NWR new zero tolerance covid thread

www.bbc.co.uk

Covid: Pfizer says antiviral pill 89% effective in high-risk cases

The company stopped clinical trials early because initial results for the drug were so positive.
www.bbc.co.uk

I am sure many have already seen this.
Still, if confirmed, it's a major break through: 89% effectiveness in reducing severe illness is very good for antiviral drugs. Tamiflu is less effective than this for flu.
I wouldn't say we are closer to "defeat" this disease, but indeed it's a big step towards more normal life, even that means we have to live with it.
 
Dom Shepherd said:
It does seem that the recent rise in cases has been concentrated amongst the young, and there is a school of thought that the school age groups are now approaching herd immunity and cases will therefore start to drop naturally in 2-3 weeks. Time will tell, but hospitalisations are still way below even the most optimistic Sage predictions in July. Reasons to be positive.
Click to expand...

This seems to be playing out which is great news. Consistent fall in cases for nearly 2 weeks now.
 
A lot of the covid reporting by the dedicated BBC health correspondents, unlike that by their others, has been consistently thoughtful throughout.

It remains odd to me why the resources being poured into test and trace aren't being put instead into ensuring the boosters are fully delivered in a few weeks rather than many months. Or, at least, why we're not even seriously attempting the latter. Three hundred thousand jabs a day means we won't have got close to delivering the first annual winter booster by the time summer is here.
 
Eric Burch said:
It remains odd to me why the resources being poured into test and trace aren't being put instead into ensuring the boosters are fully delivered in a few weeks rather than many months. Or, at least, why we're not even seriously attempting the latter.
Click to expand...
It would be nice at least to to be told in more detail where any problems lie, and what is being done about it. It is unclear to me how allowing people to book 1 month in advance is going to help. Unless of course the invitation to book counts as "being offered" the booster, and the goal is to manipulate that metric. Cynical, moi?

Isn't the determing factor of how quickly the booster is actually administered the 190 day wait (commonly referred to as 6 months) since the 2nd dose? Pretty much everyone I know has been able to get their booster immediately they have become eligible. I got mine on day 192 after the 2nd dose.

The only exceptions have been my parents, who are housebound - it has now been just over 7 months since their 2nd jab and still have not been boostered. I presume that the issue there is the logistics of administering Pfizer jabs in individual homes, due to the low temperature storage requirements. Maybe there is similar issue with care homes?
 
I just walked in last week and asked, no problem, no wait-and had I not wished to identify myself in any way there would still have been no problem, which seems to me very sensible indeed.
I was surprised to discover that the AZ vaccine is no longer being administered in the UK.
 
Thom Blach said:
I just walked in last week and asked, no problem, no wait-and had I not wished to identify myself in any way there would still have been no problem, which seems to me very sensible indeed.
I was surprised to discover that the AZ vaccine is no longer being administered in the UK.
Click to expand...
I'm surprised you would not need to identify yourself. Surely it would be sensible to check your medical history, including vaccinations, and make sure your GP is informed...?

The centre I used this week did have a booth with an AZ label on it, so it seems it is used in some cases. I think the reason for mainly using Pfizer or Moderna now is that they are lower risk for younger people, so they are also used for boosters for practical reasons. Maybe they were also the ones tested as boosters.
 
Steve Slatcher said:
I'm surprised you would not need to identify yourself. Surely it would be sensible to check your medical history, including vaccinations, and make sure your GP is informed...?
Click to expand...
It would, but it's surely a good thing that the vaccine is available to those completely outside the system, and there are very many people not registered with GPs etc, as I wasn't for many years.
 
Bryan Collins said:
I can't point at it, but I seem to remember there being some evidence that having a booster of a different type to the initial two vaccinations was somewhat more beneficial.
Click to expand...
I vaguely remember that too, but I also vaguely remember the evidence was sketchy, or possibly the idea was just a hypothesis. Anyway, it doesn't seem to be mentioned much now. Presumably, as we get data from different countries we will have more certainty.
 
But maybe I misunderstand you @Thom Blach. In the vaccination centre, you do not have to PROVE your ID, but under normal circumstances you have to identify yourself in the sense that you need to give a name, date of birth and address (which you could lie about). And that all sounds good too me.

Also, hopefully homeless people, and people unsure about when they were born, can be accommodated too in some way. I presume the missing information would be constructed in whatever way is usually used to access services.

Anyway, on a similar topic, I note that you now need prove your identity to get lateral flow kits from pharmacies. They prefer you to do it through your NHS app registration (which was quite tedious for me the first time), but I'm not sure about the fall-back position for those without computer technology.

I sometimes don't even have to identify myself to collect prescriptions there, as some staff just recognise me, and am not really sure what the point of the change is. I hope it does not put some people off testing themselves.
 
Last edited:
Steve Slatcher said:
But maybe I misunderstand you @Thom Blach. In the vaccination centre, you do not have to PROVE your ID, but under normal circumstances you have to identify yourself in the sense that you need to give a name, date of birth and address (which you could lie about). And that all sounds good too me.
Click to expand...
Locally you explicitly don't have to, although it is of course encouraged.
 
You can now book yourself in up to one month in advance of your six month wait for the booster.
So 5 months after your second jab you can book for the booster. This was due to go live tomorrow but is active now.

The Pfizer is being given as the booster to all the older people who had AZ to start with as it has shown to be more effective than a third dose of the same vaccine.
 
I attended my surgery yesterday morning for my Flu Jab.
They were piecing together the new 5 months booking window guidance and decided that they were able to give me my Pfizer Covid booster whilst I was there.
Great I thought.
On reflection I now wish that I had not gone for it all in one go.
There is no scientific base for my view I am sure, but if one has underlying health conditions I for sure would not give myself so much to deal with in one hit and given my time again I would stagger the vaccinations.
I have had a pretty bad 24 hours.
 
Here in Aus there needs to be 3 weeks between getting a flu jab and a Covid jab, which seems sensible. One for the doctors to decide on I suppose.

There has been so little flu here the last year that this years flu shot is a bit of a guess. From what I have read, the formation of the shot is based around the biggest strains that have occurred in the region, not just Australia, but that is difficult when nobody in the region has had flu. I presume the same has happened all over the world.
 
FT today: "England has recorded its longest unbroken run of declining daily covid caseloads since February, as covid related hospital admissions begin to fall in every region of the country...". Crucially, case rates in older people have continued to decline rapidly since the peak in early october. So, is it the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning? Hopefully, the former. Certainly, calls by Starmer and others a few weeks ago for Plan B to be implemented immediately look a bit premature to say the least. Meanwhile, the 4th wave seems to be hitting some parts of the continent despite their more extensive restrictions and even more worryingly, the surge in cases in germany has come with a similar increase in ICU admittance and death rates despite high vaccine rates.
 
I haven't read the article @Dan Baillie but the (admittedly lagging) death data gives me a slightly less warm feeling than does the quote from the FT.

1636626765175.png

We still seem to be meandering gently upwards. The same number for France is 37 and Germany is 145 (although seemingly in a steeper climb). Clearly the denominators are different so based on my basic arithmetic - this means that the UK currently has ~2.4 daily deaths per million people from covid, France .6, and Germany 1.7. Also worth remember that this makes Covid currently 33 times deadlier than automobiles in the UK.

It's not necessarily a clear indicator of what to do *next*, but I also think it's instructive to look at total deaths so far. UK is on 2,082 deaths per million, France 1,803 and Germany 1,160.

All data from worldometers.info

In unrelated news - my (double vaxxed) brother, and his wife, just both tested positive. She had a pretty high fever but now seems to be recovering, he has had no symptoms. Doubly annoying for them as they are required to self-isolate in Staffordshire and will not be able to travel back home to France for a little while.
 
Dan Baillie said:
FT today: "England has recorded its longest unbroken run of declining daily covid caseloads since February, as covid related hospital admissions begin to fall in every region of the country...". Crucially, case rates in older people have continued to decline rapidly since the peak in early october. So, is it the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning? Hopefully, the former. Certainly, calls by Starmer and others a few weeks ago for Plan B to be implemented immediately look a bit premature to say the least. Meanwhile, the 4th wave seems to be hitting some parts of the continent despite their more extensive restrictions and even more worryingly, the surge in cases in germany has come with a similar increase in ICU admittance and death rates despite high vaccine rates.
Click to expand...
Erm.
My question would still be: what's the problem of plan B? What real "damage" it would bring?
I went to Paris in late October, most restaurants and bars check vaccine pass, but Saturday everywhere was packed. I don't see business suffering like some people here described. The metro was incredibly crowded even most people still wearing mask, apparently people go on doing what they plan. When British have higher vaccination rate than France, why vaccine pass was described by HMG and some others like an issue here?
Why we should have not implemented plan B, which by its weak nature may not stop virus spreading but still could a) make the peak lower and coming down quicker than "let the virus run its course (herd immunity?)" b) decrease the chance unvaccinated people exposed to the virus in public venues hence save their lives and NHS resources?

Germany has less than 68% people fully vaccinated. That looks similar to England but as we discussed earlier, the vaccination rate for higher age groups in the UK is incredibly high. Germany also have higher totally unvaccinated people ratio. Also from FT:

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication
www.ft.com www.ft.com
This will surely cause, quoting Aljezeera, “pandemic of the unvaccinated” in hospitals.
If case number and hospitalisation get worse in say, Portugal, it will be more worrying.

Infectious disease spreading has many factors involved, so the peaks can often seem up and down 'for no reason'. It's extra complicate when there is vaccination involved. But the basic principle always stand: decrease the transmission, increase the vaccination rate, and limit/shield the unvaccinated ones exposure.
 
Andrew Lilico has been the most reliable forecaster I'm aware of. He forecasted the current drop in cases a few weeks ago when others were panicking and was confident we would never get back to 100k cases back in July when Starmer et al were crying "they're letting it rip". He's added an interesting blog post explaining how the epidemic in England is now over:

andrewlilico.wordpress.com

Why I say the English coronavirus epidemic is over – the short version

In Summer 2021, cases fell. That happened despite there being no restrictions. It happened in two phases, in each case at the precise timing (to the week) implied by my main SIR+V model for the del…
andrewlilico.wordpress.com andrewlilico.wordpress.com
 
Po-yu Sung said:
Erm.
My question would still be: what's the problem of plan B? What real "damage" it would bring?
I went to Paris in late October, most restaurants and bars check vaccine pass, but Saturday everywhere was packed. I don't see business suffering like some people here described. The metro was incredibly crowded even most people still wearing mask, apparently people go on doing what they plan. When British have higher vaccination rate than France, why vaccine pass was described by HMG and some others like an issue here?
Why we should have not implemented plan B, which by its weak nature may not stop virus spreading but still could a) make the peak lower and coming down quicker than "let the virus run its course (herd immunity?)" b) decrease the chance unvaccinated people exposed to the virus in public venues hence save their lives and NHS resources?

Germany has less than 68% people fully vaccinated. That looks similar to England but as we discussed earlier, the vaccination rate for higher age groups in the UK is incredibly high. Germany also have higher totally unvaccinated people ratio. Also from FT:

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication
www.ft.com www.ft.com
This will surely cause, quoting Aljezeera, “pandemic of the unvaccinated” in hospitals.
If case number and hospitalisation get worse in say, Portugal, it will be more worrying.

Infectious disease spreading has many factors involved, so the peaks can often seem up and down 'for no reason'. It's extra complicate when there is vaccination involved. But the basic principle always stand: decrease the transmission, increase the vaccination rate, and limit/shield the unvaccinated ones exposure.
Click to expand...
Po,

I guess the obvious replies would be:

- what’s the point if it’s not working cf germany and several other countries in europe

- if the real aim is to get to herd immunity as quickly as possible and in all circumstances before the nhs faces the full winter flu surge, then there’s an obvious problem in not letting it run through the young population now who are all, to any meaningful extent, unaffected by covid.

As I noted before, people dying now are invariably people with multiple other health issues. They are dying with covid, not necessarily because of covid. Of course that’s not true of everyone and there will undoubtedly be people dying of covid even though vaccinated and otherwise healthy. However, I suspect the numbers are very small indeed and are no basis on which to impose restrictions on the rest of the population, any more than we would for the winter flu season or any other disease.

Dan
 
mmmmhhh... It is well documented that UK government data (we don't see ONS statistics anymore in the media...) only take into account deaths happening less than 28 days after testing positive. Other countries do not exclude over 28 days deaths (irrespective of whether one approach is better than the other).
So the international statistics (which do not challenge country statistics) do not show the full gap between say UK and Germany deaths. An estimate is you should add about 25% to UK statistics to get a figure comparable with other EU countries and probably more as more progress is made in treating people.
Germany vaccination rate at 68% is lower than UK at 73%
UK has had a significant wave for many weeks and a higher death toll so may enter in a decreasing phase. Countries are all in different phases so comparison on a daily statistics do not make sense
Indeed the EU is in a different phase of the cycles: cases are now increasing fast in France Germany...
You don't substantiate your claim that it is not working in Germany. What is not working? what measures are in place? Don't you know it may vary with Landers (Germany is not a very centralised country)

Po recommendations are only common sense. Washing hands, wearing a mask keep a bit of distantiation .... are just good stuff

Reaching Herd immunity has never been achieved so the question arises of whether this is a meaningful goal. Of course, you are right we will all die but is it a reason to let the virus run its course...

The co morbidity is nothing new and is worldwide. When one country has more casualties, it does not necessarily mean it has more people with multiple other health issues. Clearly, with much less deaths in Germany since the beginning of the pandemic, there are more people with multiple health problems left while the age pyramid is also defavourable. I would be extremely happy for UK if we had done as well as Germany (I acknowledge not comparable of course)

Given current economic statistics, it is not obvious that laissez faire management is better for the economy (while it is worse for casualties) than more stringent policies.

Having come back from France a few days ago, I noted a big difference in people behaviours and adherence to mitigation measures. Despite this, number of daily cases has increased to 10000 a day in France while deaths are still low for now (but more people in hospital)

A lot of posts look like people pick the data that reinforce their thesis... only too human.
 
Dan Baillie said:
- what’s the point if it’s not working cf germany and several other countries in europe
- if the real aim is to get to herd immunity as quickly as possible and in all circumstances before the nhs faces the full winter flu surge, then there’s an obvious problem in not letting it run through the young population now who are all, to any meaningful extent, unaffected by covid.
Click to expand...
Dan,

My argument would be, if the definition of 'working' is to totally prevent a peak, then even vaccination won't be working. For me, it's a balance of disturbance and benefit. There will be benefit coming from asking people wearing facemask and showing vaccination proof before going into a bar, and I personally think the disturbance here is not really that much.
Together with your second point, as we have vaccine now, herd immunity should mainly come from vaccination, not natural infection, because the potential risk at least for people over 40. When we have vaccine in hand, surpressing peak is buying time for more people vaccinated/boosted rather than delaying the peak to winter.

Vaccine passport has two effects here, 1st is to protect unvaccinated people, 2nd is to further pursuade them to get vaccine, like we saw in France. I get what you said that the 1st effect could somehow backfire in winter, when those 'protected' people ended up still get infected later, but that doesn't need to be the case if the 2nd effect works well enough, or simply we have a bit more time to give booster jabs.

Again, I feel sorry (and puzzled) that vaccine passport and facemask mandate became a political debate point just because it's in 'plan B'. They are just two moderate methods of many which can be used to control the damage, and I really see no reason why it shouldn't be used side by side with vaccination programme.

Dan Baillie said:
As I noted before, people dying now are invariably people with multiple other health issues. They are dying with covid, not necessarily because of covid. Of course that’s not true of everyone and there will undoubtedly be people dying of covid even though vaccinated and otherwise healthy. However, I suspect the numbers are very small indeed and are no basis on which to impose restrictions on the rest of the population, any more than we would for the winter flu season or any other disease.
Click to expand...

I am not quite sure I get this.
The covid death that had totally no health issue was probably small (according to ONS, 9% of total covid death by Fed 2021), but so many people over 60s have "health issues", hypertension, diabetes, heart problem... many of them could have lived quite many years if there is no covid. I am not even talking about ethical issue.
And about the basis to impose restrictions on the rest of population; depends on what kind of restriction? Is showing vaccine passport before entering a bar is that much a sarcrifice, especially when it has a targeted benefit on unvaccinated groups? It's not that we are asking night clubs to close or even limit their capacity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top