Generic Virus Thread

[darrenm]

I don't like to use up my attachment quota but here's another few KB  This is cases by date https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases

You always get reporting delays over the weekend but generally Thursdays and Fridays are the full data. Some reporting delays get backfilled into previous days as they come through too.

The 1st and 2nd of July are both lower than 30th June. They're a Thursday and Friday. Maybe there's a significant reporting delay with cases, I don't know.

You'd expected the 2nd to have a few more added, then 3rd and 4th to have lots more from the weekend reporting delay, so today will probably look terrible because it'll be something like 40,000 new cases. But as I was saying before with deaths, that's new recorded cases added to the overall total, not new cases by date.

I think double jabbed people are 65% less likely to be infectious (as far as I can recall) and are 98% protected against severe disease. Plenty of double jabbed people can still catch it but they're a lot less likely to pass it on and will be very likely to suffer no ill effects.

Sajid's about to change it you don't have to self isolate now if double jabbed because you won't be pinged on the app. Could be interesting.

[Rugeley Villa]

9 minutes ago, Genie said:

It’s doubling at around every 10 or so days so 50,000 daily infections is probably less than 2 weeks away. 
Then we hit the new restrictions easing so it will accelerate things and 100,000 will follow quite soon after, especially as the baseline of infections in the community already being very high.

Well have new challenges, hospitals probably won’t get overrun but there will be millions at home isolating or feeling ill.

 

By winter I can see hospitals being very stretched and we’ll be forced back into lockdowns of some sort. 

Edited July 6, 2021 by Rugeley Villa

[darrenm]

8 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

it’s a reasonable set of guesses.

Working in IT, I never speak in absolutes  

[chrisp65]

For what its worth, I don’t see a medical meltdown happening.

But it isn’t doom mongering to suggest that going from restrictions to a free for all on an arbitrary date in less than 2 weeks time might not be the optimum plan.

It’s the plan of a last government taking a punt because their chums can’t turn a profit with half empty pubs and half empty office blocks.

This is not a binary choice, it’s only binary if you can’t be arsed to think.

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, blandy said:

There's only 25 million to infect, so no worries, eh?

I wasn't aware that all of the unvaccinated people are in one camp and the others in a separate camp...

Honestly, the lack of understanding on how viruses and vaccines work is a bit staggering. You don't need 100% vaccine uptake to end the pandemic.

To stop it, you need to starve it. Either by locking down completely, or by having a high enough protection in the population, either by herd or by vaccine uptake.

[blandy]

Just now, darrenm said:

generally Thursdays and Fridays are the full data. Some reporting delays get backfilled into previous days as they come through too.

That's key - the most recent 5 days get back filled over about a week or so. That' why they colour them differently on the gov website - partial data.

45,351,719 people have been partially or fully  vaccinated (33,726,362 fully).

Half the country is not full vaccine protected (bearing in mind, also, the vaccine does not fully protect anyway, even after 2 doses). So the virus will continue to spread and will spread more widely as the kids and youngsters mingle more in the school holidays - In the old days of course, they used to play on X-Boxes and Playstations, but luckily kids are much more active and outdoorsy now, not glued to screens and computer games, right?

It's not that changing measures is wrong, it's that removing them all when we're not far off, in terms of weeks, of getting many more people vexed and protected - we've gone and given up on all the other measures that protect people and reduce spread. It'll kill plenty of people unnecessarily, it'll clog up hospitals and cause delays to people's other treatments. It's **** mental.

 

[StefanAVFC]

6 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

But it isn’t doom mongering to suggest that going from restrictions to a free for all on an arbitrary date in less than 2 weeks time might not be the optimum plan.

I dunno. Read the thread, just doom and gloom, As if the world is ending again.

6 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

This is not a binary choice, it’s only binary if you can’t be arsed to think.

I agree, FWIW the only truly binary post recently was this:

  

41 minutes ago, sidcow said:

This thread is like the Tammy Abraham thread. 

Some think it's ludicrous to open up and the Government are irresponsible and those who feel the Government are out to destroy peoples liberties and we should have opened up before and certainly now at any cost. 

 

[blandy]

7 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

I wasn't aware that all of the unvaccinated people are in one camp and the others in a separate camp...

It's the government you need to be telling that to!

My comment was in response to "there's no one left to infect".

[LondonLax]

Look at excess mortality. At the moment the U.K. is running well below what it would be if it was a normal year before COVID. Relaxing the last few restrictions just brings you back up to a normal level of mortality again. 

[darrenm]

The next 7 days of case data should prove the Tories very right or very wrong on opening back up in a couple of weeks.

[StefanAVFC]

3 minutes ago, blandy said:

It's the government you need to be telling that to!

My comment was in response to "there's no one left to infect".

Perhaps a slightly clumsy phrasing; but the point stands about the virus being starved.

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said:

Perhaps a slightly clumsy phrasing; but the point stands about the virus being starved.

Yeah, absolutely. I posted a couple of weeks or so ago about the more infectious something is, the greater the percentage of people there has to be who are protected to starve it of new victims. Delta needs around 85% of the population protected  - Not 85% of adults, but 85% of all people. We're on (optimistically) about 60% (going off one dose + those not vexed, but carrying anti-bodies through previous infection). It's why the complete opening up is so stupid. Defeat from the jaws of winning.

[blandy]

24 minutes ago, darrenm said:

The next 7 days of case data should prove the Tories very right or very wrong on opening back up in a couple of weeks.

You'e right it'll give a good clue, but I'd wait, personally, till late August - at that point we'll have just started to see the impact of opening up fully in terms of hospital cases and death rate, plus the various sporting and musical events will have re-started so we'll see if cricket, football, festivals, nightclubs cause super spreading etc.

[a m ole]

On balance it seems like the right decision to me and I **** hate the Tories.

[LondonLax]

27 minutes ago, blandy said:

Yeah, absolutely. I posted a couple of weeks or so ago about the more infectious something is, the greater the percentage of people there has to be who are protected to starve it of new victims. Delta needs around 85% of the population protected  - Not 85% of adults, but 85% of all people. We're on (optimistically) about 60% (going off one dose + those not vexed, but carrying anti-bodies through previous infection). It's why the complete opening up is so stupid. Defeat from the jaws of winning.

No it’s not a stupid opinion, that language doesn’t aid the discussion. It’s a different opinion based on a different risk tolerance which is going to be personal for everyone. 

Edited July 6, 2021 by LondonLax

[HanoiVillan]

2 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

No it’s not a stupid opinion, that language doesn’t aid the discussion. It’s a different opinion based on a different risk tolerance which is going to be personal for everyone. 

Getting very tired of how much discourse on the left in British politics keeps falling back on accusing Johnson of killing people, because we can't get anything else to stick.

[blandy]

2 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

It’s a different opinion based on a different risk tolerance which is going to be personal for everyone

It's not. It's the government bowing to back bench nutters for face saving reasons. The record shows they've got every call wrong, and this is no different.

[HanoiVillan]

11 minutes ago, blandy said:

It's not. It's the government bowing to back bench nutters for face saving reasons. The record shows they've got every call wrong, and this is no different.

You need to consider the possibility just genuinely disagree with you, on the merits, rather than it all being an evil ploy or a party management tactic.

[darrenm]

 

 

[blandy]

3 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

You need to consider the possibility just genuinely disagree with you, on the merits, rather than it all being an evil ploy or a party management tactic.

I've considered the possibility of the government disagreeing with me (well the other way round actually) and have posted my opinion as a consequence. I consider them to be incompetent idiots.