COVID-19
Re: COVID-19
This is a good example of how damaging harmful content is on social media.
Overnight the guy walked back his overblown claim. But that's too late. It had already reached a vulnerable audience.
Attention needs to be paid to a large segment of the population who will retain long-term scarring from lockdown addiction - continuing to stay indoors, excessively avoiding people, over-protecting themselves despite being double-dosed. It's going to be a recognisable mental health condition. Any idiot can type "it's COVID-21" and get loads of twitter-attention, not caring that it sets off another cycle of anxiety and over-reaction. This is going to continue for years and there will some people who'll never stop their personal lockdown as a result.
Overnight the guy walked back his overblown claim. But that's too late. It had already reached a vulnerable audience.
Attention needs to be paid to a large segment of the population who will retain long-term scarring from lockdown addiction - continuing to stay indoors, excessively avoiding people, over-protecting themselves despite being double-dosed. It's going to be a recognisable mental health condition. Any idiot can type "it's COVID-21" and get loads of twitter-attention, not caring that it sets off another cycle of anxiety and over-reaction. This is going to continue for years and there will some people who'll never stop their personal lockdown as a result.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
Re: COVID-19
...in America (although I appreciate the phrase originated there).bob sterman wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 8:22 amTalking about censorship in relation to naming conventions for virus variants - with a virus for which the naming conventions have been changing over the past 18 months - is a bit extreme. New influenza strain names incorporate the year they were first isolated. It's hardly unprecendent.tom p wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 7:50 amEveryone should be in the case of misinformation that can harm the public health.
In fact, I think big tech should be legally obliged to censor harmful content. Freedom of speech does not extend to the right to should "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. that's an old principle and one which should always be remembered.
Not saying the naming suggestion is a good idea!!! Or that it's not a bad idea. But there's a big gap between good ideas and ideas that organisations should be legally obliged to censor.
Also - in case anyone wasn't aware - the "fire in a crowded theatre" analogy comes from a case that was overturned nearly 50 years ago...
It’s Time to Stop Using the ‘Fire in a Crowded Theater’ Quote
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/ar ... te/264449/
Also, I was responding to the principle (ie censorship of misinformation) rather than this specific instance. I do think that lpm is being a wee bit silly
- bob sterman
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
- Location: Location Location
Re: COVID-19
Yes - I'd be on-board with social media companies censoring stuff like "swabs for COVID tests contain microchips/brain control nanoparticles" etc.
But I think censorship of "Alpha vs Kent" and "COVID-19 vs COVID-21" is too far.
Not sure where I'd draw the line actually!
Re: COVID-19
Saying "Delta has figured out how to evade your immune response" is plain wrong.
It hasn't.
Evidence suggests there's a partial reduction in immune protection from previous infection or single dose; terrifying the vulnerable by exaggerating this into a claim we've lost all immunity and are back to square one is unacceptable from a doctor.
It hasn't.
Evidence suggests there's a partial reduction in immune protection from previous infection or single dose; terrifying the vulnerable by exaggerating this into a claim we've lost all immunity and are back to square one is unacceptable from a doctor.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
- bob sterman
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
- Location: Location Location
Re: COVID-19
Yes - "figured out" is sloppy teleological language. Very common when people talk about evolutionary change. And "evade" seems to be an absolute rather than relative claim. But worthy of censorship?lpm wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 9:09 amSaying "Delta has figured out how to evade your immune response" is plain wrong.
It hasn't.
Evidence suggests there's a partial reduction in immune protection from previous infection or single dose; terrifying the vulnerable by exaggerating this into a claim we've lost all immunity and are back to square one is unacceptable from a doctor.
And he didn't say we'd "lost all immunity and are back to square one". He was just pointing out that Delta is very different to Alpha. And this tweet was part of a thread where he was arguing that people need to get vaccinated! Because natural immunity from previous exposure to Alpha may not offer good protection against Delta.
Of course what he should have written was something like "Sera from convalescent patients collected up to 12 months post symptoms were 4 fold less potent against variant Delta, relative to variant Alpha (B.1.1.7)"...
Reduced sensitivity of SARS-CoV-2 variant Delta to antibody neutralization
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03777-9
At what point would "evade" become a legitimate claim? 4 fold less potent against variant Delta? 5 fold? 10 fold?
Re: COVID-19
Come off it, stop trying to fudge his words when he himself has already walked it back.
People could and did get reinfected with the original strain. There's nothing new to see here, just an adjustment to the risk of reinfection.
It was a tweet that was deliberately trolling for attention, which is fine when it's trolling about a football match but isn't when it's scaremongering about a deadly disease that terrifies some people into locking themselves at home. You know this. But what you maybe don't know is this doctor is a CNN personality who has a huge reach, not some twitter nobody, and him claiming there's a new Covid-21 disease that we don't have immunity to is a terrible bit of misinformation to fuel the conspiracy end of the spectrum.
People could and did get reinfected with the original strain. There's nothing new to see here, just an adjustment to the risk of reinfection.
It was a tweet that was deliberately trolling for attention, which is fine when it's trolling about a football match but isn't when it's scaremongering about a deadly disease that terrifies some people into locking themselves at home. You know this. But what you maybe don't know is this doctor is a CNN personality who has a huge reach, not some twitter nobody, and him claiming there's a new Covid-21 disease that we don't have immunity to is a terrible bit of misinformation to fuel the conspiracy end of the spectrum.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7075
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: COVID-19
Number of lives lost to Covid so far is about equal to battle deaths in all wars since 1982.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-deat ... s-hopkins/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-deat ... s-hopkins/
- wilsontown
- Clardic Fug
- Posts: 208
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:51 am
Re: COVID-19
"When is a variant sufficiently different to justify calling it a new virus?" isn't a question I'm massively interested in, to be honest, and we can argue exactly what is meant by "evade" all day. The problem, as ever, is that Twitter isn't really suited to nuanced science communication, but it's not as though you can just stay off it and let misinformation run unchecked.
"All models are wrong but some are useful" - George Box
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8266
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: COVID-19
First year of pandemic claimed lives of 25 young people in England
During the first year of the pandemic 25 children and teenagers died (equating to an absolute risk of one in 481,000, or approximately two in a million) as a direct result of Covid-19 in England and about 6,000 were admitted to hospital, according to the most complete analysis of national data on the age group to date.
“Factors linked to a higher risk of severe Covid-19 appear to be broadly consistent for both children and adults. Our study found a higher risk of admission to intensive care among young people of black ethnicity compared to white, as well as among young people with health conditions such as diabetes, asthma and cardiovascular disease. Young people with multiple conditions had the highest risk.”
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
Re: COVID-19
Such tiny numbers support the idea that the vaccine is too risky for healthy children relative to the benefit.
Of the 25, 13 were "living with complex neuro-disabilities" so maybe vaccination for this category is worth it? Or maybe diabetes, asthma, obese sub groups?
Hospitalisation figures show the same story: 367,600 emergency hospital admissions excluding injuries, of which only 5,800 were due to Covid-19. Only 250 intensive care cases. The UK government approach of letting Covid rip through the <18 population instinctively feels wrong to all of us, but instincts can mislead and there's plenty of scientific support for preventing mass vaccination of children.
Of the 25, 13 were "living with complex neuro-disabilities" so maybe vaccination for this category is worth it? Or maybe diabetes, asthma, obese sub groups?
Hospitalisation figures show the same story: 367,600 emergency hospital admissions excluding injuries, of which only 5,800 were due to Covid-19. Only 250 intensive care cases. The UK government approach of letting Covid rip through the <18 population instinctively feels wrong to all of us, but instincts can mislead and there's plenty of scientific support for preventing mass vaccination of children.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
-
- Fuzzable
- Posts: 272
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:52 pm
Re: COVID-19
How many PICU beds do we have though and how many children can we have hospitalised with Covid over a short period of time before it becomes an issue.
The speed at which it’s going to spread through kids once the few mitigation measures and the self isolation of contacts are over is going to mean that all of the hospitalisations from about 14million kids catching covid are going to happen quite quickly.
The speed at which it’s going to spread through kids once the few mitigation measures and the self isolation of contacts are over is going to mean that all of the hospitalisations from about 14million kids catching covid are going to happen quite quickly.
Re: COVID-19
The necessary info for a sense check are in the above posts.
In one year in England there were 361,800 emergency hospital admissions excluding injuries and Covid, plus 5,800 Covid admissions. Assuming 361,800 a year is a normal average, that's 30,000 per month. The NHS must be set up for that, having the necessary beds, ICU capacity etc.
Hence if we assume a massive surge of Covid - a year's worth of children cases in just one month, say - then 5,800 admissions in a month would add a 20% burden on top of the usual 30,000.
Overall, the NHS peaked at 4,000 daily admissions and 40,000 Covid patients in hospital in January 2021. It was swamped but probably a little way off breaking point. 5,800 children hospitalised in a single month can be view in this context.
Also for context, in England and Wales in 2019 there were 2,390 infant deaths (aged under 1 year) and 907 child deaths (aged 1 to 15 years). The 2,390 babies figures isn't really relevant as it has so many very premature babies who die within a day. The 25 Covid deaths are therefore in the context of the 907 child deaths a year, around 2.5% of deaths.
In one year in England there were 361,800 emergency hospital admissions excluding injuries and Covid, plus 5,800 Covid admissions. Assuming 361,800 a year is a normal average, that's 30,000 per month. The NHS must be set up for that, having the necessary beds, ICU capacity etc.
Hence if we assume a massive surge of Covid - a year's worth of children cases in just one month, say - then 5,800 admissions in a month would add a 20% burden on top of the usual 30,000.
Overall, the NHS peaked at 4,000 daily admissions and 40,000 Covid patients in hospital in January 2021. It was swamped but probably a little way off breaking point. 5,800 children hospitalised in a single month can be view in this context.
Also for context, in England and Wales in 2019 there were 2,390 infant deaths (aged under 1 year) and 907 child deaths (aged 1 to 15 years). The 2,390 babies figures isn't really relevant as it has so many very premature babies who die within a day. The 25 Covid deaths are therefore in the context of the 907 child deaths a year, around 2.5% of deaths.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
- bob sterman
- Dorkwood
- Posts: 1132
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 pm
- Location: Location Location
Re: COVID-19
Not wishing to dispute the very low risk of serious consequences in children - but for some reason they present the COVID-related multisystem inflammatory syndrome ICU admissions separately...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... in-england
I can't find <18 data right now - but by the end of February 2021 there had been about 530,000 confirmed COVID cases in people aged 0-19
So 25 deaths gives an IFR of 0.004% - 1 in 21,200 for confirmed cases.
Chances of needing ICU for confirmed cases were 1 in 2111 (or 1 in 946 if you combine the COVID and PIMS admissions).
Caveat - of course these are over-estimates because the true case numbers are likely much higher than the confirmed case numbers. So adjust them according to whatever you think the ascertainment rate is.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/ ... in-england
These chances are for the population of all under 18s - not just confirmed COVID cases. This is important because schools were closed and children restricted from seeing each other socially during previous peaks, keeping case numbers down.Using data on hospital admissions covering children in England under a year old up to 17-year-olds, researchers led by Joseph Ward, a doctor at UCL calculated that 5,830 children and young people were admitted to hospital with Covid-19 during the first year of the pandemic, up to the end of February 2021.
Of these children 251 (4%) required intensive care, equivalent to a one in 50,000 chance of being admitted to ICU with Covid-19 for those under 18.
The researchers also identified 690 children and young people who had developed the rare Covid-related condition known as paediatric multisystem inflammatory syndrome (PIMS-TS), of whom 309 required intensive care – equating to a risk of one in 38,911.
I can't find <18 data right now - but by the end of February 2021 there had been about 530,000 confirmed COVID cases in people aged 0-19
So 25 deaths gives an IFR of 0.004% - 1 in 21,200 for confirmed cases.
Chances of needing ICU for confirmed cases were 1 in 2111 (or 1 in 946 if you combine the COVID and PIMS admissions).
Caveat - of course these are over-estimates because the true case numbers are likely much higher than the confirmed case numbers. So adjust them according to whatever you think the ascertainment rate is.
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8266
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: COVID-19
Ok the 7-day average for the UK has now gone above 30,000 cases per day.shpalman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 30, 2021 8:53 amI'm saying that because there's usually a jump in case numbers mid-week, as a day-of-the-week effect. But the 7-day average (which is less than 18,000 per day right now) won't go above 30,000 for another week or so.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Wed Jun 30, 2021 8:28 amI think that the weekend is more likely. But yes, this seems like another case of ministers being hopelessly behind where the curve is going.
But yes, by 19th July, we could have a 7-day average of 40,000 per day, which means the first day which goes over 40,000 will probably be Tuesday or Wednesday next week.
The death rate is probably also now going to come up with a 9-10 day doubling time for week or so, to follow what happened in the cases.
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: COVID-19
Big Tech should be censored not do the censoring. Social media is the largest source of anti-vaccine propganda.tom p wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 7:50 amEveryone should be in the case of misinformation that can harm the public health.
In fact, I think big tech should be legally obliged to censor harmful content. Freedom of speech does not extend to the right to should "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. that's an old principle and one which should always be remembered.
Masking forever
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Re: COVID-19
You do know that it's the users who write the content on social media, right? Twitter doesn't write it all for them.Herainestold wrote: ↑Sat Jul 10, 2021 4:19 pmBig Tech should be censored not do the censoring. Social media is the largest source of anti-vaccine propganda.
Just checking.
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am
Re: COVID-19
Censorship does not mean that people are only allowed to speak the truth: it means they are only allowed to say what those in power want them to say. Censorship is a great friend of lies and an enemy of truth.tom p wrote: ↑Fri Jul 09, 2021 7:50 amEveryone should be in the case of misinformation that can harm the public health.
In fact, I think big tech should be legally obliged to censor harmful content. Freedom of speech does not extend to the right to should "Fire!" in a crowded theatre. that's an old principle and one which should always be remembered.
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: COVID-19
Twitter is one thing, but platforms like facebook and youtube have algorithms that give users increasingly extreme options. This is one of the main drivers behind the anti-vax movement. Big Tech needs to be reined in and cut down or we all will suffer.Martin Y wrote: ↑Sat Jul 10, 2021 9:14 pmYou do know that it's the users who write the content on social media, right? Twitter doesn't write it all for them.Herainestold wrote: ↑Sat Jul 10, 2021 4:19 pmBig Tech should be censored not do the censoring. Social media is the largest source of anti-vaccine propganda.
Just checking.
Masking forever
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8266
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: COVID-19
Yeah it looks like the case rate is now coming up sharply here. And I notice that the number of total current positives* increased for the first time since April.
(* - Italy has a protocol for declaring someone covid-free but today's number of people declared covid-free was lower than today's number of new positives.)
(* - Italy has a protocol for declaring someone covid-free but today's number of people declared covid-free was lower than today's number of new positives.)
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am
Re: COVID-19
So you think our views are currently dominated by what Big Tech wants, and you'd like to replace that with what Priti Patel wants? How is that an improvement?Herainestold wrote: ↑Sun Jul 11, 2021 12:29 amTwitter is one thing, but platforms like facebook and youtube have algorithms that give users increasingly extreme options. This is one of the main drivers behind the anti-vax movement. Big Tech needs to be reined in and cut down or we all will suffer.
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: COVID-19
Its not that those views are what Big Tech wants, it is that those views are the end result of algorithms designed by Big Tech to drive clicks and advertising and ultimately sell products. The views are just a very unfortunate side effect of the system.Big Tech wants clicks, eyeballs and ultimately money. Capitalism at its finest.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Sun Jul 11, 2021 11:52 pmSo you think our views are currently dominated by what Big Tech wants, and you'd like to replace that with what Priti Patel wants? How is that an improvement?Herainestold wrote: ↑Sun Jul 11, 2021 12:29 amTwitter is one thing, but platforms like facebook and youtube have algorithms that give users increasingly extreme options. This is one of the main drivers behind the anti-vax movement. Big Tech needs to be reined in and cut down or we all will suffer.
Masking forever
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
- shpalman
- Princess POW
- Posts: 8266
- Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 12:53 pm
- Location: One step beyond
- Contact:
Re: COVID-19
Covid patients are younger this time
Obviously, because it's obvious that younger people are less likely to have had one or both jabs by now. Also obviously, some of them end up in hospital anyway because a several-per-million risk multiplied by millions of people is still a several people.Dr. Obvious wrote:I’ve been looking after patients aged between 27 and 82 in critical care, but most are in their 30s, 40s and 50s. And the vast majority are either unvaccinated or have had one dose of the jab.
having that swing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for it meaning a thing
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
@shpalman@mastodon.me.uk
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 1621
- Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am
Re: COVID-19
Even if that is true, do you think that it's better to allow the views to be dictated by the likes of those we can see in power?Herainestold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 12, 2021 3:01 amIts not that those views are what Big Tech wants, it is that those views are the end result of algorithms designed by Big Tech to drive clicks and advertising and ultimately sell products. The views are just a very unfortunate side effect of the system.Big Tech wants clicks, eyeballs and ultimately money. Capitalism at its finest.Millennie Al wrote: ↑Sun Jul 11, 2021 11:52 pmSo you think our views are currently dominated by what Big Tech wants, and you'd like to replace that with what Priti Patel wants? How is that an improvement?
Re: COVID-19
I really don't like the "cases/hospitalizations/deaths have reached their highest level since March" construct.
The correct comparison is with the upslope, not the downslope.
It's like saying "flood waters have risen to where they had fallen to a few days after the big floods of 2008".
Lazy journalists.
The correct comparison is with the upslope, not the downslope.
It's like saying "flood waters have risen to where they had fallen to a few days after the big floods of 2008".
Lazy journalists.
Awarded gold star 4 November 2021
-
- After Pie
- Posts: 2029
- Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2019 1:23 pm
Re: COVID-19
What they should say is its at the same level as Dec 20 in the second wave. It will double at least one more time again and may peak in August (or September). And ...lpm wrote: ↑Tue Jul 13, 2021 9:23 pmI really don't like the "cases/hospitalizations/deaths have reached their highest level since March" construct.
The correct comparison is with the upslope, not the downslope.
It's like saying "flood waters have risen to where they had fallen to a few days after the big floods of 2008".
Lazy journalists.
It will be nasty. Very nastyAcross all scenarios explored, the team estimated that lifting restrictions on 19th July in the context of Delta could lead to a significant but highly uncertain third wave of hospitalisations and death with the total number of deaths ranging from 9,400 (estimate range: 4,600 to 19,800) in the most optimistic, to 115,800 (estimate range: 81,700 to 143,600) deaths in the most pessimistic scenario.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-07- ... lysis.html
Masking forever
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again
Putin is a monster.
Russian socialism will rise again