Coronavirus

[ad_orientem]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60133618

***********

The number of Americans dying each day from Covid-19 now stands as high as it did during the Delta variant's peak, a grim figure that experts believe will rise.

Statistics show that an average of over 2,000 people are dying from the virus in the US every day, roughly on par with the deaths seen in late September.

According to statistics from Johns Hopkins University, the daily average of confirmed Covid-19 deaths surpassed 2,000 on 21 January and stood at 2,033 on 23 January.

That's just short of where it was at the peak of the surge in Delta variant cases in September.

But there are many more people in hospital now due to the virus than there were back then, due to much higher case loads.

The average daily number of new confirmed cases in the US far surpasses previous waves.

************

What is this....?  Just when we thought it was all getting over....

Too many unvaxed fat people.

[Spud]

Too many unvaxed fat people.

Naturally acquired immunity protected people against Delta better than vaccines:
https://youtu.be/25-iJKPA1CA

[Nearly Sane]

And as well as lying sbout parties, they were grossly incompetent/corrupt about PPE


https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1488494435679838209.html

[Outrider]

Naturally acquired immunity protected people against Delta better than vaccines: https://youtu.be/25-iJKPA1CA

Yeah, but the survival rate of vaccines is quite a bit higher than the survival rate for COVID... from the summary of the study this video is talking about:

among those who survive, previous SARS-CoV-2 infection also confers protection against severe outcomes in the event of reinfection (3,4).

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm#contribAff

If your argument is based upon the circumstances being beneficial 'among those who survive' then you're already onto a losing argument.

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Yeah, but the survival rate of vaccines is quite a bit higher than the survival rate for COVID... from the summary of the study this video is talking about:
 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm#contribAff

If your argument is based upon the circumstances being beneficial 'among those who survive' then you're already onto a losing argument.

O.

Yes, I do feel Spud is being a bit Social Darwinian here.

[Udayana]

And as well as lying sbout parties, they were grossly incompetent/corrupt about PPE


https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1488494435679838209.html

Of-course, as suggested here all along. But, just price it in along with covid fraud and money wasted on non-working track and trace ... the public will happily pay through increased NI and tax - in exchange for a diet of recycled jokes and lies.

[Nearly Sane]

And more fall out in NI from the lies of Boris Johnson, and his corrupt govt

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60241608

[Spud]

Yeah, but the survival rate of vaccines is quite a bit higher than the survival rate for COVID... from the summary of the study this video is talking about:
 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm#contribAff

If your argument is based upon the circumstances being beneficial 'among those who survive' then you're already onto a losing argument.

O.

Sure, I'm aware of that, but I think that because so many people were not susceptible to severe disease, it was unnecessary (a) to lock everyone down and (b) to vaccinate everyone. That was my position from the start. I was just pointing to the data because policies seem to have been based on a mistrust of natural immunity from the get-go. For example, the requirement to have been double-jabbed to avoid quarantine, even if one had antibodies from previous infection.
(Edit: ad-o's point was probably right, although other factors are at play in the US, such as the inability of many to afford to pay for treatment to control underlying illness, leading to their increased risk of severe covid)

[Outrider]

Sure, I'm aware of that, but I think that because so many people were not susceptible to severe disease, it was unnecessary (a) to lock everyone down and (b) to vaccinate everyone.

Lock down there are arguments for and against - I think, on balance, some degree of lockdown was necessary to protect the health service capacity, but the most recent was probably not required. Vaccinations I think were a no-brainer - I'd like to live in a world that wasn't filled with anti-scientific pontificating nonsense where you'd be able to presume that the overwhelming majority of people would take up the offer, but unfortunately that's not the world we live in. The balance of risk between being vaccinated and not doesn't even justify a discussion about why we shouldn't.

Even within those valid argument areas, though, this argument is just ridiculous.

That was my position from the start. I was just pointing to the data because policies seem to have been based on a mistrust of natural immunity from the get-go.

It's not a mistrust, it's that consequences of waiting for natural immunity to build, both for vulnerable individuals and for the national infrastructure, were horrendous.

For example, the requirement to have been double-jabbed to avoid quarantine, even if one had antibodies from previous infection.

That's a pragmatic choice based on how easy it is to mass deploy reliable antibody testing; given that there's virtually no risk to having the vaccination, I don't have a problem with it being run how it was. This has already been costly enough, running a separate testing programme alongside lateral flow and PCR and the vaccination programme doesn't seem justified to pacify people taken in by palpably nonsensical disinformation campaigns.

(Edit: ad-o's point was probably right, although other factors are at play in the US, such as the inability of many to afford to pay for treatment to control underlying illness, leading to their increased risk of severe covid)

I was working on a conversation about the UK. Trying to make any kind of rational point about the US healthcare 'system' is just a non-starter!

O.

[Aruntraveller]

Sure, I'm aware of that, but I think that because so many people were not susceptible to severe disease, it was unnecessary (a) to lock everyone down and (b) to vaccinate everyone. That was my position from the start.

And at the start we had no way of knowing who was and who wasn't susceptible to severe disease. Even now we are only just getting a handle on why some people are affected so adversely. So the only option to avoid even more deaths (and please don't forget the 150,000 + and still counting) was to lock down initially and to go for vaccination. To achieve herd immunity which is what you are basically arguing for, and have done in your long history of misinformed posting, would only have condemned many more of us to death.

[Spud]

And at the start we had no way of knowing who was and who wasn't susceptible to severe disease. Even now we are only just getting a handle on why some people are affected so adversely. So the only option to avoid even more deaths (and please don't forget the 150,000 + and still counting) was to lock down initially and to go for vaccination. To achieve herd immunity which is what you are basically arguing for, and have done in your long history of misinformed posting, would only have condemned many more of us to death.

I notice that the number of deaths is currently quite high. That is because of the high infectiousness of Omicron. Apparently it's only because the vaccine for Omicron isn't yet approved that it hasn't been rolled out, so it looks as though the pandemic will end through the very method you say we should avoid - enough people being infected to achieve herd immunity.
One other thing: we knew quite early on that children were not severely affected. Because we locked them up we won't know whether they and healthy adults could have achieved herd immunity without the high deaths you assume.

[Aruntraveller]

I notice that the number of deaths is currently quite high. That is because of the high infectiousness of Omicron. Apparently it's only because the vaccine for Omicron isn't yet approved that it hasn't been rolled out, so it looks as though the pandemic will end through the very method you say we should avoid - enough people being infected to achieve herd immunity.
One other thing: we knew quite early on that children were not severely affected. Because we locked them up we won't know whether they and healthy adults could have achieved herd immunity without the high deaths you assume.

Yes, we are closer to herd immunity but precisely because of the vaccine. Not because we let it rip through the country initially when there was no natural immunity.

As to not knowing, of course, we won't know the exact figures of deaths, but they clearly would have been much higher without lockdown initially.

I'll leave you with this because it does give some evidence of the difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated and how the vaccines actually work, you know as opposed to wishful fucking thinking:

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/ng-interactive/2022/jan/28/the-simple-numbers-every-government-should-use-to-fight-anti-vaccine-misinformation

[Nearly Sane]

Not often I agree with Douglas Ross but this is indeed bonkers


https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/health/fmqs-nicola-sturgeon-defends-proposal-to-chop-bottom-off-school-doors-for-ventilation-3553576

[Maeght]

I notice that the number of deaths is currently quite high. That is because of the high infectiousness of Omicron. Apparently it's only because the vaccine for Omicron isn't yet approved that it hasn't been rolled out, so it looks as though the pandemic will end through the very method you say we should avoid - enough people being infected to achieve herd immunity.
One other thing: we knew quite early on that children were not severely affected. Because we locked them up we won't know whether they and healthy adults could have achieved herd immunity without the high deaths you assume.

Vaccinated people who catch Covid have their immunity boosted without such serious risks, so what is happening mostly isn't the same as achieving that same level of immunity without vaccines.

Is true herd immunity possible with Omicron and the current vaccines? Since transmission still occurs how are the vulnerable protected (true herd immunity?) High population immunity isn't the same as herd immunity.

[Spud]

Vaccinated people who catch Covid have their immunity boosted without such serious risks, so what is happening mostly isn't the same as achieving that same level of immunity without vaccines.

I get this, and am aware of the proportions of deaths in unvaccinated people being much higher, as in Trent's link.

Is true herd immunity possible with Omicron and the current vaccines? Since transmission still occurs how are the vulnerable protected (true herd immunity?) High population immunity isn't the same as herd immunity.

I guess it depends on whether more immune escape occurs - already in some countries BA.2 is taking over from BA.1, for example. The thing now is that with the immune systems of so many people being exposed to proteins in the virus that are conserved between variants, that will generate a more comprehensive immunity that will hopefully control transmission.

[Maeght]

I get this, and am aware of the proportions of deaths in unvaccinated people being much higher, as in Trent's link.

So why did you say 'it looks as though the pandemic will end through the very method you say we should avoid' when what people were saying should be avoided was trying to achieve herd immunity/wide scale immunity by natural infection rather than by vaccination?

I guess it depends on whether more immune escape occurs - already in some countries BA.2 is taking over from BA.1, for example. The thing now is that with the immune systems of so many people being exposed to proteins in the virus that are conserved between variants, that will generate a more comprehensive immunity that will hopefully control transmission.

I think that the high infectivity with Omicron, and the fact that the vaccines reduce but do not prevent transmission, true herd immunity will be very hard to reach. I'd rather talk about high population immunity rather than herd immunity as the latter has a specific meaning which is different as I understand it.

[Spud]

So why did you say 'it looks as though the pandemic will end through the very method you say we should avoid' when what people were saying should be avoided was trying to achieve herd immunity/wide scale immunity by natural infection rather than by vaccination?

Because Omicron will (possibly) do just that: achieve herd/wide scale immunity by natural infection. The reason this is likely now is because the anti-omicron vaccine hasn't been made in time - by the time it's ready, most people will have been exposed. But this will be better because exposure to the whole virus generates better memory, that is effective against all variants (except those that result from antigenic shift). Had we rolled out the new vaccine already I have read that this could lead to further immune escape. So hopefully omicron will in the next month generate sufficient immunity that they do not roll it out.

I think that the high infectivity with Omicron, and the fact that the vaccines reduce but do not prevent transmission, true herd immunity will be very hard to reach. I'd rather talk about high population immunity rather than herd immunity as the latter has a specific meaning which is different as I understand it.

Possibly, yes.

[Aruntraveller]

Spud. You brought up children earlier. They are dying from Covid at a rate of 2 or 3 a week. Many more are suffering from Covid and its long-term implications.

https://bjgplife.com/our-children-are-sitting-ducks/

 There is still so much that is unknown.

Your argument seems to be to let this disease go unchecked as you have fallen for the "it's a milder version" fallacy.

Do you really think it is wise to just allow this disease to progress unchecked?

[Spud]

Spud. You brought up children earlier.

Yes: Because they are less susceptible to severe disease than adults. But as the virus becomes more infectious they will suffer increasingly severe illness, yes.

They are dying from Covid at a rate of 2 or 3 a week. Many more are suffering from Covid and its long-term implications.

https://bjgplife.com/our-children-are-sitting-ducks/

 There is still so much that is unknown.

Your argument seems to be to let this disease go unchecked as you have fallen for the "it's a milder version" fallacy.

Do you really think it is wise to just allow this disease to progress unchecked?

Denmark has ended all restrictions, I think? The problem now is that the current vaccines do not block omicron's entry into the cell because it uses a different entry method. So for now, it's a matter of avoiding severe illness using early outpatient therapeutic intervention - the moment a person becomes ill.

[Spud]

A good presentation by Dr Philip McMillan on breakthrough infections:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-ZzEf_ITys&t=2259s
The first 40 minutes, particularly at 30-39 minutes.

[Aruntraveller]

Denmark has ended all restrictions, I think?

And??

If someone walked off the end of a pier would you follow them?

Vaccination is one way of avoiding severe illness, even with it being less effective against Omicron.

[Outrider]

The problem now is that the current vaccines do not block omicron's entry into the cell because it uses a different entry method.

Not quite, as I understand it. The method is the same, the body's ability to identify Omicron and isolate and attack it is based on the individual's response to the vaccine, and some people's response is not adequately tailored, so the vaccine is effective in a smaller number of cases. It's still fairly effective compared to no vaccination at all, and the other variants against which the vacccines are even more effective are still out there.

So for now, it's a matter of avoiding severe illness using early outpatient therapeutic intervention - the moment a person becomes ill.

No, now it's a case of balancing common sense preventive measures, including but not limited to vaccinations and some degree of restrictions on movement, mingling, and other measures like mask-wearing, against the ongoing effects of those measures, like social isolation for the vulnerable, economic problems (and their associated health and wellbeing implications) etc.

O.

[Maeght]

The problem now is that the current vaccines do not block omicron's entry into the cell because it uses a different entry method.

The antibodies block the virus spike protein from attaching to the ACE2  receptors. From what I've read, Omicron still needs to attach to ACE2 receptors but unlike earlier variants it favours a different method of cell entry (Endocytosis) but the reduced vaccine protection is to do with the changes in the virus spike protein rather than the method of entering cells. The different entry method does mean it is more infectious (as it doesn't require the presence of the TMPR552 protease), more of an upper respiratory disease (for the same reason) and does less damage to lungs (less bunching of infected cells - syncytia).

[Spud]

And??

If someone walked off the end of a pier would you follow them?

Vaccination is one way of avoiding severe illness, even with it being less effective against Omicron.

They have a high vaccination level and are doing children, they've fully jabbed 31% of 5-11 year-olds.
Dr John Campbell, who I follow a bit on YouTube, thinks that we can't avoid exposure to Omicron, despite restrictions. So he thinks Denmark are doing the right thing.

[Aruntraveller]

They have a high vaccination level and are doing children, they've fully jabbed 31% of 5-11 year-olds.
Dr John Campbell, who I follow a bit on YouTube, thinks that we can't avoid exposure to Omicron, despite restrictions. So he thinks Denmark are doing the right thing.

There you are then. Vaccination works.