Coronavirus update - NO MORE RESTRICTIONS

[CCFCC3PO]

Re: Coronavirus update

Yes, that has happened in the past and I've read on a few occasions experts saying that it is best for the virus' long term survival for it to become something that can find human hosts without killing as many of them. Hopefully, that will happen again this time, but, for now, while it is good news that not as many as might have been expected are dying in America, it seems to me that there are more credible reasons as to why this is the case than it being down to the virus mutating into something less harmful to us. Wouldn't such a mutation take longer than a few months?

In my opinion it is very difficult to glean anything from just looking at number of cases vs number of deaths. Firstly, each country uses different ways of recording cases and/or deaths. Secondly, each country tests subjects based on differing criteria. Lastly, even looking at some countries in isolation, their methods of testing and recording have differed over time.

In the UK, initially only people who were sick were being tested. Now, people are being tested for various reasons. My partner is getting tested weekly as a care worker.

The data I tend to look at is the data provided by the ONS which is extrapolated from various sources of data.

One other thing that I think may be causing a more favourable death to case ratio is that I think those people who are more susceptible to getting seriously sick have changed their behaviour over time. Care homes are being better protected than they once were, for example.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

On the subject of anti vaxers, I find the result of this poll both incredible and depressing;-

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/09/only-half-of-britons-would-definitely-have-covid-19-vaccination

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

New infections up to more than a thousand in a day in the UK for the first time since June.

[xsnaggle]

Re: Coronavirus update

New infections up to more than a thousand in a day in the UK for the first time since June.

But I think in most cases they are in hot spots and the powers that be know where and are dee-aling with them

[lisvaneblue]

Re: Coronavirus update

New infections up to more than a thousand in a day in the UK for the first time since June.

And closer to home Cardiff had 7 cases yesterday, 13 in the last 7 days. Its on the up and when the detail is published I bet a lot of it resulting from the crowds in Cardiff Bay

[xsnaggle]

Re: Coronavirus update

But deaths yesterday for UK are put at 8. I know it's the weekend but it is still low compared with the apparent rise in confirmed cases.
See how the total pans out by tuesday when all the weekend figures should kick in.

[Madassa]

Re: Coronavirus update

But deaths yesterday for UK are put at 8. I know it's the weekend but it is still low compared with the apparent rise in confirmed cases.
See how the total pans out by tuesday when all the weekend figures should kick in.

Deaths lag new infections.

[CCFCC3PO]

Re: Coronavirus update

On the subject of anti vaxers, I find the result of this poll both incredible and depressing;-

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...19-vaccination

I am not anti-vaccination by any stretch of the imagination, but I am sure I would be less enthusiastic to take a vaccine that was only 50-60% effective in trials (I probably would still take it mind). If the vaccine only provided protection for a few months, I'd be in two minds. So, if I was asked in that survey, I probably wouldn't be in the half of Britons who would definitely have the vaccine - purely because of a lack of detail at the present moment.

[xsnaggle]

Re: Coronavirus update

Deaths lag new infections.

Clearly you have to be infected before you die but there have been reports of a rise (spike) in infections for some time but no equivalent rise in deaths, lagging behind or otherwise. I just hope it continues.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

I am not anti-vaccination by any stretch of the imagination, but I am sure I would be less enthusiastic to take a vaccine that was only 50-60% effective in trials (I probably would still take it mind). If the vaccine only provided protection for a few months, I'd be in two minds. So, if I was asked in that survey, I probably wouldn't be in the half of Britons who would definitely have the vaccine - purely because of a lack of detail at the present moment.

I qualify for a flu vaccine every year and have had one for what must be close to ten years now. Each time I have one, I know that it doesn't guarantee that I will be free from flu over the next year and that there may be side effects that leave me feeling very poorly for a while. Seems to me that the benefits still well outweigh the risks when it comes to an annual flu jab and, given the stats on COVID for people of my age, the same would appear to be the case but even more so with that.

Any harmful side effects from a Covid vaccine would have to be very serious for me to contemplate not having one and you would have thought that, if that were the case, it would not be approved for general use - even if it was only 50/60 per cent effective, I don't get why anyone would turn it down.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

In my opinion it is very difficult to glean anything from just looking at number of cases vs number of deaths. Firstly, each country uses different ways of recording cases and/or deaths. Secondly, each country tests subjects based on differing criteria. Lastly, even looking at some countries in isolation, their methods of testing and recording have differed over time.

In the UK, initially only people who were sick were being tested. Now, people are being tested for various reasons. My partner is getting tested weekly as a care worker.

The data I tend to look at is the data provided by the ONS which is extrapolated from various sources of data.

One other thing that I think may be causing a more favourable death to case ratio is that I think those people who are more susceptible to getting seriously sick have changed their behaviour over time. Care homes are being better protected than they once were, for example.

It is entirely possible to get an idea of what is happening if you only look at the outcomes in one country which, presumably, has been using the same or similar methods of compiling new cases and deaths figures. That's why I limited my comments to America where it's clear that more new cases than ever in June and July running into August has not resulted in the level of deaths seen back in March/April when the New York region took the brunt of the hit from the virus.

It seems unlikely to me that there is one reason alone for this disparity - an American equivalent of the care homes situation in the UK may be one of them and other possibilities have been mentioned earlier, with the possibility that the virus is losing some of its potency being one of them. As I mentioned, I find it more likely that the difference is down to the virus generally affecting younger people than before, but I may well be wrong.

[goats]

Re: Coronavirus update

The peak for new cases in the USA has definitely occurred in the last month as can be seen here;-

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/

but that page also shows you are right because although deaths have risen in the last few weeks, the peak for them definitely occurred during the "first wave" which was based around New York back in March/April and I'd say that the figures would be showing a sign by of climbing to April levels by now if they were going to do so.

While it takes a level of expertise beyond us on here to make a convincing case that this apparent dilution of the virus' ability to kill humans is down to it mutating into something less lethal (I'm unaware of any study saying this is the case anyway), I'd say that, certainly, in westernised countries that are experiencing a resurgence of cases, there is quite a bit of evidence out there that the more likely Covid sufferer this time around is younger than your typical victim in the late winter/spring, so that should equate to less deaths.

I'd also say that there are a few treatments proven to be effective against fighting the virus out there now which were not recognised as such a few months ago, so I'd say there are two reasons which are backed by research which confirms the suppositions behind them, so I'd say they are more likely causes for the lower number of deaths than a mutation to something less powerful in the virus.

The steroid for one, saved my mates mothers life in April. She has COPD, always back and fore to hospital where she caught Covid after a visit. They thought she was a goner and basically said their goodbyes. She pulled through as she already had plenty of the steroid they were about to pump into her in her system. Small simple things, but I guess this is standard procedure for many now.

[goats]

Re: Coronavirus update

It is entirely possible to get an idea of what is happening if you only look at the outcomes in one country which, presumably, has been using the same or similar methods of compiling new cases and deaths figures. That's why I limited my comments to America where it's clear that more new cases than ever in June and July running into August has not resulted in the level of deaths seen back in March/April when the New York region took the brunt of the hit from the virus.

It seems unlikely to me that there is one reason alone for this disparity - an American equivalent of the care homes situation in the UK may be one of them and other possibilities have been mentioned earlier, with the possibility that the virus is losing some of its potency being one of them. As I mentioned, I find it more likely that the difference is down to the virus generally affecting younger people than before, but I may well be wrong.

Read somewhere bob that the average age of those testing positive in Florida recently was 36, so far younger than in the peak when it was double that. I guess with such a young average they are getting it and surviving also.

[CCFCC3PO]

Re: Coronavirus update

I qualify for a flu vaccine every year and have had one for what must be close to ten years now. Each time I have one, I know that it doesn't guarantee that I will be free from flu over the next year and that there may be side effects that leave me feeling very poorly for a while. Seems to me that the benefits still well outweigh the risks when it comes to an annual flu jab and, given the stats on COVID for people of my age, the same would appear to be the case but even more so with that.

Any harmful side effects from a Covid vaccine would have to be very serious for me to contemplate not having one and you would have thought that, if that were the case, it would not be approved for general use - even if it was only 50/60 per cent effective, I don't get why anyone would turn it down.

It would, maybe, depend on side effects if any. Personally, the only thing that could potentially hold me back is if the vaccine was only effective for a short amount of time. If a vaccine was effective for 1 year and there was a global effort to vaccinate as many people as possible then, even with the anti-vaxxers, the virus would be pretty much beat in a few cycles. If it was only effective for a few months, then poorer nations would forever be at the mercy of the disease. However, saying that, even a vaccine that lasted a short amount of time would be a significant step forward.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: Coronavirus update

Read somewhere bob that the average age of those testing positive in Florida recently was 36, so far younger than in the peak when it was double that. I guess with such a young average they are getting it and surviving also.

To be fair to youngsters, I was surprised by how well observed the March/April and May lockdown was by people of all ages. I thought it would start to falter after about a fortnight, but it didn't. However, I only need to think back to what I was like about forty years ago to see that it would have become increasingly hard to stop my socialising because I may catch something that, in all likelihood, would not do me any lasting harm. Yes, I would have been conscientious enough to think of what I might pass on to elder friends and relatives, but as the time went by, i'd start taking more "risks" and that's what is happening now - rather than knock younger people for this, I've got quite a bit of admiration for them that they lasted out as long as they did.

Also I think that the whole Dominic Cummings thing definitely had an effect on how well observed lockdowns became.