster]

The vaccine has never been claimed to stop transmission? Not sure what your point is? Plenty of people aren’t yet (fully) vaccinated regardless of their ethnicity (such as the majority under 30).
Why do you think certain areas have higher levels of cases than others?

 

[Milzy]

The vaccine stops hospitalisation. Obviously the more testing you do the more cases you’ll have.
It has already been reported on the news that areas like Bradford, Dewsbury Bolton, London, Leicester, Birmingham have all had increases. Just a coincidence there are all the more concentrated ethnic areas? I’m not having a go at any people, they can live the way they like for all I care.
When the restrictions have been lifted on the 21st we will see a better picture.

 

[Ajax Bay]

The vaccine stops hospitalisation [with COVID-19].

I'm afraid this is not true. That's what each vaccine's % efficacy informs. Unless a vaccine is 100% effective against the vaccinated individual developing serious illness. Which none of them are.
This summer, of those that tragically die and COVID-19 is noted on their death certificate, the majority will have been vaccinated.
The efficacy of even a double dose of vaccine merely moderates the odds ratio of an individual who being old or infirm, has a 'built-in' (statistical) increased risk of serious illness and in extremis death.
compared with:
A young and otherwise healthy person who is not vaccinated (presumably for medical reasons or by choice), has a 'built-in' (statistical) much lower risk of serious illness let alone death.

 

[Julia9054]

Plenty of people aren’t yet (fully) vaccinated regardless of their ethnicity (such as the majority under 30).

Plenty of over 50s are not yet fully vaccinated - myself included

 

[vickster]

Plenty of over 50s are not yet fully vaccinated - myself included

Indeed, that was my point (although I think the over 50s I know are)

 

[Milzy]

I'm afraid this is not true. That's what each vaccine's % efficacy informs. Unless a vaccine is 100% effective against the vaccinated individual developing serious illness. Which none of them are.
This summer, of those that tragically die and COVID-19 is noted on their death certificate, the majority will have been vaccinated.
The efficacy of even a double dose of vaccine merely moderates the odds ratio of an individual who being old or infirm, has a 'built-in' (statistical) increased risk of serious illness and in extremis death.
compared with:
A young and otherwise healthy person who is not vaccinated (presumably for medical reasons or by choice), has a 'built-in' (statistical) much lower risk of serious illness let alone death.

You’re technically correct. I should have said reduces not stopped. Careless language I apologise. A good reminder they’re not 100% by you though.

 

[DCLane]

@Ajax Bay and that's why I'm being careful for a while yet.

I've had the second vaccination, am no longer classed as 'vulnerable', but SWMBO has had enough patients die of this and I've been to five friends' funerals in the last year due to Covid for me to know not to take stupid risks.

 

[Ajax Bay]

Maths prof
Haven't run the numbers myself.

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/BristOliver/status/1399744418534592512

Copied and reposted the graph (his twit 1 Jun)

Two days on (data cut-off 29 May, before BHw/e, orange line = 5 day average), you can see the gradient has turned negative (but see note below).

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases
Data refresh in a few days will allow affects of the BHw/e to be minimised further. SAGE and then Cabinet will have data on which to base dates. Assume concurrent activity while focus shifts to Carbis Bay.

 

[Milzy]

Hmmm on those data graphs I don’t think it’s wise lifting restrictions on the 21st. Imagine the football stadiums & concerts full then going out night clubbing. The Torie plan seems to be finding a happy medium between deaths & economy as it always has been from the start. Of course many people sit fine with that.

 

[DCLane]

@Milzy - I'm in two minds with lifting restrictions. The 'sensible' me sees the rise in cases locally and nationally with the end result being June 21st appears daft. The 'parent' me wants them to be lifted as both son no.1 and no. 2 have possible internships relying on them being lifted.

 

[lane]

Per BBC News report "They say that there may also be a higher risk of hospitalisation linked to the Delta variant."

If so that may not bode well for breaking the link between cases and hospital admissions and pressure on NHS. Even more reason to delay the 21st.

 

[Ajax Bay]

Hmmm on those data graphs I don’t think it’s wise lifting restrictions on the 21st. Imagine the football stadiums & concerts full then going out night clubbing. The Torie plan seems to be finding a happy medium between deaths & economy as it always has been from the start. Of course many people sit fine with that.

These are graphs of daily cases. Why don't you think it's wise? Case rate (UK) is down in the 40s per 100,000 and its current increase is slow, doubling in about three weeks. Hospitalisation admission rate factor (from cases) reduced from January, presumably because of vaccination of the more vulnerable cohorts. But emerging trends (weak data from PHE) suggesting the δ variant may increase that factor: this should be clearer in a week and can be factored into the estimates.
15 Jan: Cases 40k, nine days later Admissions 3200 (8%)
30 Jan: Cases 20k, nine days later Admissions 1900 (9%)
Latest (that data allow): Cases 2100, nine days later Admissions 121 (6%)
(all 7-day averages of daily figures)
There will be a third wave. The issue is the whether the estimated peak of hospitalisations is not acceptable, balanced against the harms the current restrictions cause.

 

[roubaixtuesday]

its current increase is slow, doubling in about three weeks.

It's about two weeks.

I'd describe that as "fast" personally.

And further opening up would be expected to speed that considerably.

 

[Ajax Bay]

It's [the daily case rate is doubling in] about two weeks. I'd describe that as "fast" personally.

As I pointed out, the 'even larger' graph you share again is for daily cases in England.
The full sentence from which you quoted said "Case rate (UK) is down in the 40s per 100,000 and its current increase is slow, doubling in about three weeks." Given that there's going to be a third wave cases are 'bound' to go up (but low hospitalisations).
In response to your last "it's doubling in a fortnight and here's the maths prof saying so" I said:

Professor Johnson shows doubling in 14 days . . . . in England. Add in the other parts of UK and you get the estimate I shared.

Having said all that, today's case (reported) number is another thousand up. There's some late reporting after the BH w/e - all the figures before the w/e, by specimen date have been augmented (and I have drawn that amended data into the revised graph below). That supports that the UK cases are set to double in about two weeks (a daily average increase since 16 May of 4.7%). If that rate of increase persists, I think the 'no earlier than' 21 Jun date relaxation is in jeopardy, or at least SAGE will be clear (and probably vocal, in a way that they weren't quite in September). Irrespective of the best for the country in the round which rightly will be a political decision, they must robustly represent the science/health factors. Furthermore they can see that 'history' is being fashioned under their noses: let's hope their frankness doesn't play out to be a 'Cassandra' contribution.

Data cut-off 29 May (data as at 3 Jun), orange line = 7 day average