Scrutable

Grumble wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:36 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:28 pm

Had a positive lateral flow test result today (had my first pfizer jab at the end of May). Current symptoms are headache, runny nose, sinusitis, sore throat. Thought it was a cold, someone else suggested hay fever, and only bothered to request some LFTs yesterday because I saw this BBC article.

Went off to get a PCR at lunchtime. But I'm holed up now for a wee while.

Fingers crossed

Missed this! Best wishes EPD!

headshot wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 9:06 pm

Grumble wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 8:36 pm

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:28 pm

Had a positive lateral flow test result today (had my first pfizer jab at the end of May). Current symptoms are headache, runny nose, sinusitis, sore throat. Thought it was a cold, someone else suggested hay fever, and only bothered to request some LFTs yesterday because I saw this BBC article.

Went off to get a PCR at lunchtime. But I'm holed up now for a wee while.

Fingers crossed

Missed this! Best wishes EPD!

Likewise

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:28 pm

Had a positive lateral flow test result today (had my first pfizer jab at the end of May). Current symptoms are headache, runny nose, sinusitis, sore throat. Thought it was a cold, someone else suggested hay fever, and only bothered to request some LFTs yesterday because I saw this BBC article.

Went off to get a PCR at lunchtime. But I'm holed up now for a wee while.

So you'll be posting here more often?

Seriously, fingers crossed for you, EPD

Yes, EPD, hope things go well.

I would recommend a wee dram of single malt, for medicinal purposes only.

I just can't believe this. Here we go again, lets have another wave just like the other wave.

If it transpires that the transmissibility of Delta is in the order of 60 percent higher, this could have a catastrophic impact under conditions in which only 50 percent of the population is fully vaccinated and virtually all children and millions of adults under 40 totally unvaccinated. According to SAGE modelling, a strain of COVID that is 50 percent or more transmissible than the Kent strain will lead to between 10,000 and 20,000 hospital admissions per day by the summer and 1,000 deaths daily by August. SAGE predicted that such numbers would rapidly overwhelm the National Health Service. Ten thousand hospitalisations a day is more than double the UK peak of hospitalisations in the pandemic so far.

1000 deaths per day. Think about it for a moment.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/0 ... k-j05.html

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:28 pm

Had a positive lateral flow test result today (had my first pfizer jab at the end of May). Current symptoms are headache, runny nose, sinusitis, sore throat. Thought it was a cold, someone else suggested hay fever, and only bothered to request some LFTs yesterday because I saw this BBC article.

Went off to get a PCR at lunchtime. But I'm holed up now for a wee while.

I hope you are fine EPD.

For what it’s worth I’ve had symptoms like that several times over the past year. Got tested and was negative every time.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 1:28 pm

Had a positive lateral flow test result today (had my first pfizer jab at the end of May). Current symptoms are headache, runny nose, sinusitis, sore throat. Thought it was a cold, someone else suggested hay fever, and only bothered to request some LFTs yesterday because I saw this BBC article.

Went off to get a PCR at lunchtime. But I'm holed up now for a wee while.

I hope you're ok

jimbob wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 6:42 pm

lpm wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:58 pm

jimbob wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 15, 2021 5:19 pm

Rolling Case rate by age in NW England heatmap with colour boundaries every factor of 2 from end of Feb (bottom) to Jun 10th (top)

0-4 on L 85-89 on R

Are you able to easily change population sizes for this heat map?

E.g. create an imaginary country called "NW Unvaccinatia" with a total population of loads of 0-30 year olds, some 30-40, only a handful of >50s?

Just take England's vaccination % for each cohort and multiply by cohort population? Instead of 20,000 people over 80, pretend there are 1,000 people?

Otherwise it will never ever show spread towards the right. Too few cases per large vaccinated population. But if adjusted it might show spread of a few cases into the small unvaccinated population.

There are raw case numbers in https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details ... mographics

When you download the CSV, you need to still separate by comma and colon (and remove closing curly bracket from some datatypes) to get it into a decent format.

I could possibly look at this data

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details ... mographics and divide by the percent unvaccinated for that day.

The vaccination data has 334 columns, which I haven't yet worked out what the fields for each age range are

But as it's an excel array, it is actually fairly trivial to get the data into both matrices once I've worked that out

I think it would be interesting to take today's vaccination percentages, and apply it backwards to Feb. Rather than actual percentages on the day. What I'm basically wondering is if a column of data - 60s say - starts to burn red hot earlier than we think for the unvaccinated. Are fires being hidden by the vaccinated mass?

I think what I'm ultimately wondering about is whether the orderliness of the UK rollout is now hurting us.

Why is delta hurting the UK more than other countries? Why isn't it hurting the US or Israel or Germany?

It's clear the 12-week gap worked very well and defeated alpha, with fortunate timing meaning all >60s were double-dosed nonetheless by the time delta started off. So it's not that.

Nor is it a lack of total doses, the UK is still top five in the world for both first doses and second doses.

But one peculiar feature of the UK rollout is its very strict age groupings. It's marched down the ages almost without deviation. So the minimal percentage of 18-21 comes only from healthcare work or underlying conditions. In other countries there's been randomisation of ages due to various local behaviours - most noticeably the US where 18-21 could compete for vaccination appointments with 60-70s, with added randomness state by state, city by city.

And of course people socialise with their own age grouping. Particularly at the 18-30 end of the spectrum. And obviously under 18s are together in tight single year groups.

So the UK rollout has inadvertently created completely unvaccinated groups for delta to spread unhindered, the virus in a 25 year old potentially never meeting a single vaccinated person on a night out. If the <50s rollout had been randomised by lottery rather than age then by now young people would be socialising in groups where half the people round the table were vaccinated.

And this is what I think a heatmap might show. Previously it spread from red hot school children and 18-30 year olds up into the older age groups. Is it now stuck in its lanes? Or is it again repeating its trick of spreading upwards via the unvaccinated older people, with this spread being hidden behind highly protected vaccinated people?

lpm wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:53 am

Why is delta hurting the UK more than other countries? Why isn't it hurting the US or Israel or Germany?

Could be less seeding from travel in some places? Also Israel was way ahead of the UK in the proportion with 2 jabs. > 50% by March 16th. UK was on 2.5% at that point. And Israel was all Pfizer.

lpm wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:53 am

But one peculiar feature of the UK rollout is its very strict age groupings. It's marched down the ages almost without deviation. So the minimal percentage of 18-21 comes only from healthcare work or underlying conditions. In other countries there's been randomisation of ages due to various local behaviours - most noticeably the US where 18-21 could compete for vaccination appointments with 60-70s, with added randomness state by state, city by city.

And of course people socialise with their own age grouping. Particularly at the 18-30 end of the spectrum. And obviously under 18s are together in tight single year groups.

So the UK rollout has inadvertently created completely unvaccinated groups for delta to spread unhindered, the virus in a 25 year old potentially never meeting a single vaccinated person on a night out. If the <50s rollout had been randomised by lottery rather than age then by now young people would be socialising in groups where half the people round the table were vaccinated.

Interesting idea. But random allocation under 50 would mean that yes for people in the 18-25 year range...50% of the people they socialise with might have been vaccinated by now - but 50% of the people in the 30-50 range that they interact with (e.g. parents, older colleagues at work, college lecturers, taxi drivers etc) would not be.

It would take some sophisticated modelling taking into account the frequency and nature of contact - plus probability of onward transmission - to work out which approach was really best.

lpm wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:53 am

I think what I'm ultimately wondering about is whether the orderliness of the UK rollout is now hurting us.

Why is delta hurting the UK more than other countries? Why isn't it hurting the US or Israel or Germany?

Compared to other Western states the Delta got a head start in the UK. Delta is spreading rapidly in the US. Its up to 10 per cent now, give it some weeks and it'll be dominant.

lpm wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:53 am

It's clear the 12-week gap worked very well and defeated alpha, with fortunate timing meaning all >60s were double-dosed nonetheless by the time delta started off. So it's not that.

Nor is it a lack of total doses, the UK is still top five in the world for both first doses and second doses.

But one peculiar feature of the UK rollout is its very strict age groupings. It's marched down the ages almost without deviation. So the minimal percentage of 18-21 comes only from healthcare work or underlying conditions. In other countries there's been randomisation of ages due to various local behaviours - most noticeably the US where 18-21 could compete for vaccination appointments with 60-70s, with added randomness state by state, city by city.

And of course people socialise with their own age grouping. Particularly at the 18-30 end of the spectrum. And obviously under 18s are together in tight single year groups.

So the UK rollout has inadvertently created completely unvaccinated groups for delta to spread unhindered, the virus in a 25 year old potentially never meeting a single vaccinated person on a night out.

I agree, the textbook herd immunity models assume that vaccination is random. But now, perhaps 80% of a 25 year old's interactions are with other unvaccinated people about their age, and perhaps only 10% with older people who are vaccinated.

lpm wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:53 am

And this is what I think a heatmap might show. Previously it spread from red hot school children and 18-30 year olds up into the older age groups. Is it now stuck in its lanes? Or is it again repeating its trick of spreading upwards via the unvaccinated older people, with this spread being hidden behind highly protected vaccinated people?

As per the links posted earlier, vaccination (especially with AZ) isn't preventing transmission.

Also, according to this, Delta has a native r number of 5-8 (compared to 2.4-2.6 in the original Wuhan virus and 4-5 for Alpha). I don't have time to look it up, but if a double dose of the AZ vaccine only offers 60% protection against Delta with mild symptoms then that probably isn't enough for herd immunity even among the age groups who've been vaccinated. The 40% who get sick will pass it on. If it were to rip through the older population then about 10% of the vaccinated would still be sick enough to need hospital admission (see the above links). With r at 5-8 that'll be enough to overwhelm the NHS given the huge number of people who'd be infected.

The way to keep r down is for vaccinated people to keep social distancing, along with everyone else. But that messaging will be difficult.

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 1:01 am

Yes, EPD, hope things go well.

I would recommend a wee dram of single malt, for medicinal purposes only.

Haha, just back from holiday in Scotland (which is where I think I caught it), lots of whisky purchased. Was halfway through a nice dram of Talisker during the France-Germany match when fairly suddenly my sense of taste fell away. It's come back a little bit since but probably about 50% still gone.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 12:33 pm

Herainestold wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 1:01 am

Yes, EPD, hope things go well.

I would recommend a wee dram of single malt, for medicinal purposes only.

Haha, just back from holiday in Scotland (which is where I think I caught it), lots of whisky purchased. Was halfway through a nice dram of Talisker during the France-Germany match when fairly suddenly my sense of taste fell away. It's come back a little bit since but probably about 50% still gone.

Doesn't sound good. Especially if you couldn't taste the Talisker.

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 11:56 am

I don't have time to look it up, but if a double dose of the AZ vaccine only offers 60% protection against Delta with mild symptoms then that probably isn't enough for herd immunity even among the age groups who've been vaccinated.

That's what worries me - not enough protection in the 50s/60s age group due to AZ. Plus take-up rates are lower in those age groups than in the 70s plus who seem to have been more gungho about it.

El Pollo Diablo wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 12:33 pm

Haha, just back from holiday in Scotland (which is where I think I caught it), lots of whisky purchased. Was halfway through a nice dram of Talisker during the France-Germany match when fairly suddenly my sense of taste fell away. It's come back a little bit since but probably about 50% still gone.

Damn. Whisky didn't kill the bugger. (MrRaven has this theory that alcohol and nicotine kill germs, bless him.)
Take it easy, EPD.

bob sterman wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 11:47 am

lpm wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:53 am

Why is delta hurting the UK more than other countries? Why isn't it hurting the US or Israel or Germany?

Could be less seeding from travel in some places? Also Israel was way ahead of the UK in the proportion with 2 jabs. > 50% by March 16th. UK was on 2.5% at that point. And Israel was all Pfizer.

lpm wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 9:53 am

But one peculiar feature of the UK rollout is its very strict age groupings. It's marched down the ages almost without deviation. So the minimal percentage of 18-21 comes only from healthcare work or underlying conditions. In other countries there's been randomisation of ages due to various local behaviours - most noticeably the US where 18-21 could compete for vaccination appointments with 60-70s, with added randomness state by state, city by city.

And of course people socialise with their own age grouping. Particularly at the 18-30 end of the spectrum. And obviously under 18s are together in tight single year groups.

So the UK rollout has inadvertently created completely unvaccinated groups for delta to spread unhindered, the virus in a 25 year old potentially never meeting a single vaccinated person on a night out. If the <50s rollout had been randomised by lottery rather than age then by now young people would be socialising in groups where half the people round the table were vaccinated.

Interesting idea. But random allocation under 50 would mean that yes for people in the 18-25 year range...50% of the people they socialise with might have been vaccinated by now - but 50% of the people in the 30-50 range that they interact with (e.g. parents, older colleagues at work, college lecturers, taxi drivers etc) would not be.

It would take some sophisticated modelling taking into account the frequency and nature of contact - plus probability of onward transmission - to work out which approach was really best.

Don't think we need sophisticated modelling? The effect comes from the social side, not the virus side. We already know young people socialise more within a tight age group.

An R=8 virus in a 25 year old can meet eight unvaccinated people in their 20s on a single night out and get its assignment done. Whereas a 45 year old would be more likely to meet up with people with a range of ages, because we know the older we get the more we socialise based on interests instead of age. Just as we could never shield the elderly and let the virus rage in the young, the accidental outcome of the vaccination rollout is that partial immunity in the old does little to dampen the fires in the young.

I don't think Woodchopper's point about AZ partial ineffectiveness in preventing transmission changes this - it's another gearing thing, not a decoupling. Doesn't ineffectiveness increase the desire for randomness, with a muddle of different ages (and different vaccine types), rather than have entire cohorts with identical status? My household is a multi-defence mix of Pfizer and AZ and maybe Moderna to come, plus big variation in timings, and instinctively this feels stronger than being in a household with a mono-defence of just one type on one day.

Chaotic feels good, rigid ordered cohorts by age group feels vulnerable.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/06 ... recipients

Third dose trialled for transplant patients

lpm

Article on Iceland concludes that:

We find that vaccinating in order of ascending age or uniformly at random would have prevented more infections per vaccination than vaccinating in order of descending age.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 21258741v1

Woodchopper wrote: ↑

Wed Jun 16, 2021 8:36 pm

lpm

Article on Iceland concludes that:

We find that vaccinating in order of ascending age or uniformly at random would have prevented more infections per vaccination than vaccinating in order of descending age.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101 ... 21258741v1

It's interesting, although AFAICT they don't also model mortality?

I know long covid etc is bad too, but the age-descending strategy may still have saved lives (if not years-of-life or QALYs) even with a higher number of infections.

PHE says that about 16,000 of the 4 million infections so far in England are "possible reinfections".

A possible reinfection is identified where consecutive positive test results in the same person are at least 90 days apart. These are reinfections which have not been sequenced and so we cannot be completely certain they are not the same original infection.

There were 478 "probable" and 53 "confirmed" reinfections.

The news release apparently says "This is equivalent to around 0.4% cases becoming reinfected."

(4 million total infections so far in England is equivalent to around 7% of the population becoming infected...)

Possible signs that cases in NW England have started to slow down in working age population

shpalman wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 17, 2021 4:51 pm

PHE says that about 16,000 of the 4 million infections so far in England are "possible reinfections".

A possible reinfection is identified where consecutive positive test results in the same person are at least 90 days apart. These are reinfections which have not been sequenced and so we cannot be completely certain they are not the same original infection.

There were 478 "probable" and 53 "confirmed" reinfections.

The news release apparently says "This is equivalent to around 0.4% cases becoming reinfected."

(4 million total infections so far in England is equivalent to around 7% of the population becoming infected...)

... which somewhat balances Previous Covid infection may not offer long-term protection! according to a preprint of an unreviewed study of tests on the blood of 78 people.

I mean, if one person out of 4 million catches covid a second time then yes it's technically true that it's possible to catch covid twice, but still, f.cking perspective.

It's got to imply that catching it once and then getting double-dose of the vaccine is pretty fab protection. Or alternatively getting double-dosed and then getting a mild case also leads to fab protection.

Plus the UK will have three waves: March to June 2020 = original strain, Oct 2020 to March 2021 = alpha, May 2021 to ? = delta. A very interesting piece of info would be if the current cases among the young & unvaccinated & previously infected with original/alpha are now seeing any reinfections with delta.

lpm wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 17, 2021 5:36 pm

It's got to imply that catching it once and then getting double-dose of the vaccine is pretty fab protection. Or alternatively getting double-dosed and then getting a mild case also leads to fab protection.

Plus the UK will have three waves: March to June 2020 = original strain, Oct 2020 to March 2021 = alpha, May 2021 to ? = delta. A very interesting piece of info would be if the current cases among the young & unvaccinated & previously infected with original/alpha are now seeing any reinfections with delta.

Catching it once and getting a single dose is apparently pretty good: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavi ... li=BBoPWjQ

About half of those in the study group had contracted COVID-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in March, 2020, while the remainder had not been infected.

The study found that those who'd previously had a mild or even asymptomatic infection had a far higher immune response after one dose of the Pfizer vaccine than those who hadn't been ill.

The immune response was so strong, the study noted, that it also offered good protection against the variants first detected in Britain and South Africa.

The study "is basically showing that if you've had prior COVID-19, and then you've had a single dose vaccine, you are really in a different league in terms of your immune response," said Rosemary Boyton, a professor of immunology and respiratory medicine at Imperial College, who co-authored the study.

"It's almost like the infection has acted as a prime and the first dose has acted as a boost."

11-day doubling time... based on data from 10 days ago.