Coronavirus Thread

[Dunge]

16 minutes ago, danny. said:

I think that’s widely what everyone thinks? https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/01/06/moderna-ceo-says-people-may-need-fourth-covid-shot-as-efficacy-of-boosters-likely-to-decline-over-time.html This says it declines after 4 weeks. After 4 months I don’t think it does anything looking at the figures. 

 

and even then would likely apply to protection against symptomatic infection rather than severe disease.

[Dunge]

Sorry if that looks rude, I’m just not in the mood for people promoting and defending these shysters.

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Sorry if that looks rude, I’m just not in the mood for people promoting and defending these shysters.

[st albans fox]

Definitive statements from scientists and people with influence are a big problem (when they don’t know for sure and are opposing the safer options). Whatever your stance on yeadon, I saw some stuff attributed to him today which, if he did say it, proves he absolutely is no scientist and certainly shouldn’t be listened to with any veracity. 

[dsr-burnley]

8 hours ago, danny. said:

I think that’s widely what everyone thinks? https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/01/06/moderna-ceo-says-people-may-need-fourth-covid-shot-as-efficacy-of-boosters-likely-to-decline-over-time.html This says it declines after 4 weeks. After 4 months I don’t think it does anything looking at the figures. 

Again, like so many people, you are assuming that if you get a sniffle from covid then you might as well be dead.  It isn't true.  Longer term (though I am dubious about any stat that claims to know the effect of boosters on omicron 10 weeks later, since we haven't had omicron for 10 weeks) a booster that does not prevent symptomatic infection but does stop you from dying, is a positive thing.  

[danny.]

1 hour ago, dsr-burnley said:

Again, like so many people, you are assuming that if you get a sniffle from covid then you might as well be dead.  It isn't true.  Longer term (though I am dubious about any stat that claims to know the effect of boosters on omicron 10 weeks later, since we haven't had omicron for 10 weeks) a booster that does not prevent symptomatic infection but does stop you from dying, is a positive thing.  

I’m not assuming anything. Just saying that doctor in the video said efficacy is down after a matter of weeks, someone said that was “speaking tripe” but from what I can see; the efficacy is indeed right down after a few weeks. The head of Pfizer said he expects the booster to not hold well against Omicron. 

[Finnaldo]

Cases beginning to drop off?

 

 

Half expected this as January is a naturally quiet month as it is. Back to school may or may not have an impact however.

[shade]

Genuine question for somebody that understands data. We've discussed the weaknesses of using per 100,000 of vaccinated/unvaccinated to assume the efficacy of the vaccine and discussed the flaws with using the NIMS database, but why would the numbers increase for covid cases in the vaccinated population in the two latest reports? Omicron is more virulent, but surely you would expect both groups number of cases to increase a similar amount? Am I missing something glaringly obvious?

 

 

 

[Dunge]

6 minutes ago, shade said:

Genuine question for somebody that understands data. We've discussed the weaknesses of using per 100,000 of vaccinated/unvaccinated to assume the efficacy of the vaccine and discussed the flaws with using the NIMS database, but why would the numbers increase for covid cases in the vaccinated population in the two latest reports? Omicron is more virulent, but surely you would expect both groups number of cases to increase a similar amount? Am I missing something glaringly obvious?

 

 

 

I think there are extra bits of information needed here:

 

- How was this data collected?

- What are the caveats, e.g. what is the definition of “Unadjusted”?
 

One distinct possibility, for instance, is that vaccinated people who would be naturally more onboard with this sort of thing, are far more likely to report cases.

[shade]

2 minutes ago, Dunge said:

I think there are extra bits of information needed here:

 

- How was this data collected?

- What are the caveats, e.g. what is the definition of “Unadjusted”?
 

One distinct possibility, for instance, is that vaccinated people who would be naturally more onboard with this sort of thing, are far more likely to report cases.

That's fair enough, but do you think unvaccinated over 80 year olds are less onboard? I doubt there's many refuseniks there? 

 

The over 80 demographic went from -50% chance to +7%.

[Dunge]

11 minutes ago, shade said:

That's fair enough, but do you think unvaccinated over 80 year olds are less onboard? I doubt there's many refuseniks there? 

 

The over 80 demographic went from -50% chance to +7%.

A refusenik will be a refusenik, of any age. Over 80s are probably only lower due to the disease affecting them more. There are fewer refuseniks as a percentage of the age group in the over 80s, but the likelihood of an elderly refusenik not reporting could well be the same, if not higher.

 

Also worth noting that the differences between graph 1 and graph 2 will reflect the rise of Omicron over Delta in this scenario, with what looks like milder symptoms giving even less reason for the unvaccinated (of any age) to report.

 

But yeah, I’m hypothesising here without the information of how the data was collected.

[danny.]

17 minutes ago, shade said:

That's fair enough, but do you think unvaccinated over 80 year olds are less onboard? I doubt there's many refuseniks there? 

 

The over 80 demographic went from -50% chance to +7%.

Wouldn’t that be down to the spread of Omicron? If they just had 2 doses almost a year ago they wouldn’t have much protection from Omicron I’d guess. 

[shade]

1 minute ago, Dunge said:

A refusenik will be a refusenik, of any age. Over 80s are probably only lower due to the disease affecting them more. There are fewer refuseniks as a percentage of the age group in the over 80s, but the likelihood of an elderly refusenik not reporting could well be the same, if not higher.

 

Also worth noting that the differences between graph 1 and graph 2 will reflect the rise of Omicron over Delta in this scenario, with what looks like milder symptoms giving even less reason for the unvaccinated (of any age) to report.

 

But yeah, I’m hypothesising here without the information of how the data was collected.

COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report - week 51 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

 

It's from the government's report, so I'm guessing it's confirmed PCR tests?

[shade]

3 minutes ago, danny. said:

Wouldn’t that be down to the spread of Omicron? If they just had 2 doses almost a year ago they wouldn’t have much protection from Omicron I’d guess. 

But why would one increase more than the other in every age group?

[Dunge]

2 minutes ago, shade said:

But why would one increase more than the other in every age group?

Yeah, I stick by what I said about the unvaccinated probably being less likely to even take tests, and then even less likely with Omicron as the symptoms seem generally less severe.

 

I was interested to know whether it was some kind of independent survey, but if they’re just taking the results of tests done for a reason of the individual’s choosing then it stands to reason that refuseniks will choose to test less.

[Dunge]

In fact, they go into detail in the explanation on page 41.

[Stivo]

One  confounder might be that reinfections within 90 days are not currently counted.

Edited 10 January 2022 by Stivo

[danny.]

13 minutes ago, shade said:

But why would one increase more than the other in every age group?

As Dunge said, a lot of unvaccinated probably won’t take tests. The data for unvaccinated probably aren’t worth much if only a small fraction of cases are reported. There are loads of nutters on social media that think ie covid isn’t real or is caused by 5G that have never taken a test. 

[shade]

8 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Yeah, I stick by what I said about the unvaccinated probably being less likely to even take tests, and then even less likely with Omicron as the symptoms seem generally less severe.

 

I was interested to know whether it was some kind of independent survey, but if they’re just taking the results of tests done for a reason of the individual’s choosing then it stands to reason that refuseniks will choose to test less.

I'm not sure I agree with that, I think the percentage of genuine conspiracy theorist "refuseniks" who don't believe in covid or don't care if they get it are pretty low. There's 5 million+ and I would guess that the vast majority are just normal people who are worried about the vaccine, put it off or just assume they're healthy so there's not much point. I don't know many unvaccinated people to be honest, but we're all pretty normal people and have all tested if we thought we had it.

[Sly]

At the moment, we’re presented by lots of data from all areas of society, rightly for or against the current covid protocols, however half the data is pointless. 
 

We’ve got:

 

People who are unable to get tests. 

People that don’t test.

 

People that are testing as they have a cold.

 

Death numbers are debatable and so is the domino impact on other illnesses. 

 

The illness impacts people different.

 

I’ve sort of lost confidence in everything, everyone is telling me, so I’m just acting sensibly when in public surroundings and take  appropriate measures regarding masks, hand sanitiser etc, as they can’t be a bad thing …….

 

In the garage getting fuel last night, some bloke called me a willy puller for wearing a mask!  The state of society at times!! 

[orangecity23]

Given the amount of debate in this thread about young people "not needing vaccines" because of "low risk", it might be worth taking a look at Table 9 & 10 on pages 37 & 38 - unvaccinated hospitilations and deaths are much higher for unvaxxed young people, despite the fact they are a smaller population group than vaccinated.

 

[danny.]

10 hours ago, Dunge said:

Sorry if that looks rude, I’m just not in the mood for people promoting and defending these shysters.

No worries - do you know that for a fact, or conjecture? I can't find data that breaks down infection prevention and hospitalisations. Probably a lot of guess work anyway at this point.

[Farrington fox]

All I know is, the subjugation of people who choose not be vaccinated has to stop. It’s discriminatory divisive and disgusting and will lead to social unrest. I don’t give two hoots whether I come into contact with someone who is unvaccinated, it’s none of my business frankly. 

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

All I know is, the subjugation of people who choose not be vaccinated has to stop. It’s discriminatory divisive and disgusting and will lead to social unrest. I don’t give two hoots whether I come into contact with someone who is unvaccinated, it’s none of my business frankly. 

I certainly agree about the divisive part...

 

... but at the same time, freedom does cut both ways (for the individual and for society at large), or it isn't fair.

 

NB. It would be interesting to substitute in "wear seat belts" or "don't drink drive" in for "be vaccinated" in that passage - I wonder if that is as discriminatory? All expressions of personal freedom, after all.

[st albans fox]

5 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

All I know is, the subjugation of people who choose not be vaccinated has to stop. It’s discriminatory divisive and disgusting and will lead to social unrest. I don’t give two hoots whether I come into contact with someone who is unvaccinated, it’s none of my business frankly. 

Hopefully it will begin to matter less and less as the virus becomes endemic 

 

but it will only take some ‘proper’ studies that show the virus has a much higher chance of mutating in the wrong direction in an unvaccinated individual to make that matter more and more. 
 

There is still a lot that we simply don’t know about this virus and the body’s ability to fight it (whether vaxxed or previous infected )