Coronavirus

[Bryn]

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

Just scooting in to wonder whether a mild case would be a Lambretta mod.?

[Barbirollians]

Just scooting in to wonder whether a mild case would be a Lambretta mod.?

Reports this morning that young people hospitalised with Covid are as likely to get organ damage and failure as older patients . The fact that fewer young people are at risk does not justify the recklessness of living restrictions when even under Step 3 the virus is running riot , there are 10 million people who have only had one jab plus the unvaccinated . Many more people are going to die unnecessarily , suffer hospitalisation and long Covid - just so others can queue at a bar and not wear a face mask.

Whilst the supposed benefit to the economy is stalled and the NHS forced to struggle by millions in self-isolation.

[Bryn]

Reports this morning that young people hospitalised with Covid are as likely to get organ damage and failure than older patients . The fact that fewer young people are at risk does not justify the recklessness of living restrictions when even under Step 3 the virus is running riot , there are 10 million people who have only had one jab plus the unvaccinated . Many more people are going to die unnecessarily , suffer hospitalisation and long Covid - just so others can queue at a bar and not wear a face mask.

Whilst the supposed benefit to the economy is stalled and the NHS forced to struggle by millions in self-isolation.

Yes, and also the reported higher reticence among younger adults re getting vaccinated. This appears to result from a combination of 'anti-vaxxer' disinformation campaigns and the myth that SARS-Cov-2 is only a problem for the elderly.

[french frank]

I take the "small boy stamping his foot" analogy-nice phrase, if I may make so bold!

I did wonder whether I might seem to have overstepped the mark of civility, but analogies can never be exact equivalents in every respect (or they wouldn't be analogies).

Meanwhile, Whitty saying what I'm saying :-)

There is quite a difference between 'learning to live with it' and 'behaving in the same way you did before it arrived, just as if it wasn't still around'.

[Mandryka]

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

Is this from your own analysis or is it online somewhere? Can you share the details?

One question is when cases will peak, and how long the tail will be. It could be interesting to track the rates of change.

[Simon B]

Is this from your own analysis or is it online somewhere? Can you share the details?

One question is when cases will peak, and how long the tail will be. It could be interesting to track the rates of change.

In the first instance it's just fancy maths language (bad habit, sorry) for - "what Spector said", and by implication the Zoe study.

To go to source, you can see it for yourself in the .gov.uk figures:

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases (go to "Cases by specimen date" graph - which is more useful than one arrayed by recorded date). Viewed linear or log, it's clear that the slope/rate-of-change has been reducing since about 18/Jun.

So on that evidence, the epidemic is decelerating, not accelerating.

If you look at the analogous (but definitely not nominally identical as it's a different thing measured in a different way, albeit with the same goal in terms of trends) curve from Zoe, this is more stark:

https://covid.joinzoe.com/data#levels-over-time

All that said, as a pessimist by nature, it increasingly feels intuitively "wrong" to me. Maybe that shows the power of the media once again ramping up the doom narrative even on someone (me) whose internal monologue is the stereotype whiny nasal voice saying "Yes, but never mind all that drivel, follow the evidence...".

[french frank]

So on that evidence, the epidemic is decelerating, not accelerating.

Meaning the rate of increase is currently slowing down? Hasn't that happened before, and then it's started to speed up again?

All that said, as a pessimist by nature, it increasingly feels intuitively "wrong" to me. Maybe that shows the power of the media once again ramping up the doom narrative even on someone (me) whose internal monologue is the stereotype whiny nasal voice saying "Yes, but never mind all that drivel, follow the evidence...".

ADD: And the latest Zoe newsletter says: "This Monday brings so-called 'Freedom Day' to England, and with it the relaxation of most restrictions. However, even though we’ve seen evidence of a recent plateau in some areas, rates are still high and the possibility of Long COVID is what should keep us all vigilant and responsible."

[Simon B]

Meaning the rate of increase is currently slowing down? Hasn't that happened before, and then it's started to speed up again?

Yes, both within "waves" and without (by definition, at the start of another one). It does however appear untrue to say that the epidemic is accelerating at the moment - as all the data shows the opposite on a sustained basis. Though what could happen next based on this evidence in isolation is: anything.

ADD: And the latest Zoe newsletter says: "This Monday brings so-called 'Freedom Day' to England, and with it the relaxation of most restrictions. However, even though we’ve seen evidence of a recent plateau in some areas, rates are still high and the possibility of Long COVID is what should keep us all vigilant and responsible."

The "some areas" distinction is peculiar on the face of it as their own output shows a plateau on the entire dataset. Either way, it's indisputable that the point of inflection on the Zoe curve is occurring at a high absolute level. If it doesn't turn into a decline for other reasons, the only thing that will prevent everyone ultimately being exposed is when the threshold of herd immunity is reached. To me, it sounds like Spector is positing that this is what is sort-of gradually happening, without explicitly saying so. Maybe I misunderstand him.

My layperson's suspicion is that this outcome is broadly what Prof Whitty et al are expecting, and regard as either the least worst option or one among a set which are in equipoise, providing whichever is chosen happens slowly. This is the problem from their perspective with the "unlocking" - the unknown and unknowable degree to which that deceleration might be undone.

It's a common misapprehension IMV that the scientific policy makers are trying to influence individual outcomes rather than the macroscopic effects, i.e. managing public health and demand on healthcare services. Individual benefit is effectively an intentional side-effect.

As an aside, the reporting of Whitty's remarks in the last day or two as though they are news seems odd to me. In the substance he's merely repeating exactly what he said at BoJo's last mumblefest.

[teamsaint]

Figures from the ZOE app today definitely show the current wave topping out, somewhat inevitably. Round here the pingdemic is in full flow, we have about a quarter of our workforce self isolating , none of whom actually have the infection AFAIK, and most of whom are vaccinated.luckily we can all work from home, though getting on towards 18 months of this has really taken its toll on a number of staff.

The lack of attention to collateral damage is very concerning.That damage covers many areas of life, healthcare, the economy, mental health and so on, whilst the numbers in hospital with covid are really not all that high, either in absolute terms or as a percentage of capacity.13 as of today in Southampton hospitals, and six in Salisbury, as we head towards the peak of the wave, though I would expect them to rise somewhat yet.It has been claimed that hospitalisations are lasting in average 2 days, and the admissions data from those two trusts would seem to bear that out. Not wishing to downplay covid at all, but context is very important.

[french frank]

Not wishing to downplay covid at all, but context is very important.

I agree with what you said there, but the key question for us, the gen. peeps, is how do we behave from next Monday? Do we return entirely to no masks, close contacts with all friends and acquaintances, removal of all sanitising points and perspex screens in e.g. restaurants and moving all the tables back to how they were so that we can accommodate the maximum number of customers, everyone clocking in for work? Or do we proceed with some care? If so, how? That's the question that is being left to us as individuals, to employers, to companies … And does it matter what we do anyway? Is that what "living with the virus" means?

[teamsaint]

I agree with what you said there, but the key question for us, the gen. peeps, is how do we behave from next Monday? Do we return entirely to no masks, close contacts with all friends and acquaintances, removal of all sanitising points and perspex screens in e.g. restaurants and moving all the tables back to how they were so that we can accommodate the maximum number of customers, everyone clocking in for work? Or do we proceed with some care? If so, how? That's the question that is being left to us as individuals, to employers, to companies … And does it matter what we do anyway? Is that what "living with the virus" means?

Well the easy answer is that, in the end, we will all have to make judgements about behaviour , as we all used to. It is clear that for now, many mitigations will stay in place, and that seems sensible, hopefully as part of a winding down process.
One thing that does concern me is the keeping of particular precautions “ just” to make people feel safe. I can’t help but think that ultimately this is self defeating. People need to feel that it is sensible to go about their business with whatever mitigations they feel are necessary, or are in place because they actually work. Just IMVHO of course.

[Bryn]

"Confirmed" cases reported today, over 50,000. For whatever reason, some contributors here seem to have missed a rather important word regarding the ZOE figures. That word is "estimated".

[teamsaint]

Some contributors here have been following the figures closely over the last 16 months, and know that the ZOE app has shown the trajectory of the pandemic extremely accurately throughout. The govt figure themselves are far from a perfect reflection of the situation, being subject to fluctuation etc.
And as we all know, cases are just one metric.

[Bryn]

Some contributors here have been following the figures closely over the last 16 months, and know that the ZOE app has shown the trajectory of the pandemic extremely accurate throughout. The govt figure themselves are far from a perfect reflection of the situation.

ZOE's "estimates", as is made clear on their site, are derived from data provided by those, such as myself, who participate in their study. The official figures relate to confirmed cases in the UK population.

[teamsaint]

ZOE's "estimates", as is made clear on their site, are derived from data provided by those, such as myself, who participate in their study. The official figures relate to confirmed cases in the UK population.

I know.

Of course official figures contain large numbers of probable false positives etc,so one is an estimate,( which has proved very accurate in predicting the trend, the other is an indicator of confirmed case numbers at best.

This wave is topping out.