Coronavirus Thread

[dsr-burnley]

2 hours ago, pazzerfox said:

 

Quite a lot of this is based on how you interpret his words.  He says "protection against deaths is very good" - which the Rise Melbourne, whoever they may be, interprets as being minimally better than nothing.  It's the usual thing that anti-vaxxers like to say - that if there is a fatal disease about and all the vaccine does is stop you from dying, but you can still feel rough for a couple of days, then the vaccine is worthless.  Anti-vaxxers abuse statistics to the extent that they think that having a sniffle is 1 case, being dead is 1 case, so the two cases are equal.

[dsr-burnley]

3 hours ago, WigstonWanderer said:

The ONS stats take much longer to produce and are therefore delayed.

 

Edit:

 

Here’s a link to November data and some contextual explanation

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales/november2021

 

Deaths due to COVID-19 registered in November 2021

The doctor certifying a death can list all causes in the chain of events that led to the death, and pre-existing conditions that may have contributed to the death. Using this information, we determine an underlying cause of death. More information on this process can be found in our user guide.

Since March 2020 (when the first deaths involving coronavirus (COVID-19) were registered in England and Wales), where COVID-19 was mentioned on the death certificate it was the underlying cause of death in most cases (88.6% in England, 87.2% in Wales). For more information on our definition of COVID-19 deaths, see Section 10: Measuring the data.

!

In this bulletin, we use the term "due to COVID-19" when referring only to deaths with an underlying cause of death of COVID-19, and we use the term "involving COVID-19" when referring to deaths that had COVID-19 mentioned anywhere on the death certificate, whether as an underlying cause or not. 

Of the 48,180 deaths registered in November 2021 in England, 6.6% (3,185 deaths) were due to COVID-19, a larger proportion than in October 2021 (5.6%). Including all deaths involving COVID-19 (3,752 deaths), this percentage increases to 7.8% of all deaths in England in November 2021.

In Wales, 9.0% of the 3,344 deaths registered in November 2021 were due to COVID-19 (302 deaths), a smaller proportion than in October 2021 (9.5%). Including all deaths involving COVID-19 (360 deaths), this percentage increases to 10.8% of all deaths in Wales.

 

 

This is one of the statistics that I absolutely do not understand.  Other respiratory diseases are the primary cause of death of quite a lot of people, but in far more cases respiratory diseases are a secondary cause of death, finishing off people who were already ill, old, or frail.  covid apparently doesn't do this.  People who are already old, ill or frail are almost immune from dying from it; only those who were expected to live for yonks are dying from covid, according to these stats.

 

I'll try and explain.  according to official death certificates last year, 604,000 people died in England and Wales.  (All figures rounded to the nearest thousand.  I don't have Scotland figures.)

 

Of those 604,000, 105k had flu or pneumonia on their death certificate and 83k had another respiratory disease other than covid on their death certificate.  Only 16k of the flu/pneu people and 37k of the others had their respiratory disease as a primary cause of death.  The other 89k flu/pneu and 46k others had more pressing causes of death and the respiratory disease was something that made the others worse/helped them on their way, as the case may be.

 

Covid doesn't do that.  In 2021, 76k had covid on their death certificate and 66k had it as a primary cause of death.  Only 10k who died with covid, died with other causes being their primary cause.  That is no more than we would expect from random numbers.  Almost literally nobody is dying with covid who has more significant comorbidities. A quarter of deaths are partly, as a secondary cause, related to breathing problems - but hardly any of them are covid.

 

It seems (and, to me, is) incredible.  Are these statistics being filled in correctly, or is it actually true that seriously ill people do not die if they get covid?  Or are seriously ill people somehow not getting covid, either by immunity or by self protection?  It seems very, very strange.  I would certainly get some statistical boffins onto it if I was in government.

[Parafox]

5 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

Dr Steve James: I’d sacrifice my job over vaccine mandates - The Post (unherd.com)

 

 

We can all find shit on media platforms that support our personal beliefs. Doesn't make it true.

 

 Get the fukking jab!! What have you got to lose? 

[Dunge]

2 hours ago, Lionator said:

Basically coronaviruses evolve quite quickly (though not as fast as flu), which means that there'll be new variants popping up all the time. Unlike flu, the variants all have similarities which means that while infection won't be stopped, serious illness will be, as we're seeing now. Eventually we'll probably have to have annual updated covid jabs, just like we do flu depending on which variant is looking most prominent in an endemic world. 

Also worth noting that there’s a good argument for having vaccinations against deadlier strains (Delta) and not worrying quite so much about effectiveness against milder strains (Omicron).

Push the virus down the evolutionary path that benefits us.

[danny.]

37 minutes ago, Parafox said:

We can all find shit on media platforms that support our personal beliefs. Doesn't make it true.

 

 Get the fukking jab!! What have you got to lose? 

A bad reaction? Worst case scenario injury or death. 

[MPH]

3 hours ago, Lionator said:

Basically coronaviruses evolve quite quickly (though not as fast as flu), which means that there'll be new variants popping up all the time. Unlike flu, the variants all have similarities which means that while infection won't be stopped, serious illness will be, as we're seeing now. Eventually we'll probably have to have annual updated covid jabs, just like we do flu depending on which variant is looking most prominent in an endemic world. 

 

50 minutes ago, Dunge said:

Also worth noting that there’s a good argument for having vaccinations against deadlier strains (Delta) and not worrying quite so much about effectiveness against milder strains (Omicron).

Push the virus down the evolutionary path that benefits us.

 

No Covid virus in the covid vaccine so no way of tailoring it to a specific strain- just a need to reinvigorate your immune system - in theory one type of covid vaccine should be just as effective against each strain of Covid. flu vaccine has to be tailored to the type of flu strain they expect to be virulent that year - hit and miss. 

[shade]

7 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

This is one of the statistics that I absolutely do not understand.  Other respiratory diseases are the primary cause of death of quite a lot of people, but in far more cases respiratory diseases are a secondary cause of death, finishing off people who were already ill, old, or frail.  covid apparently doesn't do this.  People who are already old, ill or frail are almost immune from dying from it; only those who were expected to live for yonks are dying from covid, according to these stats.

 

I'll try and explain.  according to official death certificates last year, 604,000 people died in England and Wales.  (All figures rounded to the nearest thousand.  I don't have Scotland figures.)

 

Of those 604,000, 105k had flu or pneumonia on their death certificate and 83k had another respiratory disease other than covid on their death certificate.  Only 16k of the flu/pneu people and 37k of the others had their respiratory disease as a primary cause of death.  The other 89k flu/pneu and 46k others had more pressing causes of death and the respiratory disease was something that made the others worse/helped them on their way, as the case may be.

 

Covid doesn't do that.  In 2021, 76k had covid on their death certificate and 66k had it as a primary cause of death.  Only 10k who died with covid, died with other causes being their primary cause.  That is no more than we would expect from random numbers.  Almost literally nobody is dying with covid who has more significant comorbidities. A quarter of deaths are partly, as a secondary cause, related to breathing problems - but hardly any of them are covid.

 

It seems (and, to me, is) incredible.  Are these statistics being filled in correctly, or is it actually true that seriously ill people do not die if they get covid?  Or are seriously ill people somehow not getting covid, either by immunity or by self protection?  It seems very, very strange.  I would certainly get some statistical boffins onto it if I was in government.

I'm assuming there's no monetary incentives in the UK like there is in the US for hospitals to declare them covid deaths? 

[st albans fox]

6 hours ago, danny. said:

A bad reaction? Worst case scenario injury or death. 

Same as covid then ……….with better odds and helping to keep society open. 
 

just think what life would currently be like here without covid vaccines ……

[st albans fox]

8 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Quite a lot of this is based on how you interpret his words.  He says "protection against deaths is very good" - which the Rise Melbourne, whoever they may be, interprets as being minimally better than nothing.  It's the usual thing that anti-vaxxers like to say - that if there is a fatal disease about and all the vaccine does is stop you from dying, but you can still feel rough for a couple of days, then the vaccine is worthless.  Anti-vaxxers abuse statistics to the extent that they think that having a sniffle is 1 case, being dead is 1 case, so the two cases are equal.

Tweets like that really should be removed as they totally misrepresent what is being said. 

 

the jabs absolutely do help to keep you out of hospital in the vast majority of cases.  completely the opposite of what is written in the tweet 

[WigstonWanderer]

Van Tam resigned 

[danny.]

50 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Same as covid then ……….with better odds and helping to keep society open. 
 

just think what life would currently be like here without covid vaccines ……

For many people, yup

[SpacedX]

57 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Tweets like that really should be removed as they totally misrepresent what is being said. 

 

the jabs absolutely do help to keep you out of hospital in the vast majority of cases.  completely the opposite of what is written in the tweet 

Even given a cursory glance you wouldn't afford it any credence. 

 

What I find more concerning on this thread (and in wider society as a whole), is those that seem to think that a social media feed substitutes for an education.

 

Also, it amuses me that Adrian Durham generates three pages of outrage on this forum about football (exactly what he's paid to do), yet his pseudoscientific, agenda driven, sensationalist, social media counterparts/equivalents are embraced, shared and upvoted repeatedly by the same members trolling this thread. 

[leicsmac]

40 minutes ago, Line-X said:

Even given a cursory glance you wouldn't afford it any credence. 

 

What I find more concerning on this thread (and in wider society as a whole), is those that seem to think that a social media feed substitutes for an education.

 

Also, it amuses me that Adrian Durham generates three pages of outrage on this forum about football (exactly what he's paid to do), yet his pseudoscientific, agenda driven, sensationalist, social media counterparts/equivalents are embraced, shared and upvoted repeatedly by the same members trolling this thread. 

It's a quite simple flaw of humanity, really; people simply care less for things that are most abstract to them. 

 

Unfortunately, when that thing is a natural threat, such an attitude is not really compatible with long term survival.

[Facecloth]

BBC News - Covid self-isolation in England being cut to five full days
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59980505

[danny.]

2 hours ago, leicsmac said:

It's a quite simple flaw of humanity, really; people simply care less for things that are most abstract to them. 

 

Unfortunately, when that thing is a natural threat, such an attitude is not really compatible with long term survival.

Also a lot of people simply don't believe what they are being told, or don't believe all of it. Unfortunately having serial liar Johnson stood there at all the announcements (granted, sometimes it's a different untrustworthy minister) probably isn't great, as then the science gets mixed up with politics and no doubt for some people the distrust of anything this government says will extend to pandemic procedure .

[leicsmac]

Just now, danny. said:

Also a lot of people simply don't believe what they are being told, or don't believe all of it. Unfortunately having serial liar Johnson stood there at all the announcements (granted, sometimes it's a different untrustworthy minister) probably isn't great, as then the science gets mixed up with politics and no doubt for some people the distrust of anything this government says will extend to pandemic procedure .

Yes, and it's a problem not limited to the UK, either, as the responses around the world to this and other issues show. The problem is very clear.

 

Thing is though, and pardon me for repeating myself, but the natural world doesn't tend to allow for the irrationality of not choosing to distinguish between sources of fact on the topic of it. So that "lot of people", for everyone's sake including their own, could perhaps do with getting better at it.

 

Before a less forgiving act of nature than Covid arrives.

[danny.]

35 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yes, and it's a problem not limited to the UK, either, as the responses around the world to this and other issues show. The problem is very clear.

 

Thing is though, and pardon me for repeating myself, but the natural world doesn't tend to allow for the irrationality of not choosing to distinguish between sources of fact on the topic of it. So that "lot of people", for everyone's sake including their own, could perhaps do with getting better at it.

 

Before a less forgiving act of nature than Covid arrives.

I agree. We probably need to find a way to detach politics and medicine/science going forwards. 

[leicsmac]

Just now, danny. said:

I agree. We probably need to find a way to detach politics and medicine/science going forwards. 

When science is a matter of policy (which it often is) and people will therefore conflate the two then I'm not sure how that's possible.

 

But it is one way to give the scientific field the trust it deserves - I just wonder if somehow there is another way. We could really do with finding it.

[shade]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10397737/Ministers-used-propagandistic-tactics-scare-public-complying-Covid-rules.html

[danny.]

26 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

When science is a matter of policy (which it often is) and people will therefore conflate the two then I'm not sure how that's possible.

 

But it is one way to give the scientific field the trust it deserves - I just wonder if somehow there is another way. We could really do with finding it.

Maybe not disseminating the information in a room associated with someone laughing about parties while people were banned from funerals, with a guy that lies every time he opens his mouth leading the briefing 

[danny.]

14 minutes ago, shade said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10397737/Ministers-used-propagandistic-tactics-scare-public-complying-Covid-rules.html

Mate, that's the DM...

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, danny. said:

Maybe not disseminating the information in a room associated with someone laughing about parties while people were banned from funerals, with a guy that lies every time he opens his mouth leading the briefing 

That would require a department for science policy completely removed from other areas and actors of policy, though.

 

Now, I'm totally up for an independent science policy creating organisation with that kind of power and independence, but I'm not sure how many other people (particularly those with power) are.

[Farrington fox]

 Cases falling faster than Autumn leaves. And all without a lockdown and/or closing hospitality. 

[dsr-burnley]

11 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

That would require a department for science policy completely removed from other areas and actors of policy, though.

 

Now, I'm totally up for an independent science policy creating organisation with that kind of power and independence, but I'm not sure how many other people (particularly those with power) are.

If the independent science body was given a very strict political remit on what they do, perhaps.  But it's certainly a non-starter to give a scientific body powers sufficient so that, if they decided elimintation of covid was all-important, they could order lockdown for years on end.  If you want anyone, scientists or no, to work out what on balance is the best thing to do re. covid, taking into account conflicting aspects such as deaths, illnesses, children's education, the well-being of the population especially those with dementia, and the overall economy both national and global, and come up with a solution - then the scientists must by definition be making political decisions.

Edited 13 January 2022 by dsr-burnley

[Legend_in_blue]

2 hours ago, shade said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10397737/Ministers-used-propagandistic-tactics-scare-public-complying-Covid-rules.html

We knew this 12 months ago.  You still hear it in the news now also.  1 in 3 are asymptomatic blah blah blah...

 

Repeat the same message over and over again and people begin not to question anything, nothing at all.