Will we go back into Lockdown ?? Will this become part of the general routine of life ??
AndyWilson said, 1627898365
Most motorists who die in road accidents were wearing seat belts.
Does that mean seat belts don't work?
Or is it just because most drivers wear sear belts?
The same effect is starting to become apparent with covid and vaccination. If 100% of people were vaccinated then even if only 1 person died of covid 100% of the deaths would have been vaccinated.
GhostOfArielAdam said, 1627898778
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Well, so far the gamble seems to have paid off. Cases haven't gone through the roof with unlocking, they have fallen, which has surprised nearly everybody (including the Government). It seems unlikely that we will be having another lockdown.
Things could take a turn for the worse again in autumn when the schools go back, or if another variant takes hold, but at the moment I think we will not be having any more lockdowns.
The thing that really bothers me is that none of the projections suggested cases would drop and scientists are now trying to explain away this drop with things like:It's the school holidays. Given this is a planned event shouldnt it be included in ne of the models?
People are reluctant to get tested because they want to go on holiday. Again this is pretty normal behaviour so it should be included in the model?
The general public are being more cautious since the 19th. Couldnt one line on the charts indicate what happens if people do that?
I have tended to believe the scientists up to around June 14 when it was clear that the charts they were using were selective in terms of what might happen. Given that their last set of charts were woefully wrong I think we are at least entitled to a press conference to explain why, especially as Sajid David said he expected cases to be 100k by August. As it stands at the moment if they doubled every 2 weeks they could reach that figure by the End of August but we are now 2 weeks into 'Freedom' and cases are still dropping.
At least after a general election pollsters tell us why they got it wrong, SAGE arent even doing that!
You should read this, particularly the summary.
Don't confuse what the TV talking heads say and what the scientists say. Yes, our situation is better than the central projections, but well within modelled possible outcomes.
hyperphoto said, 1627899014
Hopefully not - surely at some point we've got to reach herd immunity in the UK.
Merrill C. Leo said, 1627899722
hyperphoto said
Hopefully not - surely at some point we've got to reach herd immunity in the UK.
Only if enough of the young and those older who haven't so far take up the vaccine.
I think there will be suggestions for a new lockdown in September, but I believe the Government will fight strongly any attempt to go back into a lockdown any time soon, but will instead reintroduce other precautions(probably badly). The demographic of the country that generate the most wealth has for the most part been vaccinated now, so what would be the point in preventing them from generating income will I expect be the thinking.
As many have already said though, the virus & variants will be something that we must live with, which should include continued mask wearing and frequent testing were required to keep outbreaks contained.
MidgePhoto said, 1627900674
Chantastic said
....I read about studies that some people, about 30% but varies, have natural immunity to Covid in their T Cells even though they are never exposed to Covid before. Of course I'm not willing to risk but if there was a test to confirm this immunity being offered I be interested.
Where did you read about the studies or where were they published?
They'd say how they determined t cell specificity.
The immune system is interestjng. Around age zero it starts producing T cells etc with mutated, cut and pasted, generally randomly altered genes determining the arms of the antibody molecules they will produce or use for detectors/triggers.
Then it tests thpse random weapons against the history tissues, and deletes any that are self-attacking.
(Several diseases occur where that glitches)
So, randomly, individuals will be found with an immune response to antigens never before encountered by the species.
It isn't heritable.
hyperphoto said, 1627902207
Hopefully, as more people develop antibodies either through infection or vaccination the virus should become more manageable and less of an influence on a further lockdown even though it may not be totally eradicated.
sketch101 said, 1627912858
Dennis Bloodnok Photography said
Everyone,
Will we go back into Lockdown ?? Will this become part of the general routine of life ??
The various vaccines which are currently being administered to the population give a certain percentage of immunity to those who have had the injections. For example, I have had both injections and there is a third injection which is rumoured to begin being given some time later in 2021.
The thing is (as mentioned in other threads, by several others) the largest percentage of people getting infected with Covid-19 are now those with both vaccines.
As indoor locations (EG Nightclubs) can now allow large numbers of people to enter (without wearing a mask) infection rates are skyrocketing. I am expecting that death rates will soon follow suit.
Given all of the above, will we be back into lockdown before the end of the year ??
Equally , will local and national lockdowns be an intermittent fact-of-life going on years into the future ??
Easy.
Whatever the Govt promises they're not going to do, expect the exact opposite.
No more lockdowns promised? Panic buy bogroll.
Definitely no plans to introduce an integrated covid passport/digital ID/Chinese-style 'social credit' system? Stock up on tinfoil...
Two weeks to flatten the curve? Yeah...
Kevin Connery said, 1627916338
JJsPix said
To me, the problem is that we have to learn to live with this virus until it mutates beyond the highly infectious form that it is at the moment.
But it will be just like any virus; we live with colds, flu, measles and so on.
It's how we manage it that counts.
Sadly, while such mutations do occur, they rarely survive long enough to have an impact--lower infection rates don't spread and die out. Higher infection rates spread rapidly; both alpha and delta are near-perfect examples.
hyperphoto said
Hopefully, as more people develop antibodies either through infection or vaccination the virus should become more manageable and less of an influence on a further lockdown even though it may not be totally eradicated.
That is the hope.
Imby said, 1627917511
GhostOfArielAdam said
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Well, so far the gamble seems to have paid off. Cases haven't gone through the roof with unlocking, they have fallen, which has surprised nearly everybody (including the Government). It seems unlikely that we will be having another lockdown.
Things could take a turn for the worse again in autumn when the schools go back, or if another variant takes hold, but at the moment I think we will not be having any more lockdowns.
The thing that really bothers me is that none of the projections suggested cases would drop and scientists are now trying to explain away this drop with things like:It's the school holidays. Given this is a planned event shouldnt it be included in ne of the models?
People are reluctant to get tested because they want to go on holiday. Again this is pretty normal behaviour so it should be included in the model?
The general public are being more cautious since the 19th. Couldnt one line on the charts indicate what happens if people do that?
I have tended to believe the scientists up to around June 14 when it was clear that the charts they were using were selective in terms of what might happen. Given that their last set of charts were woefully wrong I think we are at least entitled to a press conference to explain why, especially as Sajid David said he expected cases to be 100k by August. As it stands at the moment if they doubled every 2 weeks they could reach that figure by the End of August but we are now 2 weeks into 'Freedom' and cases are still dropping.
At least after a general election pollsters tell us why they got it wrong, SAGE arent even doing that!
You should read this, particularly the summary.
Don't confuse what the TV talking heads say and what the scientists say. Yes, our situation is better than the central projections, but well within modelled possible outcomes.
I wasnt referring to what the TV talking heads say I was referring to what the scientists and politicians were saying the week before freedom day when all the charts pointed to a growth in cases, deaths, and hospitalisations.
I have read the summary you refer to, that actually says they dont know and the document has graphs covering every eventuality without giving an indication of what they think will happen.
On that basis it is worse than useless in terms of explaining what has occurred in the past two weeks.
What I really want is for Chris Whitty, Jonathan Van Tam, Patrick Vallance, and/or the PM to show us new charts and explain why there is such a large variance from their models on July 12.
If the current situation was one of the forecasts I think they should tell us why that wasnt one of the charts used.
Presumably it is because none of them wanted to stand there and say 'we might hit 100k cases by August or we might see case numbers being lower by August and we dont know which'
I dont believe that anyone suggested that Sajid David's 100k by August figure was wrong but it clearly was.
Jerome Razoir said, 1627922768
Mao Zhu 毛 猪 said
We cannot carry on locking down and bringing about economic chaos to protect those that won't protect themselves.
Taking this in isolation. This is an ideological stance.
Put simply, we have two camps (plus, of course many little ones):
those who want to put medicine first
and
those who want to put economics first.
NEITHER can be allowed to dictate absolutely to the other.
Consider, "If we lock down again my business is going to go bust."
How many members of your workforce can die before the death rate amongst your workforce is great enough to bring your business down?
We should all be very, very grateful that COVID-19 is not more virulent than it is.
Historically, there were periods of time when the death rate was 90% of a community.
Ebola had a death rate of 100% in some communities in the early days.
David JC said, 1627927898
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Well, so far the gamble seems to have paid off. Cases haven't gone through the roof with unlocking, they have fallen, which has surprised nearly everybody (including the Government). It seems unlikely that we will be having another lockdown.
Things could take a turn for the worse again in autumn when the schools go back, or if another variant takes hold, but at the moment I think we will not be having any more lockdowns.
The thing that really bothers me is that none of the projections suggested cases would drop and scientists are now trying to explain away this drop with things like:It's the school holidays. Given this is a planned event shouldnt it be included in ne of the models?
People are reluctant to get tested because they want to go on holiday. Again this is pretty normal behaviour so it should be included in the model?
The general public are being more cautious since the 19th. Couldnt one line on the charts indicate what happens if people do that?
I have tended to believe the scientists up to around June 14 when it was clear that the charts they were using were selective in terms of what might happen. Given that their last set of charts were woefully wrong I think we are at least entitled to a press conference to explain why, especially as Sajid David said he expected cases to be 100k by August. As it stands at the moment if they doubled every 2 weeks they could reach that figure by the End of August but we are now 2 weeks into 'Freedom' and cases are still dropping.
At least after a general election pollsters tell us why they got it wrong, SAGE arent even doing that!
You should read this, particularly the summary.
Don't confuse what the TV talking heads say and what the scientists say. Yes, our situation is better than the central projections, but well within modelled possible outcomes.
I wasnt referring to what the TV talking heads say I was referring to what the scientists and politicians were saying the week before freedom day when all the charts pointed to a growth in cases, deaths, and hospitalisations.I have read the summary you refer to, that actually says they dont know and the document has graphs covering every eventuality without giving an indication of what they think will happen.
On that basis it is worse than useless in terms of explaining what has occurred in the past two weeks.
What I really want is for Chris Whitty, Jonathan Van Tam, Patrick Vallance, and/or the PM to show us new charts and explain why there is such a large variance from their models on July 12.
If the current situation was one of the forecasts I think they should tell us why that wasnt one of the charts used.
Presumably it is because none of them wanted to stand there and say 'we might hit 100k cases by August or we might see case numbers being lower by August and we dont know which'
I dont believe that anyone suggested that Sajid David's 100k by August figure was wrong but it clearly was.
Worth pointing out that it's less than clear that cases are dropping. Yes, there's a substantial drop on the total number of cases detected but according to the ONS infection survey, cases were still rising by last week (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest). The ONS survey is done by routine sampling every week which makes it a lot more reliable than the data on the government dashboard, which is affected by how many tests are actually being done.
I'll believe cases are really dropping if this week's ONS data says it is. Which it may; the government dashboard does show C19 hospitalisations levelling off and I've always thought that's a better measure of how good or bad things are than counting cases. It's a better measure of serious disease, which is what we're most worried about, and the criteria for admitting someone has been pretty much the same since day one rather than being dependent on who gets tested.
Richard Winn said, 1627928634
David JC said
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Well, so far the gamble seems to have paid off. Cases haven't gone through the roof with unlocking, they have fallen, which has surprised nearly everybody (including the Government). It seems unlikely that we will be having another lockdown.
Things could take a turn for the worse again in autumn when the schools go back, or if another variant takes hold, but at the moment I think we will not be having any more lockdowns.
The thing that really bothers me is that none of the projections suggested cases would drop and scientists are now trying to explain away this drop with things like:It's the school holidays. Given this is a planned event shouldnt it be included in ne of the models?
People are reluctant to get tested because they want to go on holiday. Again this is pretty normal behaviour so it should be included in the model?
The general public are being more cautious since the 19th. Couldnt one line on the charts indicate what happens if people do that?
I have tended to believe the scientists up to around June 14 when it was clear that the charts they were using were selective in terms of what might happen. Given that their last set of charts were woefully wrong I think we are at least entitled to a press conference to explain why, especially as Sajid David said he expected cases to be 100k by August. As it stands at the moment if they doubled every 2 weeks they could reach that figure by the End of August but we are now 2 weeks into 'Freedom' and cases are still dropping.
At least after a general election pollsters tell us why they got it wrong, SAGE arent even doing that!
You should read this, particularly the summary.
Don't confuse what the TV talking heads say and what the scientists say. Yes, our situation is better than the central projections, but well within modelled possible outcomes.
I wasnt referring to what the TV talking heads say I was referring to what the scientists and politicians were saying the week before freedom day when all the charts pointed to a growth in cases, deaths, and hospitalisations.I have read the summary you refer to, that actually says they dont know and the document has graphs covering every eventuality without giving an indication of what they think will happen.
On that basis it is worse than useless in terms of explaining what has occurred in the past two weeks.
What I really want is for Chris Whitty, Jonathan Van Tam, Patrick Vallance, and/or the PM to show us new charts and explain why there is such a large variance from their models on July 12.
If the current situation was one of the forecasts I think they should tell us why that wasnt one of the charts used.
Presumably it is because none of them wanted to stand there and say 'we might hit 100k cases by August or we might see case numbers being lower by August and we dont know which'
I dont believe that anyone suggested that Sajid David's 100k by August figure was wrong but it clearly was.
Worth pointing out that it's less than clear that cases are dropping. Yes, there's a substantial drop on the total number of cases detected but according to the ONS infection survey, cases were still rising by last week (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest). The ONS survey is done by routine sampling every week which makes it a lot more reliable than the data on the government dashboard, which is affected by how many tests are actually being done.I'll believe cases are really dropping if this week's ONS data says it is. Which it may; the government dashboard does show C19 hospitalisations levelling off and I've always thought that's a better measure of how good or bad things are than counting cases. It's a better measure of serious disease, which is what we're most worried about, and the criteria for admitting someone has been pretty much the same since day one rather than being dependent on who gets tested.
In addition to what David saidt, models are never perfect. So far, we have been lucky in the sense that they have predicted a ball park sequence fairly well, that is always the case however. There are still a lot of unknowns when it comes to SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 and that will affect the accuracy of the modelling. It is easy to criticise in hindsight, but most people expected figures to continue incrasing when the final restrictions were removed. Many were saying the increases were due to the easing, but that could never have been the case, as it was too early for that effect to have started showiong in the data. With hindsight, if the data continues to show a decrease (subject to the ONS surveys, whcih are more consistent, as David said), then it is likely that the Euros had an effect. This is important to understand, as when the football season starts up agian, we could see another resurgence. Alternatively, it could be that vaccination has had a greater and earlier effect than expected or it could be something completely different. Scientists won't commit to any cause until they have data to reflect it, so you won't get anyone making any sort of announcement to that effect any time soon.
Richard Winn said, 1627930160
Richard Winn said
David JC said
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Imby said
GhostOfArielAdam said
Well, so far the gamble seems to have paid off. Cases haven't gone through the roof with unlocking, they have fallen, which has surprised nearly everybody (including the Government). It seems unlikely that we will be having another lockdown.
Things could take a turn for the worse again in autumn when the schools go back, or if another variant takes hold, but at the moment I think we will not be having any more lockdowns.
The thing that really bothers me is that none of the projections suggested cases would drop and scientists are now trying to explain away this drop with things like:It's the school holidays. Given this is a planned event shouldnt it be included in ne of the models?
People are reluctant to get tested because they want to go on holiday. Again this is pretty normal behaviour so it should be included in the model?
The general public are being more cautious since the 19th. Couldnt one line on the charts indicate what happens if people do that?
I have tended to believe the scientists up to around June 14 when it was clear that the charts they were using were selective in terms of what might happen. Given that their last set of charts were woefully wrong I think we are at least entitled to a press conference to explain why, especially as Sajid David said he expected cases to be 100k by August. As it stands at the moment if they doubled every 2 weeks they could reach that figure by the End of August but we are now 2 weeks into 'Freedom' and cases are still dropping.
At least after a general election pollsters tell us why they got it wrong, SAGE arent even doing that!
You should read this, particularly the summary.
Don't confuse what the TV talking heads say and what the scientists say. Yes, our situation is better than the central projections, but well within modelled possible outcomes.
I wasnt referring to what the TV talking heads say I was referring to what the scientists and politicians were saying the week before freedom day when all the charts pointed to a growth in cases, deaths, and hospitalisations.I have read the summary you refer to, that actually says they dont know and the document has graphs covering every eventuality without giving an indication of what they think will happen.
On that basis it is worse than useless in terms of explaining what has occurred in the past two weeks.
What I really want is for Chris Whitty, Jonathan Van Tam, Patrick Vallance, and/or the PM to show us new charts and explain why there is such a large variance from their models on July 12.
If the current situation was one of the forecasts I think they should tell us why that wasnt one of the charts used.
Presumably it is because none of them wanted to stand there and say 'we might hit 100k cases by August or we might see case numbers being lower by August and we dont know which'
I dont believe that anyone suggested that Sajid David's 100k by August figure was wrong but it clearly was.
Worth pointing out that it's less than clear that cases are dropping. Yes, there's a substantial drop on the total number of cases detected but according to the ONS infection survey, cases were still rising by last week (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/coronaviruscovid19infectionsurveypilot/latest). The ONS survey is done by routine sampling every week which makes it a lot more reliable than the data on the government dashboard, which is affected by how many tests are actually being done.I'll believe cases are really dropping if this week's ONS data says it is. Which it may; the government dashboard does show C19 hospitalisations levelling off and I've always thought that's a better measure of how good or bad things are than counting cases. It's a better measure of serious disease, which is what we're most worried about, and the criteria for admitting someone has been pretty much the same since day one rather than being dependent on who gets tested.
In addition to what David saidt, models are never perfect. So far, we have been lucky in the sense that they have predicted a ball park sequence fairly well, that isn't always the case however. There are still a lot of unknowns when it comes to SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 and that will affect the accuracy of the modelling. It is easy to criticise in hindsight, but most people expected figures to continue incrasing when the final restrictions were removed. Many were saying the increases were due to the easing, but that could never have been the case, as it was too early for that effect to have started showiong in the data. With hindsight, if the data continues to show a decrease (subject to the ONS surveys, whcih are more consistent, as David said), then it is likely that the Euros had an effect. This is important to understand, as when the football season starts up agian, we could see another resurgence. Alternatively, it could be that vaccination has had a greater and earlier effect than expected or it could be something completely different. Scientists won't commit to any cause until they have data to reflect it, so you won't get anyone making any sort of announcement to that effect any time soon.
GhostOfArielAdam said, 1627978835
Imby said
I wasnt referring to what the TV talking heads say I was referring to what the scientists and politicians were saying the week before freedom day when all the charts pointed to a growth in cases, deaths, and hospitalisations.I have read the summary you refer to, that actually says they dont know and the document has graphs covering every eventuality without giving an indication of what they think will happen.
On that basis it is worse than useless in terms of explaining what has occurred in the past two weeks.
What I really want is for Chris Whitty, Jonathan Van Tam, Patrick Vallance, and/or the PM to show us new charts and explain why there is such a large variance from their models on July 12.
If the current situation was one of the forecasts I think they should tell us why that wasnt one of the charts used.
Presumably it is because none of them wanted to stand there and say 'we might hit 100k cases by August or we might see case numbers being lower by August and we dont know which'
I dont believe that anyone suggested that Sajid David's 100k by August figure was wrong but it clearly was.
The scientists and politician at the press conferences are the talking heads. The science is done by the modelling groups.
I think there are two factors: they don't know (for the myriad reasons detailed in the link) and what they say effects the outcome. If there central projection is for 50k cases a day and they say that at the press conference they expect 50k cases a day, people will behave differently to if the said 100k cases a day. Saying 100k might end up producing 25k, and saying 50k might produce 50k. What they say is simply that powerful.
Of course the "crying wolf" effect could kick in, and those initial 25k cases a day could turn into 100k cases later as people relax more and more mistrust develops in the messaging. It's hard to express how uncertain things are without the public thinking "they don't know anything, I'll do what I like".
The Ghost said, 1627979285
Just to further the confusion - you would expect PCR case numbers to drop, because you would expect symptomatic testing to drop as the vaccines are rolled out. So we could be sitting on a powder keg of 250k cases next week but that might be okay if hospitalisations stay low. Obviously it would be great if actual case rates were falling.