Coronavirus

[Archied]

3 hours ago, ketteringram said:

Tier 4 is not lockdown. If it's lockdown that's needed, then it needs to be as it was back in April. Essential work only. 

If I lived in tier 4 (currently tier 3, so will probably be 4 very soon), my life is hardly any different to pre covid time. I'll admit , I don't have a typical lifestyle, whatever that is. But tier 4 means I wear a mask in a supermarket, and don't take a flight . And that's about the only difference.

I'll still be going to work. Mixing with dozens/hundreds of other people. Indirectly, thousands of other people.

If they carry on just using the tier system. The figures over the next 12 weeks or so, are going to be bad.

april was not a lock down it was a muddle that has carried on since and seems will carry on indefinitely, construction workers like myself were left with thechoice of carry on working or those prepared to carry on will take your work, what has ensued and been the theme is the targeted (purposely or not) destruction of small independent s , middle classes and chosen sectors of the economy with often no evidence to back it up and ludicrous inconsistencies in the rules and regs

[Archied]

35 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Lets hope this is the game changer.

 

yep ,lets hope its not another world beater

[Sith Happens]

1 hour ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

Yesterday i saw somewhere that they' ve cracked the formuation to improve efficacy but haven't seen the detail of how. Does anyoneknow ?

2 weeks ago it was about 1/2 dose followed by a full one but i am not sure it is confirmed

Yeah, they seem to think 95% and 100% protection against hospitilisation. I guess they think those that do get it it will be mild, which is probably the reason they are happy to go with the get as many people with one dose as possible.

 

 

[Guest]

Interesting graph.

[alexxxxx]

7 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Interesting graph.

Guess the point is that there will be some deviation from that graph . Its been 10 days since the 20th December and hospitalisations/people still in hospital are still growing. 

[BIllyD]

16 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Interesting graph.

Yes very interesting. Have you got the source for the graph to check its authenticity?

[Spanish]

20 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Interesting graph.

Seems at odds with all the stories but this is restricted to type 1 A&E.  In the summer there were articles stating that A&E was quieter than normal due to a lack of sporting injuries as a result of lockdowns.  Maybe the CV19 are admitted via a different entry point?

[BIllyD]

1 hour ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

Yesterday i saw somewhere that they' ve cracked the formuation to improve efficacy but haven't seen the detail of how. Does anyoneknow ?

2 weeks ago it was about 1/2 dose followed by a full one but i am not sure it is confirmed

The original results were incorrect, it wasn't the half dose that increased the efficiency but a longer period between the doses allowing it to settle. As pointed out above, the vaccine has results showing it is 100% effective at preventing hospitalisation.

[Eddie]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-55481397

@Eddiehow does this tie in with your prediction of a fatality rate of 3%?

This would equate to over 15,000 deaths in Wuhan alone. The total recorded deaths in China is just over 4k.

Is Chia massaging the figures? I note that they do not record asymptomatic cases.

Or is Eddies remarkable record of getting everything right so far about this pandemic under threat?

It wasn't a prediction and never has been.

It was the number of official deaths expressed as a percentage of the number of official cases.

Currently, in the UK, that's 71567 deaths from 2382865 cases. In the world, that's a somewhat lower 1789912 from 81997581, but still over 2%.

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Interesting graph.

On the subject of hospital beds, there was an interesting point made on the radio this morning from some medical guy. In a way, we’re a victim of our own success. We’re better equipped (in terms of knowledge of how to treat the virus) now which means less people are dying but, the downside is, that means people are spending longer in hospital receiving such treatment. I don’t know how true that is but it does make sense.

[rammieib]

So the one full dose now, and second dose three months later - what’s the effective rate of this?

Or are they using the fact that 1 full dose led to no hospitalisations as the main driver?

[Sith Happens]

24 minutes ago, rammieib said:

So the one full dose now, and second dose three months later - what’s the effective rate of this?

Or are they using the fact that 1 full dose led to no hospitalisations as the main driver?

They seem to be suggesting 70% after the first dose (takes about 3 weeks to get the protection).

Seems a sensible approach to me.

[BIllyD]

1 minute ago, Sith Happens said:

They seem to be suggesting 70% after the first dose (takes about 3 weeks to get the protection).

Seems a sensible approach to me.

Is that the latest results ? Cant seem to find them anywhere but sounds about right. What this trial did that the others didn't was run several groups alongside each other, the previously published data were a mix of just two of the trials they have run, it seems the preferred approach is neither of them.

The key has to be preventing hospital admissions, I don't buy into these stories around the hospitals not being under pressure, data can be presented to make results look any way you want.
 

Common sense tells me that you stop these and you can start to return to normal, of course with Bill Gates tracking our every move ?

[jimmyp]

2 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Interesting graph.

Not very much elective surgery takes place on a Sunday. Wonder what the graph would look like if they had compared a three year average to a weekday rather than just picking  the quietest day of the week. 

[rammieib]

44 minutes ago, BIllyD said:

Is that the latest results ? Cant seem to find them anywhere but sounds about right. What this trial did that the others didn't was run several groups alongside each other, the previously published data were a mix of just two of the trials they have run, it seems the preferred approach is neither of them.

The key has to be preventing hospital admissions, I don't buy into these stories around the hospitals not being under pressure, data can be presented to make results look any way you want.
 

Common sense tells me that you stop these and you can start to return to normal, of course with Bill Gates tracking our every move ?

But this is the point - they seem to be going down a route where the data isn’t released publicly that I’m aware of.

Thats not good for building public confidence.

Everything for me at the moment is saying I want the Pfizer vaccine. It’s 25% more likely to give me protection.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, alexxxxx said:

Guess the point is that there will be some deviation from that graph . Its been 10 days since the 20th December and hospitalisations/people still in hospital are still growing. 

Yes I guess thats true.

The new variant, that is 70% more trasmissible than the old one, has been round since September though with reported cases going up and up.

Despite this critical care bed occupancy is no higher than the 3 year average.

This surge and overwhelming of the NHS always seems to be 2 weeks away.

[Sith Happens]

1 hour ago, BIllyD said:

Is that the latest results ? Cant seem to find them anywhere but sounds about right. What this trial did that the others didn't was run several groups alongside each other, the previously published data were a mix of just two of the trials they have run, it seems the preferred approach is neither of them.

The key has to be preventing hospital admissions, I don't buy into these stories around the hospitals not being under pressure, data can be presented to make results look any way you want.
 

Common sense tells me that you stop these and you can start to return to normal, of course with Bill Gates tracking our every move ?

It was in the BBC daily feed.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Eddie said:

It wasn't a prediction and never has been.

It was the number of official deaths expressed as a percentage of the number of official cases.

Currently, in the UK, that's 71567 deaths from 2382865 cases. In the world, that's a somewhat lower 1789912 from 81997581, but still over 2%.

Sorry should have said calculation.

It appears that the most populous country in the world, where the virus arose, are not reporting asymptomatic cases, I'd suggest that could make a huge difference to the numbers.

[BIllyD]

58 minutes ago, rammieib said:

But this is the point - they seem to be going down a route where the data isn’t released publicly that I’m aware of.

Thats not good for building public confidence.

Everything for me at the moment is saying I want the Pfizer vaccine. It’s 25% more likely to give me protection.

The pfizer wasn't readily available either when approved, just the headline figures. 
 

If you wait for the Pfizer vaccine, you will be looking at 100% less protection as unless you are in one of the highest groups, there won't be enough to go around. The Oxford vaccine gives 70% reduction in chances of catching the vaccine by day 22, but 100% reduction in death and hospital risk. Seems a pretty good vaccine to me.

[BIllyD]

55 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Yes I guess thats true.

The new variant, that is 70% more trasmissible than the old one, has been round since September though with reported cases going up and up.

Despite this critical care bed occupancy is no higher than the 3 year average.

This surge and overwhelming of the NHS always seems to be 2 weeks away.

I was in ICU for 2 days last year, one thing I remember is that nearly every bed was full. Thing with mine, it the result of a planned op, they knew I was coming out after 2 days, same with a lot of the other people in there, who I saw on step down during my period that followed.

With COVID admission you don't get the luxury of knowing when people will come out, unfortunately it seems some of these will be the result of them passing away rather than getting better. That's why to me, stats mean nothing, it's a completely different scenario, for the past 3 years they plan and manage the majority of the beds in ICU, now they are trying to keep the numbers down so they have enough beds. 
 

It doesn't seem rocket science to me, where the concerns are coming from.