Covid-19 Virus

Statistically speaking there's little logic for any of the recent actions, with the possible exception of banning travel to/from the Spanish mainland. Although even that isn't clear cut given the regional differences in cases over there.

Prof Henegan reckons cases are broadly stable and any recent increases can be explained by increased testing:

https://www.cebm.net/covid-19/covid-cases-in-england-arent-rising-heres-why/

The volume of tests being completed in Leicester for example is capable of skewing things.

The ONS reports an upward shift in community transmission, but it's still far below where things were in April and an increase was always expected as restrictions reduced. Other indicators - deaths, hospital admissions, calls to 111 - are all either dropping or stable.

My current guess is the government, in moving away from a national approach to a more localised one, needs to test it now before winter starts. Hence Leicester and the North West. The Manchester lockdown was particularly poorly executed. Chaotic and poorly timed comms and I read 4 days later they've still not put the legal regulations in place to make any of it enforceable. Hopefully they'll get something valuable out of it.

The talk of a 'second wave' by Boris and Hancock is an interesting side show too. They've both used the term a fair bit in the last week. I presume this is because their policy wonks reckon it's a phrase the public both understand and fear the implications of. It cuts through. Yet I don't think I've heard a scientist yet who actually agrees with them that there's a second wave. I worry a bit that misusing the phrase could mean it has less impact if one does happen going into winter.

 

Yes, the term "second wave" is being totally misused. Scientifically speaking, we are still in the first wave. It is just being managed.

A second wave would be when the virus has been eradicated from the country completely but then returns again.

But, as you say, the term is being used to cut through to the public. I'm not sure what they will call a real 2nd wave, should it happen though. A 3rd wave?

 

It's all guess work and has been all along IMO.

We should obviously continue to try and find a cure, but otherwise we should let this thing run it's course and I say this as one of the so called vulnerable group before anyone calls me callous.

At the end of the day this thing is mostly a minor illness for those who contract it, which is why I think that the world wide hysteria it has caused is wayyyyyyyyyyyy OTT, because the world cannot just stop functioning like it has, and I don't think it needed to do so as our species will survive.

IMO, instead of this "Stop the World, I want to get off attitude" we should plough on through this pandemic, take our losses, and come out leaner fitter and stronger on the other side. Even if as one of the so called Vulnerable people I am one of those losses.

By the way don't all cheer at once, as I will be doing my best not to be one of those loses

 

What exactly do you mean 'run its course'? What would you have do Govt differently as you yourself are 'trying your best not to be one of the losses'?

Sounds a bit 'herd immunity' to me which, putting aside the devastation that could cause, isn't really guaranteed to work.

If you are trying your best to avoid it do you just mean let everyone else get it until it goes away?

 

Which vulnerable group are you ?

 

There is, of course, a big difference between the survival of the species and the survival of individuals. Extrapolating your proposal across the world would result in the deaths of millions rather than hundreds of thousands, including many supposedly ‘non-vulnerable’ people and each death affects not just the individual but his/her close group of family and friends. On top of that you would have an even greater knock-on effect of health facilities not being able to treat other conditions, leading to yet more excess deaths.

 

He's an old git, like many of us.

 

There is a tendency for people to use the term ‘herd immunity’ as if it were a policy choice, due to the suggestion that the government was considering allowing COVID 19 to run through the population at one stage. It’s not. Herd immunity is a phenomenon which applies to all viruses. Once there are few enough new people to infect the virus transmission rate inevitably starts to fall at an accelerating rate. Whether you achieve this by allowing the virus to take its course or by vaccination is the choice. The former is surely only acceptable if the virus is not deadly enough to result in many deaths.

 

I don't get this. Surely there was a policy choice being considered: either taking measures to restrict the spread of the virus, such as lockdown, or just letting it run free, given that no vaccine was available. So in that sense, reaching herd immunity by doing nothing was a policy choice (albeit not a good one)?

 

Yes, fair enough. I was meaning your point about how practical such as strategy is, but also that there has been some doubt about whether having this particular virus gives a lasting immunity.

 

I get a momentary vision of a big virus particle bouncing joyfully across the Austrian hills in the style of the The Sound of Music. 'Ooo I'm Fwee! Fwee!'

 

Currently at Birmingham airport. I've seen airports this quiet before but usually in the middle of the night. Seamless departure board comfortably runs into tomorrow before the end of the first screen. Seamless experience jumping through all the hoops so far though.

 

Everything in the modern world is completely brilliant when you remove most of the people from it. Bon voyage.

 

A government makes a policy choice after considering various options. Leaving things so that a herd immunity develops was only a consideration that was discarded, it wasn't the policy choice - which was to lockdown.

Vallance clearly said in late Feb, or early March, that herd immunity was only likely to be a longer term benefit and could help stop a large second spike.

 

Thanks. I see it was doubly seamless in my haste!

The flight was surprisingly busy. A handful of empty seats only. Boarding was a free for all, which caught us out a bit after three or four emails in the last week stressing how it would be done row by row and everyone would need to be patient.

Mrs UEA had the fun of sitting next to a woman who was very unhappy to be sat next to someone given there’s a pandemic on and had the cheek to tell her to move to an empty seat elsewhere. Mrs UEA pointed out that was the seat we’d booked a fortnight ago directly across the aisle from me and our kids. And she could move herself if she wanted to. The woman then sat there huffing and sulking for the next 4 hours instead. Really odd but strangely entertaining (for me).

Enjoy your break too.

 

People like this are real head scratchers.

If there was an empty seat not next someone else, surely it's easier to move yourself than convince someone else to.

If there isn't an empty seat not next to someone else, it boils down to "make me safe at your own expense", which isn't exactly a compelling argument.

There are some odd people in the world.

 

I agree, it wasn’t the policy finally chosen, but it was an option on the table.

I suppose the point being made in the OP - that herd immunity was not a policy choice - is that the “policy” was either leaving things or lockdown, which policies were designed to lead to the consequences of herd immunity or flattening the curve respectively. But the separating of the policy (the means of getting there) and the intended consequence (the destination) seems a bit artificial to me.

 

Second wave hysteria - a rational view by the straight talking Katie Hopkins.

Remember Second Wave is a fear spread by the media to sell more media time/copies and by scientists needing more tax dollar research funding...

Good old Katie tells it the way it is ...

 

Well, the half time scores are in and it’s not looking good for the supporters of the nationwide lockdown.

A cheeky 16,000 indirect deaths are apparently attributable to it in the irst two months of maximum lockdown. Or, to put it another way, for every 3 people Covid saw to, the lockdown knocked off another 2 for free.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-lockdown-may-have-indirectly-caused-16-000-excess-deaths-study-12044

As time ticks on it’s only going to look like more and more of a ruinous policy decision. The evidence base in support of a lockdown is shrinking by the week as the numbers are crunched here and abroad.

 

Mass hysteria caused by the MEDIA

 

A lot of fake news and facts twisting and fear mongering from the media to sell more.. they have a lot to answer for..

 

I thought it’d only be fair to throw in some positivity into the mix. My mum needed a hernia op which, given the way the wind was blowing, she’d tried to push through privately in March but was beaten to the punch by the NHS buying up all the private bed capacity. So she was out on her ear. She had little faith the NHS would deliver it any time soon and once Covid started ramping up she assumed it was a lost cause. Especially with the cancer patients dropping like flies.

Long story short, she got a call from the NHS in late July to tell her to be ready for the op within a fortnight and to self-isolate. And low and behold they did the surgery on time (and in a private hospital to boot, so she got the fine china for lunch). It wasn’t completely seamless - the paperwork seemed to fall between the cracks and mum to chase administrators at 4.30 on a Friday but they got there in the end.

Maybe it’s not proof the system is working again but it’s certainly doing something.

 

The comparison is to be had with the numbers of deaths that would have occurred without a lockdown. Any other approach is confirmation bias - look the six figure deaths didn’t happen, who needed a lockdown?

Those non Covid deaths (if correctly attributed) are also not proof that the idea of lockdown was wrong, but more that its implementation was flawed. We did it late and this required a harsh lockdown. Even then there was no call to shut down life or death treatment, because that’s evidently, by definition, an equally life and death issue.

Start the public enquiry now so we know how to deal with this if it becomes year on year.

 

On 30th July England had its first all-settings 0 Covid deaths day since the beginning of the pandemic. This really positive news was completely missed though because PHE mucked up the figures. The ineptitude is staggering.

Meanwhile the overall tally has been reduced by 5,377 to remove all the ‘hit by a bus having tested positive for Covid 15 weeks ago’ scenario folk.

 

More people are dying due to delays in ops/treatment and flu/pneumonia than attributed to Covid, many of whom have ‘underlying health conditions’.

The sad, statistical truth is that the massive lockdown has probably brought forward or even caused many many deaths that could have been prevented but for the total focus on Covid.
Meanwhile, the economy goes into meltdown.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/flu-kills-five-times-more-than-covid-9wlzsdlh9

 

...and Holland ....Malta .....there seems to be no light at the end of this long tunnel

 

I've just come back from two consecutive UK breaks, firstly I went down to Dawlish for 4 nights. The hotel I stayed in had a laissez-faire attitude in general but we followed their guidelines and as for going out to pubs/restaurants all seemed to follow protocol nicely.
Then I went to Sandbanks for 6 nights, as of Saturday the law in England changed stating that people inside the hotel building had to wear masks, we followed the rules as did the staff and most other guests but there were a few families that didn't bother. However when I checked in, I had to sign an additional form stating that if my family did not obey the Covid-19 regulations then we could be thrown out of the hotel without refund. I ask what was the point of signing this if some guests don't bother with a mask? As I say most guests followed the instructions but others didn't, and it wasn't a class thing as I saw one guest who owned a Ferrari quite happily get out of his car and put his mask on before entering the hotel.
As for the pubs and restaurants I visited in Dorset, only one didn't do the contact tracing properly. That was a pub in Corfe Castle yesterday, patrons were expected to sign in on some website (pubtrace.co.uk) which didn't even list that pub! I mentioned it to a member of staff but I guess 20 odd year old barmaid wasn't the right person to speak to.
At my end of Sandbanks the beach was not as busy as other beaches in that neck of the woods.

 

That's quite a bold claim when the very article you linked states that overall deaths are below national average for the time of year for the 7th successive week.

Not that I disagree with the notion that putting off emergency treatment for other items is a pretty silly policy.

 

We're heading back home tomorrow from Turkey. I'll take a look at the UK form later on rather than leaving it then. It's the same here with the poor staff having to wear masks in the heat while we don't have to. The hotel was probably running at 20% when we arrived on 4 Aug but it's far busier now. Sunbed wars started here a couple of days ago so that's a sure sign things have picked up.

I'd echo your comment people shouldn't shy away from going abroad because of Covid.

 

I have anecdotal stories from local hospital medical staff that some cancer patients treatments were put on hold due to Covid focus and sadly some have passed away.
They are a cancer death statistic.

But many, if not most, people who die with Covid already had an underlying health issue that would have caused their demise at some point. But their deaths are a Covid statistic.

In both cases the patients demise was caused by and brought forward by the underlying health issue.

It goes back to the question - did the patient die WITH Covid or did the patient die OF Covid?

The focus on Covid has left other patients more vulnerable as resources to treat them have possibly been compromised.

Everyone including the govt are grappling with this outbreak and are damned if they do or don’t by critics, but in hindsight (always easy to say) the overall response could be viewed as being OTT and putting other patients in jeopardy.

20,000 in care homes have died with Covid, and the policy there was confused to say the least.

https://www.bbc.com/news/52674073

What really bugs me is the way the media and scientists with axes to grind hype up the fear and panic (‘second wave’ etc) when the reality is more people are dying of (with!) flu, pneumonia, diabetes etc but there is no massive shift in resources and policy to prevent it.

Type 2 Diabetes is a killer and largely preventable from lifestyle choices and already takes up 10% of total NHS funding (testing, drugs, amputations, rehabilitations, prosthetics, secondary effects on health such as eyesight etc etc) and a headline prediction is it could bankrupt the NHS as the current 3.4m cases grows.

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/about_us/news/new-stats-people-living-with-diabetes

Juvenile and adolescent onset type 2 diabetes was almost unheard of in this country. Now it’s a becoming a real issue. There should be a massive commitment by the govt to prevent it getting worse. But it’s a long term fix so govts won’t see a ‘return on investment’ (votes) in their terms of office so it’s a back burner project.

The priorities are all mixed up with Covid and other health issues imo.

Rant over ..