Coronavirus

[Simon B]

The first response to Spector's Tweet speaks volumes: "How does that square with the 40k+ official case count yesterday?".

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/

This is (yet another) example of great care and diligence being needed to interpret data correctly.

There appears to be a problem with both slightly cloudy presentation of the data by Zoe here and the subsequent (mis)interpretation and invalid comparison by the tweeter.

With careful reference to the wording of:

https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/new-cases-plateau-aead-of-freedom-day

it can be seen that the Zoe figure of 33,118 "cases" comprises a mean 17,501 symptomatic daily cases in the unvaccinated plus a mean 15,537 symptomatic cases in the vaccinated. 17,501+15,537 = 33,118.

This is completely consistent with the official gov.uk "cases" being 40k+ as that will include many asymptomatic cases as well as not including many symptomatic cases that people don't bother to get tested for. That's before further taking into account the fact that the Zoe data is automated symptomatic self-reporting and is measuring a different thing and yielding results on a smaller time lag.

These things will all have correlations which are no doubt carefully calibrated to get R, prevalence and all the rest of it. Zoe are (as I understand it) calibrating their symptomatic self-reporting numbers to extrapolate prevalence etc. My understanding is that their outputs have been widely acknowledged to be very well correlated with other more laggy "official" measures. Zoe output can be said to give trend signals earlier, and with a fairly reasonable degree of confidence.

Regardless of all this, in both Zoe and e.g. gov.uk datasets, for some while:

i) First differential of positivity has been consistently falling for some time - i.e. rate of increase of daily cases is falling
ii) Second differential is small however - rate of increase of rate of decrease is 0 or worse

None of that contradicts anything Spector is saying, though ii) is less comforting than it might be. It is not inconsistent with his claim that we're heading for a plateau and then a much slower tailing off than has been seen before. Which isn't the same thing as saying that will happen - which nobody really can.

[Like Spector and many others I'm personally in favour of continued mask wearing in many situations for as many people who can as both a courtesy and as it appears to have a minor but non-negligible effect on spread, albeit the balance of evidence remains vague at best]

[Andrew]

You will, of course, be aware that double vaccination by no means offers total protection against COVID-19. There have now been a number of cases of infection occurring some time after a second jab. Vaccination has been shown to be highly effective but not a guarantee against infection, any more than previous infection is. I detect more than a hint of "I'm alright Jack" syndrome in some recent posts on this thread. Hospitalisation and deaths related to SARS-Cov-2 in the UK are rising again.

Double vaccinations do not offer TOTAL protection, in the same way that seat belts do not offer TOTAL protection against injuries in a car crash, but we all wear them..... Some children are tragically born with deformities or terrible illnesses, but couples still go on "making babies".... life is a risk, but it's just that...... LIFE!

[french frank]

Double vaccinations do not offer TOTAL protection, in the same way that seat belts do not offer TOTAL protection against injuries in a car crash, but we all wear them.....

but we all wear them..... And one of the reasons is that if a driver can keep some control over the vehicle after a crash that could reduce the amount of damage the car does to others. Just as you must have at least Third Party insurance for the benefit of others who may suffer damage or injury. Logically, the wearing of a mask should be mandatory to protect others. And where powers exist, as with the Mayor of London, masks are being made mandatory in certain circumstances.

Big business seems content merely to 'encourage' people. Wouldn't want to lose customers …

[Bryn]

but we all wear them..... And one of the reasons is that if a driver can keep some control over the vehicle after a crash that could reduce the amount of damage the car does to others. Just as you must have at least Third Party insurance for the benefit of others who may suffer damage or injury. Logically, the wearing of a mask should be mandatory to protect others. And where powers exist, as with the Mayor of London, masks are being made mandatory in certain circumstances.

Big business seems content merely to 'encourage' people. Wouldn't want to lose customers …

I concur entirely.

[Andrew]

Logically, the wearing of a mask should be mandatory to protect others.

(I've reduced your quotation, but don't wish it to be taken put of context) If the wearing of masks is, as you suggest, 'logically mandatory" when did they become so? Was it the Covid epidemic that made this so or ought we to have been wearing them before? In addition, I would tentatively suggest that if it IS the Covid epidemic that has made these masks mandatory, would you accept their wearing to become voluntary once the epidemic is over?

Oh, and thanks for showing me how to do BOLD in my comments!

[french frank]

(If the wearing of masks is, as you suggest, 'logically mandatory" when did they become so?

By 'logically', I meant on the analogy of seat belts being mandatory to protect others, Third Party insurance being mandatory to protect others (you don't get to decide whether you want to wear a seat-belt or whether to have Third Party insurance), in the current circumstances it is 'logical' for mask-wearing to be mandatory (as it has already been for many months) in order to protect others.

[Andrew]

By 'logically', I meant on the analogy of seat belts being mandatory to protect others, Third Party insurance being mandatory to protect others (you don't get to decide whether you want to wear a seat-belt or whether to have Third Party insurance), in the current circumstances it is 'logical' for mask-wearing to be mandatory (as it has already been for many months) in order to protect others.

I think the seat-belt analogy falls down because most people wear seat-belts to protect themselves as opposed to those with whom they might collide. Yes, seat belt wearing drivers may be better able to drive after a collision, but most drivers would be too shocked to drive at all after a collision severe enough for a seat-belt to have saved them.

But enough of seat belts.... Even if IF it is currently "logical" for masks to be mandatory, when would you consider it to be "illogical" or perhaps non-mandatory would be better, or maybe, even (what for it...) voluntary?

It's not the mask-wearing per se that annoys me, it's the "deal" I thought we had whereby the vaccine programme, which by any objective measure has been a success, would lead to the withdrawal of the restrictions. I ask again, when would you be prepared to the mask wearing restrictions lifted? As these restrictions have NOT yet been lifted it seems we've been somewhat "conned" and the mask-wearing is here to stay in some form or another; once again, politicians and petty bureaucrats have sought to control society, when there is no need so to do.

[oddoneout]

I think the seat-belt analogy falls down because most people wear seat-belts to protect themselves as opposed to those with whom they might collide. Yes, seat belt wearing drivers may be better able to drive after a collision, but most drivers would be too shocked to drive at all after a collision severe enough for a seat-belt to have saved them.

But enough of seat belts.... Even if IF it is currently "logical" for masks to be mandatory, when would you consider it to be "illogical" or perhaps non-mandatory would be better, or maybe, even (what for it...) voluntary?

It's not the mask-wearing per se that annoys me, it's the "deal" I thought we had whereby the vaccine programme, which by any objective measure has been a success, would lead to the withdrawal of the restrictions. I ask again, when would you be prepared to the mask wearing restrictions lifted? As these restrictions have NOT yet been lifted it seems we've been somewhat "conned" and the mask-wearing is here to stay in some form or another; once again, politicians and petty bureaucrats have sought to control society, when there is no need so to do.

Deals and this government do not have a happy relationship so expecting something was perhaps a bit optimistic?

[french frank]

I think the seat-belt analogy falls down because most people wear seat-belts to protect themselves as opposed to those with whom they might collide.

Well, I only mentioned seat belts because you did, and you pointed out that people did wear them. As to people wearing their seat belt to protect themselves, most people seem to be under the impression that that's why they wear a mask, but the point at issue is the mandatory one: why did the government make it mandatory? I think it was like the insurance question, people must be insured against doing damage to others, not against injuring themselves. Which is why I maintain it would be logical to make mask-wearing mandatory at this point.

Even if IF it is currently "logical" for masks to be mandatory, when would you consider it to be "illogical" or perhaps non-mandatory would be better, or maybe, even (what for it...) voluntary?

One answer would be: when the public health experts think it is no longer necessary. For myself I would simply say, 'Not when the infections are increasing above the January second wave level, hospitalisations are increasing, and more people admitted are now needing intensive care. Perhaps (I would say) when these figures are on a downward trajectory?

It's not the mask-wearing per se that annoys me, it's the "deal" I thought we had whereby the vaccine programme, which by any objective measure has been a success, would lead to the withdrawal of the restrictions.

Well, forgive me, but that seems to bear some similarity to the child who stamps his foot and says, "But you promised we could go to the zoo today." ("Yes, I know, dear, but look at the rain. It really won't be very nice at the zoo, will it?") Some things are beyond our control and we have to improvise.

I ask again, when would you be prepared to the mask wearing restrictions lifted? As these restrictions have NOT yet been lifted it seems we've been somewhat "conned" and the mask-wearing is here to stay in some form or another; once again, politicians and petty bureaucrats have sought to control society, when there is no need so to do.

I think I've answered the first question. As for the last bit, you are stating your personal opinion without producing any evidence that there is 'no need to do so'. But in the end people, it seems, will be allowed to do what they think they will. I don't think you can hold any complaint against me simply because I think that may be ill-advised! And there I think I must leave the subject.

[Andrew]

Deals and this government do not have a happy relationship so expecting something was perhaps a bit optimistic?

Maybe I was a tad naive expecting a pro quo from Boris and friends! I take the "small boy stamping his foot" analogy-nice phrase, if I may make so bold! I wonder what the "small boy" in your analogy would say to his parents when the rain stopped. Would he accept them saying something like "well, it might rain again....."

But you're right, it's an interesting discussion and perhaps we should agree to disagree!

[Serial_Apologist]

but we all wear them..... And one of the reasons is that if a driver can keep some control over the vehicle after a crash that could reduce the amount of damage the car does to others. Just as you must have at least Third Party insurance for the benefit of others who may suffer damage or injury. Logically, the wearing of a mask should be mandatory to protect others. And where powers exist, as with the Mayor of London, masks are being made mandatory in certain circumstances.

Big business seems content merely to 'encourage' people. Wouldn't want to lose customers …

The day "big business" is seen as summing up a negative in society, the way driving over the limit and smoking are seen, something will change. Either "big business" will start to behave according to the needs of sustainability and the natural environment, or we will have to wait until enough people wake up to the realities and elect a radical government that takes over "big business" and has the ordinary employees and consumers get together to determine meeting essential social priorities. "Oh but won't that slow things down?" people might argue; to which I can only say, good.

[Dave2002]

Lambda variant

https://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2021-07-06/what-we-know-about-the-lambda-variant/100267978

It seems that there's yet another variant - called Lambda. It's mostly prevalent in South America, though there are a few cases elsewhere.
It has reached Australia, and there have been a few cases in the UK.

[richardfinegold]

You will, I assume, be well aware of the current, apparently accelerating, upswing of infections in the UK.

I am, and therefore the statement that Zero Covid is an unobtainable goal, just as zero influenza is an unobtainable goal. We are going to have to live with it as a society, just as patients with chronic conditions have to try to get on with their lives without the hope of completely eradicating those conditions. Here the spike is largely amongst the unvaccinated. Vaccine supply has exceeded demand here for months now, and the unvaccinated have adopted their status by choice, and not necessity. The variants by and large haven’t hurt the vaccinated population. There probably will be a need for boosters, same as with influenza

[muzzer]

I am, and therefore the statement that Zero Covid is an unobtainable goal, just as zero influenza is an unobtainable goal. We are going to have to live with it as a society, just as patients with chronic conditions have to try to get on with their lives without the hope of completely eradicating those conditions. Here the spike is largely amongst the unvaccinated. Vaccine supply has exceeded demand here for months now, and the unvaccinated have adopted their status by choice, and not necessity. The variants by and large haven’t hurt the vaccinated population. There probably will be a need for boosters, same as with influenza

I agree with this wholeheartedly. It is sheer lunacy that vaccine take up is so low in parts of London. It’s the government’s fault of course, but it will affect us all. I’ve simply had enough of people’s response to this disastrous pandemic being mired in finding statistically insignificant points to argue against what is very much a macro issue. People need to realise they have minimal agency. Get the jab nb twice, build immunity, have the discussion about what we do next.

[Andrew]

It seems that there's yet another variant - called Lambda.

My car should be able to sense that one...... (Sorry!)