If numbers don’t go up.

[gpietersz]

Herd immunity isn't a strategy, it's the end consequence, whether we take action or not. Because we can't stop the virus spreading (it's too virulent and contageous), but we can control it's spread through social distancing. Whether we wait for a vaccine, or just let things pan out, or lockdown for 18 months and s-l-o-w-l-y spread it throughout the population all roads lead to the same solution, herd immunity.

The question is which strategy is best. Lockdown until we have a vaccine (which could be years).

The problem is that lockdown kills and harms too. Over 80,000 extra cancer deaths alone, more domestic abuse, more mental health problems, more substance abuse.....

 

[fisicx]

I was avoiding the word strain because I was talking about mutations: variant = different genes/mutations.

Coronaviruses mutate all the time (like many other viruses). There is not enough differences in the mutations to make one any more or less potent than another. The problem comes when the virus changes sufficiently to become a new strain. It will have the same symptoms and cause the same problems but it will it now becomes a new version which can mean your immune system can't fight it off. This what happens with the flue and common cold - both are a coronavirus.

 

[Karimbo]

The question is which strategy is best. Lockdown until we have a vaccine (which could be years).

The problem is that lockdown kills and harms too. Over 80,000 extra cancer deaths alone, more domestic abuse, more mental health problems, more substance abuse.....

I do like the UK strategy, the timing is right, the relaxation of lockdown has not caused an increase in infection rate. I think the infection rates are manageable for the NHS.

I think we should keep the infection rates at it's current level (10k people in hospital at a time). Before we know it, we'll have herd immunity. i'd much rather try to get natural herd immunity than to jab myself with a untested vaccine which has been rushed through.

 

[gpietersz]

Coronaviruses mutate all the time (like many other viruses). There is not enough differences in the mutations to make one any more or less potent than another.

The article I linked to says it is common for viruses to evolve this way, so unless there is evidence that coronavirus is an exception I see no reason to doubt it.

 

[Karimbo]

How far we’ve come?

Tens of thousands dead in the last two months!

The deaths are unfortunate, but over 2 months, our death rate has declined week after week. We've gone from 1125 deaths a day (at it's peak) to 300 a day, and reducing every week.

We don't know how much of the "herd" is immune, because we're not immune testing, but NYC tested a sample of 3000 and found that 20% of the people samples had antibodies (immunity).

If we achieve 20% herd immunity every 2 months. We'd achieve herd immunity before the end of the summer.

 

[Newchodge]

he relaxation of lockdown has not caused an increase in infection rate.

How on earth do you know that? What is the incubation period of the disease? Ie how long between infection and symptoms? Easing lockdown only started a week ago?

 

[Karimbo]

How on earth do you know that? What is the incubation period of the disease? Ie how long between infection and symptoms? Easing lockdown only started a week ago?

Thats a fair point. I guess well wait and see. I would point out that the incubation period is up to 2 weeks, not 2 weeks. Thats a crucial point there because some people wont incubate at all.

 

[Newchodge]

Thats a fair point. I guess well wait and see. I would point out that the incubation period is up to 2 weeks, not 2 weeks. Thats a crucial point there because some people wont incubate at all.

But also, people have symptoms for up to 3 weeks before needing hospital treatment, so it is definitely too early to tell.

 

[fisicx]

We don't know how much of the "herd" is immune, because we're not immune testing, but NYC tested a sample of 3000 and found that 20% of the people samples had antibodies (immunity).

The presence of antibodies doesn't mean you are immune. If they are present it just tells you that you have been infected. But you may have been infected and have no antibodies.

 

[SillyBill]

I do like the UK strategy, the timing is right, the relaxation of lockdown has not caused an increase in infection rate. I think the infection rates are manageable for the NHS.

I think we should keep the infection rates at it's current level (10k people in hospital at a time). Before we know it, we'll have herd immunity. i'd much rather try to get natural herd immunity than to jab myself with a untested vaccine which has been rushed through.

Jury is out as to whether lockdown has done anything at all or barely "moved the needle" to use a business term. The only guaranteed outcome is that people will argue over this for years and numbers will be twisted to suit any argument (including future deaths as a result of lockdown).

My own view is whole population lockdown was a huge mistake and from the off we should have just isolated those most vulnerable. We may have even built up herd immunity in the 90% of us allowed to go about out every day business to shield the vulnerable when they later come out of lockdown.

I also think the drop off is in large part not because of lockdown success but...well look outside the window. The flu season is coming to an end. This is also the reason that I've not fawned over how other countries in the Southern Hemisphere have done thus far. They were fortunate that they were able to control the virus in their non-flu seasons whereas for us it hit at just the wrong time.

 

[ecommerce84]

The only guaranteed outcome is that people will argue over this for years and numbers will be twisted to suit any argument (including future deaths as a result of lockdown).

Thank goodness we’ve only just had an election!

My own view is whole population lockdown was a huge mistake and from the off we should have just isolated those most vulnerable. We may have even built up herd immunity in the 90% of us allowed to go about out every day business to shield the vulnerable when they later come out of lockdown.

I agree.

They could have spent the money they’ve used for furlough and grants etc to properly shield the most vulnerable, advised everyone else to work from home and socially distance wherever possible. I’m not convinced the outcome would have been any worse.

 

[Interestedobserver]

Regarding the flu season. I've read that the reason we have a flu season is we spend more time inside in the winter and that's when it's more likely to pass on flu (being indoors)

The summer kind of brings its own form of social distancing as being outside with people is safer than being inside with people

One benefit we should get in our next flu season is we we will have far less flu getting passed on because of social distancing

Something tells me we will also at some stage lose a bit of control of Covid and we will have stricter lockdowns brought back in again

So I guess less people will catch flu as well

Can one person catch flu and Covid at the same time?

 

[alan1302]

Can one person catch flu and Covid at the same time?

Yes, you can

 

[gpietersz]

“The Government’s defence is that this [the Imperial College model] was a plausible worst case scenario. I agree it was a plausible — or at least a possible — worst case scenario. The question is, should we act on a possible worst case scenario, given the costs of lockdown? It seems to me that given that the costs of lockdown are mounting, that case is becoming more and more fragile.”

Sunetra Gupta, Professor of Theoretical Epidemiology at Oxford

https://unherd.com/2020/05/oxford-doubles-down-sunetra-gupta-interview/

 

[Julia Sta Romana]

As the title says do you reckon if infection numbers don’t go up and continue to plummet as they are now the cards will just tumble and things could pretty much get back to normal fairly quickly?

Do you think people will demand this if this is the case and social distancing will fade away and the hospitality sector and events industry as examples will bounce back fairly quickly and this whole lockdown will be looked upon as a massive over reaction?

Let’s hope so.

I hope so too but I doubt it. I've read somewhere that with climate change, pandemics would be more common. And the only way to control the spread of infection is to maintain social distancing and minimize travel even after this is over.

 

[Nico Albrecht]

I have another question about the graphics here ( link below ) and statistics from the ONS.

It shows the death rates 2017/2018 compared to the current ones 2020. Even with Covid around there is less deaths in 2020 than in 2017/2018.

Link to it: https://ibb.co/pfgsWNX

Based on the numbers the whole lock down would not have made any difference at all.

 

[Newchodge]

I have another question about the graphics here ( link below ) and statistics from the ONS.

It shows the death rates 2017/2018 compared to the current ones 2020. Even with Covid around there is less deaths in 2020 than in 2017/2018.

Link to it: https://ibb.co/pfgsWNX

Based on the numbers the whole lock down would not have made any difference at all.

You are ignoring what the Covid numbers may have been if lockdown had not taken place.

 

[fisicx]

Based on the numbers the whole lock down would not have made any difference at all.

The lockdown wasn't about death rates, it was about controlling the numbers of people in hospital at one time. In addition it protected those most at risk of becoming seriously ill. My mum being one of these, if she gets infected she will almost certainly die. The majority of the population understand this and have complied. There will always be a small percentage who think the rules don’t apply to them.

 

[Jeff FV]

I have another question about the graphics here ( link below ) and statistics from the ONS.

It shows the death rates 2017/2018 compared to the current ones 2020. Even with Covid around there is less deaths in 2020 than in 2017/2018.

Link to it: https://ibb.co/pfgsWNX

Based on the numbers the whole lock down would not have made any difference at all.

can you give a link to the source of that graph?

Not saying it’s wrong, but it is a little confusing. For example, what does it mean when it talks of (& plots) “cumulative deaths 2017/2018”?

it doesn’t look like an ONS graph (not saying it’s not been made with their data), but the colours look “wrong”, and they (ONS) tend report year on year, rather than combining years (eg 2017/18)

Happy to be proved wrong, but until I have more detail I shall remain sceptical about that graph, but it posses an interesting question and hopefully I’ll get some time today to plot my own cumulative deaths graphs to compare recent years.

 

[Jeff FV]

Ok, as promised, I’ve crunched some data and you can see the results here:

https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/2539286/

This graph does not support the statement that there are less deaths in 2020 than 2017/18. Until late March, 2020 was slightly below the 5 year average for deaths, but then a significant increase in deaths occurred.

The graph ends at the week ending 8th May, as this is the date of the last available data.

I took the data from ONS weekly deaths, and summed each week’s deaths to get a cumulative figure for each week.

A couple of takeaways, By the 8t May 2020:

1. There were 31,892 more deaths than in 2018 (the previous worst year for deaths) representing a 14% increase in deaths, 2020 to 2018

2. There were 44,753 more deaths in 2020 than the average death rate, a 21% increase in deaths.

Because flu etc is seasonal, I will (when I get the time) run some figures with the year, instead of running Jan to Dec, but run from May to April as this will encompass the winter flu season within one cycle, but I don’t think the results will tell a different story. Covid 19 has been responsible for a significant number of deaths, it is not just like a bad year for flu.

 

[Aniela]

As the title says do you reckon if infection numbers don’t go up and continue to plummet as they are now the cards will just tumble and things could pretty much get back to normal fairly quickly?

Do you think people will demand this if this is the case and social distancing will fade away and the hospitality sector and events industry as examples will bounce back fairly quickly and this whole lockdown will be looked upon as a massive over reaction?

Let’s hope so.

When the furlough rules change, I think we will start to see people pushing to go back to normal quicker than maybe the government would like.

It's easy for people to preach the 'Yes, I agree with the lockdown!" while you're getting paid to be at home.

How many people will be saying "Yes, I agree with the lockdown!" when they get to a stage of "being at home = no money" and face losing their homes, cars etc if they don't go out to work.

I would say people will then start to reconsider what they're doing; rightly or wrongly.

 

[Forgot password]

Here are the latest daily infection figures for the four European countries that eased their lockdowns back in mid-April (accelerating since).


Denmark - 59

Norway - 14

Czech Republic - 77

Austria - 50


No second wave, not even a tiny ripple.

 

[Carl Nixon]

The mathematical projections will show the lines decreasing until they reach zero (with no second spike). You would get the exact same results if you put the data in to Excel and asked it to produce a trend line.

The medical projections are not so simple so. Things change dramatically in the winter, with things like the flu making the virus easier and more likely to spread. We also then have the potential of countries like the US re-infecting the world a second time if they don't get things under control.

Personally I think it will continue to drop, but winter will be a dangerous time if we are not careful

 

[Interestedobserver]

Just been reading that because lockdown has been successful in reducing cases it's making it way tougher for those trying to make a vaccine to test it now and prove a vaccine may work

Same organisation who said they were 80 per cent confident they could get us a vaccine by September have now reduced that to 50 per cent confident

They need more Covid around to be able to test the vaccine

Catch 22

 

[Interestedobserver]

Here are the latest daily infection figures for the four European countries that eased their lockdowns back in mid-April (accelerating since).


Denmark - 59

Norway - 14

Czech Republic - 77

Austria - 50


No second wave, not even a tiny ripple.

Easing of lockdown is still lockdown by any other standards we've ever had. It's just less lockdown let's be honest.

 

[fisicx]

HNo second wave, not even a tiny ripple.

You said you wouldn't be back for 2 weeks.

In any case, those stats don't mean anything in isolation

 

[Forgot password]

Yeah sorry fixit I cracked, won’t happen again in fact let’s throw another week on my time - see you on June 14th.

 

[MOIC]

Yeah sorry fixit I cracked

You crack too often!

Can you make it June 14th 2021?

 

[Forgot password]

Ah my Orifice in China town - where you been old bean? Nope sorry can’t do 14th June 221 as on a promise that day

 

[MOIC]

. . . . .2022 then?

Been working my bo!!@x off!

 

[gpietersz]

The mathematical projections will show the lines decreasing until they reach zero (with no second spike). You would get the exact same results if you put the data in to Excel and asked it to produce a trend line.

That was also true when people projected exponential growth. That is why you need complex models. Unfortunately there is not enough data to properly test complex models (a common problem in economics, climate science, and a lot more fields). In this case it also turns out that the model the British government has been using has been incompetently implemented (models are implemented as code, which is terrible: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technol...wn-totally-unreliable-buggy-mess-say-experts/ )

Same organisation who said they were 80 per cent confident they could get us a vaccine by September have now reduced that to 50 per cent confident

They say they only have a 50% of doing it in time to be useful because the vaccine is disappearing. That is good news right?

 

[Chris Ashdown]

We are still getting above 200 deaths a day, yet all is sunny people are swarming around on beaches and testing is still crap. even the worlds most unlikely expert on all things, Lord Cummings has been going's a lot so it seems

Still a long fight back to anything like normality me thinks
Another week and the total may be another thousand or more deaths average village around here 3000 people

 

[Interestedobserver]

That was also true when people projected exponential growth. That is why you need complex models. Unfortunately there is not enough data to properly test complex models (a common problem in economics, climate science, and a lot more fields). In this case it also turns out that the model the British government has been using has been incompetently implemented (models are implemented as code, which is terrible: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technol...wn-totally-unreliable-buggy-mess-say-experts/ )



They say they only have a 50% of doing it in time to be useful because the vaccine is disappearing. That is good news right?

That was also true when people projected exponential growth. That is why you need complex models. Unfortunately there is not enough data to properly test complex models (a common problem in economics, climate science, and a lot more fields). In this case it also turns out that the model the British government has been using has been incompetently implemented (models are implemented as code, which is terrible: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technol...wn-totally-unreliable-buggy-mess-say-experts/ )



They say they only have a 50% of doing it in time to be useful because the vaccine is disappearing. That is good news right?

You mean the virus is disappearing of course.

It's disappearing because we are in lockdown. Unless we want to be in perpetual lockdown we need a vaccine.

They can't test the vaccine without Covid being around.

I guess as we ease lockdown cases will come back and they will get their chance to test again

Catch 22 as I said

 

[Karimbo]

Here are the latest daily infection figures for the four European countries that eased their lockdowns back in mid-April (accelerating since).


Denmark - 59

Norway - 14

Czech Republic - 77

Austria - 50


No second wave, not even a tiny ripple.

Whenever I hear about second wave I just roll my eyes. They are reffering to the Spanish flu which occured during ww1.

• Understanding of infectious diseases was primitive compared to todays standard.
• The spanish flu mutated and it could kill people, young, middle aged and old in less than 24 hours
• The world was in the midst of a world war and people were malnourished and living off rations.
• There was a concerted effort to quash any news of a pandemic in order not to destroy morale and keep the war effort going.

These are all extreme cases, there has not been a second wave like it, not even remotely since 1918 (over a 100 years ago).

There were second waves of Sars (confined to asia that occured 2002-2004), it killed fewer and fewer people in subsequent waves. The virus eventually died out the vaccine wasn't required.

There is nothing to fear than fear itself, when people fear and panic about second wave and it keeps the economy unproductive.

 

[Karimbo]

How on earth do you know that? What is the incubation period of the disease? Ie how long between infection and symptoms? Easing lockdown only started a week ago?

But also, people have symptoms for up to 3 weeks before needing hospital treatment, so it is definitely too early to tell.

Well it's been 3 weeks since the relaxation of lockdown. I didn't want to argue the point - I was confident in the knowledge that the relaxation of lockdown won't have any adverse affects. So I quitely waited the 3 weeks to reply back. True to form - infections haven't risen and still continue to fall.

So in hindsight can we agree the government made the right decision after all?

The presence of antibodies doesn't mean you are immune. If they are present it just tells you that you have been infected. But you may have been infected and have no antibodies.

The present of antibodies absolutely does mean they're immune. It means the body has fought off the virus and successfully beat it. They are paticularly immune as long as the antibodies are present.

What's for us to see is whether the antibodies stick around the body in the long term or if they disappear off, and if it does disappear whether the body can quickly produce the antibodies when needed, quicker than it did the first time round.

 

[alan1302]

Whenever I hear about second wave I just roll my eyes. They are reffering to the Spanish flu which occured during ww1.

• Understanding of infectious diseases was primitive compared to todays standard.
• The spanish flu mutated and it could kill people, young, middle aged and old in less than 24 hours
• The world was in the midst of a world war and people were malnourished and living off rations.
• There was a concerted effort to quash any news of a pandemic in order not to destroy morale and keep the war effort going.

These are all extreme cases, there has not been a second wave like it, not even remotely since 1918 (over a 100 years ago).

There were second waves of Sars (confined to asia that occured 2002-2004), it killed fewer and fewer people in subsequent waves. The virus eventually died out the vaccine wasn't required.

There is nothing to fear than fear itself, when people fear and panic about second wave and it keeps the economy unproductive.

None of what you have said shows that a 2nd wave is not possible. Spanish Flu as you said did have a 2nd wave as did SARS- just that the authorities were on top of SARS so it did not take hold as much. CV19 is more infectious than SARS so more likely to have a 2nd wave should people mingle together too much and too soon.

You can roll your eyes but that does not mean it is not possible.

 

[alan1302]

The present of antibodies absolutely does mean they're immune.I

No, it does not:

https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-antibody-tests.html

 

[Interestedobserver]

Whenever I hear about second wave I just roll my eyes. They are reffering to the Spanish flu which occured during ww1.

• Understanding of infectious diseases was primitive compared to todays standard.
• The spanish flu mutated and it could kill people, young, middle aged and old in less than 24 hours
• The world was in the midst of a world war and people were malnourished and living off rations.
• There was a concerted effort to quash any news of a pandemic in order not to destroy morale and keep the war effort going.

These are all extreme cases, there has not been a second wave like it, not even remotely since 1918 (over a 100 years ago).

There were second waves of Sars (confined to asia that occured 2002-2004), it killed fewer and fewer people in subsequent waves. The virus eventually died out the vaccine wasn't required.

There is nothing to fear than fear itself, when people fear and panic about second wave and it keeps the economy unproductive.

I don't get where you are coming from here

With previous pandemics we never went into lockdown like this? In fact as you say above they even quashed the news about it?

I feel all that's happened around the world to date is we've avoided absolute chaos and collapse of health services etc by going into severe lockdown

So I don't even class us as having had a first wave myself. Basically we've just suppressed the disease. If we hadn't we would have been totally overwhelmed in the disease by now. Now had that happened then it could have been called a first wave.

What we have seen is what happens to Covid when you stop everyone from being sociable.

And as far as I'm concerned relaxed lockdown that we are now going into is still severe lockdown by any other way of judging life ? And it's still strict social distancing.

Sport behind closed doors, cinemas and theatres closed, public transport avoidance, nobody in or out without quarantine. Hospitality indoors totally shut down. Outdoors heavily restricted.

Please Karimbo don't pretend this isn't still severe lockdown?

And whether you want to call it first wave or second wave or strict or relaxed lockdown we are still all well and truly in the sh8t together.

All that's happening now is seeing how severe the lockdown has to be to ensure things don't get out of control again.

But we are still in an unprecedented lockdown state and so heavily restricted its untrue. This is lockdown still. I won't say it isn't until I can go and watch a football match in a stadium and have a drink in the pub before and after tbh

You can't compare this to Sars in any way?

I can't remember pubs shutting, theatres closing and sport behind closed doors when Sars was going on?

Can you?

You aren't comparing like with like

We've had to endure severe lockdown just to get things under control. And now weve got months and years more of lockdowns coming our way by the looks of it?

You are talking like life has been back to normal for 3 weeks and everything is fine?

Yet we still cant do anything remotely involving socialising with others?

But you talk like we've beaten the disease?

The disease is entirely in control of the whole world?

 

[MOIC]

These are all extreme cases, there has not been a second wave like it, not even remotely since 1918 (over a 100 years ago).

Nothing has happened like this since the Spanish Flu.

Do you think that's something to consider?

Close your eyes and hope for the best.

 

[Interestedobserver]

Here are the latest daily infection figures for the four European countries that eased their lockdowns back in mid-April (accelerating since).


Denmark - 59

Norway - 14

No second wave, not even a tiny ripple.

Interesting you mention those two. Denmark started lockdown first and left lockdown first. They totally clamped down on Covid to keep cases to a minimum from the start

Meanwhile Sweden tried to avoid lockdown as much as they could and now have a death rate four times worse than their near neighbours

And those two neighbours above happy to open borders to each other but now refusing to open borders with Sweden becaus of what they have done

Sweden tried to do something different but have now ended up having the worst death rate in the world per capita and have effectively isolated themselves from their neighbours as a result

Short term gain long term pain