[Albion] Covid Passports *may* allow return to full Premier League crowds

[Wardy's twin]

Protecting who? People that have already had the vaccine?

Do you also want flu vaccines for under 50’s and have them on your vaccine passport as a requirement to get into a football ground?

Let's not compare flu and COVID , COVID has killed 150k people in this country in just over a year. I agree that COVID might not have been the only cause of death but it certainly brought forward the deaths of many many people. If you use the counter argument the people would have died anyway then why not scrap the NHS as its purpose is to nurse sick people. Indeed why not scrap any rules that protect the weaker groups .

Just to make it clear, 2 Jabs of the vaccine does not eliminate you from catching COVID though the vaccine should reduce the chance and/or severity of you getting it but there is no guarantee of either. The more people who have the jab the greater the protection for the wider society. Its this principle which help reduce TB, POLIO etc to very small numbers .

If you had COVID there is no guarantee you have developed anti-bodies, i know a number of people in this scenario because there were active tests done around part of the NHS.

People who have no or weak immune systems e.g. people receiving Chemotherapy are still exposed as are other people with various underlying health conditions because the virus puts a strain on our organs e.g. heart, kidneys or liver.

Going back to FLU and people using the argument that it kills and we don't do much about it , well perhaps they should be thinking have what we learnt from the pandemic that we can use to reduce FLU deaths e.g. more vaccinations, masks and had washing.

 

[e77]

All I am saying is that comparisons with flu are valid. Especially in the context of assessing the degree of lockdown thought necessary for covid compared with the degree of lockdown thought necessary for flu.

If you prefer, I could look at the last 12 weeks since 17th April when flu and pneumonia have been the primary cause of 3,157 deaths and covid has been the primary cause of 1,166 deaths. It's a comparison, that's all. Some people appear to be of the belief that just because covid is a different disease from flu, then comparisons between the two are no more relevant than comparisons between covid and ingrowing toenails. Not true - in some respects comparisons are valuable, in other respects they aren't.

Be careful what you wish for. I suspect there will at least be some societal pressure to wear face masks during flu seasons over the next few years and getting on a bus or train with a sneeze or cough will be shunned.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

So you admit that passing flu around leads to killing people, but because it’s less risky, you don’t need to worry about it?

You also know that the average age of Covid deaths is 83.3 years old. Is that so much lower than flu?

Says here that flu added 50,000 extra deaths, no? So, why didn’t we have restrictions then?

Flu: The World Health Organization estimates that 290,000 to 650,000 people die of flu-related causes every year worldwide.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www..../coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu?amp=true

Estimated yearly deaths from Covid are 3 million.

https://www.who.int/data/stories/the-true-death-toll-of-covid-19-estimating-global-excess-mortality

Quite easy to find if you bother looking. There is no comparison to be had. Covid is a lot more transmissible. Also, Covid has killed all of these people despite social contact being much reduced by lockdown. Imagine how much worse the numbers would be if we were all going around infecting each other. So a more pertinent question is why are you making such a false comparison ?
As to the problem you raised about the terminology. Covid 19 is a type of Coronavirus. Once classified as such the more precise label went into general use. It really shouldn’t cause you any stress.

 

[Wardy's twin]

It looks like the risks of Covid for people who have been vaccinated may be lower than the risks with flu. Certainly flu and pneumonia combined are killing more people than covid at present, up to 9th July anyway (later figures are not yet available).

Deaths from Covid in week ended 9th July = 183, with 147 where it's marked as the underlying cause. Deaths from flu and pneumonia in week ended 9th July = 1,166, with 254 as underlying cause. And flu and pneumonia aren't at a high point in a very virulent wave, and the majority of the covid deaths are of people who aren't vaccinated.

So it is a valid comparison, one way or another, to compare vaccine-era covid with flu.

Turn it around 180 degrees, maybe we should be doing more to stop FLU deaths....Masks, more vaccinations and better hygiene. Might be interesting to see how many of the flu/pneumonia deaths were driven by long covid.

 

[BeHereNow]

Well, on that basis I am very pleased that our paths are very unlikely to cross in those situations where proof of vaccination will be required - be that at the football, a foreign holiday destination or wherever else it becomes necessary.

Not because I am concerned you might give me Covid but because frankly you sound like a bit of a dick.

Well, considering it’s not necessary anywhere, good luck with that.

 

[dazzer6666]

Yes sorry your quite right,false negative would be a chink in the security as it means infected people would be in the ground/nightclub.
False positives could mean healthy people being not allowed to go and also healthy vaccinated people not to go which would be a bit ridiculous.

And yes I agree I think it will all need to come together on a digital platform but it's also worth mentioning that one of the issues in Israel with the green pass was hacking or false passes being sold and uploaded on the dark web.
It was a small issue and certainly more difficult than obtaining paper ones but still was an issue none the less.
And yes I agree,I wonder if it could be something along the lines of vaccine evidence before uploading.
The fact the premier seem to have decided to design there own passport makes me think they wanted something custom made specifically for football with regards to ticketing and turnstiles maybe.
I think things will start to become clearer as the digital STs start to be sent to peoples emails.

The longer-term (but as yet unannounced) plan has to be to do away with all of this as soon as we complete the vacc programme as far as we can and assuming the NHS is coping comfortably………whatever is being done will only be for the short-term (unless the virus resurges, in which case we’re back to square one). We won’t NEED the checks if 90% are jabbed and the vaccine remains effective

 

[dazzer6666]

Turn it around 180 degrees, maybe we should be doing more to stop FLU deaths....Masks, more vaccinations and better hygiene. Might be interesting to see how many of the flu/pneumonia deaths were driven by long covid.

We have been for the last 18 months so the stats should bear that out…….also, I suspect at least better hygiene and less close contact is here to stay.

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

The longer-term (but as yet unannounced) plan has to be to do away with all of this as soon as we complete the vacc programme as far as we can and assuming the NHS is coping comfortably………whatever is being done will only be for the short-term (unless the virus resurges, in which case we’re back to square one). We won’t NEED the checks if 90% are jabbed and the vaccine remains effective

Yes I agree with that.
That's why I'm wondering if vaccine passports are the way to go rather than mass testing to.
1.bring the crisis to a swifter end.
2.enable football and nightclubs to carry on if cases do get high.
I think if it was put in law that the passports would be a temporary measure then maybe it wouldn't get as much resistance.

My worry is without vaccine passports and a reliance on testing then we will.
1.see more cases due to the increase in testing and isolation will increase.And those isolated may be vaccinated and therefore less risk to the NHS.
2.prolong the crisis because the virus may have too many avenues to escape down due to false negatives and also large groups of people traveling to and from venue's where the venue may be safe but the travelling to and from may not be so.
That's why I'm trying to understand why kier starmer has opposed it with testing rather than passports.

But I see what you are saying,it shouldn't make any difference if everyone gets the jab.
But I am interested in the 90percent number.
Where do they get that figure from as a target percentage to make everything safe?

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

I read about this recently, but I'm no expert.

All diseases have a Herd Immunity Threshold (HIT) which is determined by the R0 number of the disease (basic reproduction number - people an infected person is expected to infect).

Some examples include:

Measles - R0 12-18, HIT 92%-94%

Common flu - R0 1.3, HIT 23%

Covid Alpha variant - R0 4-5, HIT 58%-70%

....and

Covid Delta variant - R0 5-8, HIT 80%-88%.

... which is where this 90% figure comes from.

That's brilliant,thanks very much.
That also explains why we only vaccinate a small percentage of the population for flu and also why we are now looking to vaccinate young folk when we were not before,because the new delta variant requires a higher percentage.
I remember somebody saying that they couldn't know for sure what the percentage of vaccinations would be needed for covid but if they are working it out by RO then that makes sense and then add a couple of percent more on just to make sure.
So it does look like the quicker we get to 90 percent jabbed then the quicker this will all be over and also we won't need to give the kids the vaccine too hopefully.
Thanks for posting this.

 

[dazzer6666]

Yes I agree with that.
That's why I'm wondering if vaccine passports are the way to go rather than mass testing to.
1.bring the crisis to a swifter end.
2.enable football and nightclubs to carry on if cases do get high.
I think if it was put in law that the passports would be a temporary measure then maybe it wouldn't get as much resistance.

My worry is without vaccine passports and a reliance on testing then we will.
1.see more cases due to the increase in testing and isolation will increase.And those isolated may be vaccinated and therefore less risk to the NHS.
2.prolong the crisis because the virus may have too many avenues to escape down due to false negatives and also large groups of people traveling to and from venue's where the venue may be safe but the travelling to and from may not be so.
That's why I'm trying to understand why kier starmer has opposed it with testing rather than passports.

But I see what you are saying,it shouldn't make any difference if everyone gets the jab.
But I am interested in the 90percent number.
Where do they get that figure from as a target percentage to make everything safe?

First jabs seem to be stalling now in the high 80s, so 90% seems a reasonable expectation……..

We’ll muddle through until the end of September with constantly changing and mostly daft (and utterly unreliable) passport and negative test checks that cause chaos before binning it all off.

Case numbers need to be mostly ignored now really (or very soon……assuming they fall over the next 2-3 weeks) - they are so dependent on the number of tests being done. We need to focus on hospitalisations and deaths - if they are under control then we crack on safe in the knowledge that 90% of people+ won’t get seriously ill anyway even if they do catch it.

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

So you admit that passing flu around leads to killing people, but because it’s less risky, you don’t need to worry about it?

congratulations, you've demonstrated a basic awareness of the idea that different risks can be handled in different ways.

Next week's lesson is titled "Going swimming off Redcar, will I need a shark cage?". See you there!

You also know that the average age of Covid deaths is 83.3 years old. Is that so much lower than flu?

As you're clearly not interested in anything that disagrees with you, I'm not going to bother sifting through reams of data to check relative mortalities in different age groups due to Covid and different flu strains to give a worthwhile answer. But notwithstanding that, are you suggesting that old people's lives are worthless?

Says here that flu added 50,000 extra deaths, no? So, why didn’t we have restrictions then?

You've literally written a random number with no source

To be honest, I'd be more worried about how you got that big scar in the middle of your forehead.

 

[BeHereNow]

Let's not compare flu and COVID , COVID has killed 150k people in this country in just over a year. I agree that COVID might not have been the only cause of death but it certainly brought forward the deaths of many many people. If you use the counter argument the people would have died anyway then why not scrap the NHS as its purpose is to nurse sick people. Indeed why not scrap any rules that protect the weaker groups .

Just to make it clear, 2 Jabs of the vaccine does not eliminate you from catching COVID though the vaccine should reduce the chance and/or severity of you getting it but there is no guarantee of either. The more people who have the jab the greater the protection for the wider society. Its this principle which help reduce TB, POLIO etc to very small numbers .

If you had COVID there is no guarantee you have developed anti-bodies, i know a number of people in this scenario because there were active tests done around part of the NHS.

People who have no or weak immune systems e.g. people receiving Chemotherapy are still exposed as are other people with various underlying health conditions because the virus puts a strain on our organs e.g. heart, kidneys or liver.

Going back to FLU and people using the argument that it kills and we don't do much about it , well perhaps they should be thinking have what we learnt from the pandemic that we can use to reduce FLU deaths e.g. more vaccinations, masks and had washing.

I agree with most you’ve said, apart from the 150,000 figure. We were told that to judge the severity of the virus, we had to go by how many excess deaths there were. I just wish we had a proper figure of how many people died of Covid, rather than ‘This person was dying, they just happened to have Covid, and it might have been that that dealt the final blow rather than flu or pneumonia’. I think it would clear up a lot of the confusion and conflict. For example, maybe you can explain to why Covid and coronavirus have become interchangeable?

I get what you’re saying about the people with the weak immune systems, my sister is immunocompromised, but what I don’t understand is that people like her could just so easily be taken as ill with the flu, yet no one seems to care about that, for example not everyone should get the flu jab yet are told they should get the Covid jab.

Your last point though, I don’t think we should be living in a hypochondriacs world, we never have done. Sure, people should be washing their hands alot more when it’s flu season and shouldn’t be going out if they are ill, I totally agree with that, but to go around assuming that one (and everyone else) has a virus is a bit crazy, we don’t work on the Butterfly Effect, if we want to carry on with that train of thought then we all might aswell go around in bio secure suits. Wasn’t it only a month or so ago that more people were dying of pneumonia than of Covid? Might have got that wrong.

Am I also right in remembering that most people with Covid in hospital recently actually caught it in hospital rather than going in there because of the virus?

You seem civil, unlike the others. Thanks for the conversation

 

[Sid in the Sharknado]

All I am saying is that comparisons with flu are valid. Especially in the context of assessing the degree of lockdown thought necessary for covid compared with the degree of lockdown thought necessary for flu.

If you prefer, I could look at the last 12 weeks since 17th April when flu and pneumonia have been the primary cause of 3,157 deaths and covid has been the primary cause of 1,166 deaths. It's a comparison, that's all. Some people appear to be of the belief that just because covid is a different disease from flu, then comparisons between the two are no more relevant than comparisons between covid and ingrowing toenails. Not true - in some respects comparisons are valuable, in other respects they aren't.

Comparisons are valid, up to a point and with a proper basis. As I wrote previously, just looking at the headline mortality figures over a given period doesn't tell us much.

Once the vaccination programme is "complete" (people will presumably continue to be given booster jabs) I hope and expect the restrictions can all be lifted.

As somebody else on here pointed out though, this line of argument is far more likely to lead to continued restrictions to reduce the prevelance of flu, than it is a speedier removal of the remaining covid restrictions.

 

[Wardy's twin]

We have been for the last 18 months so the stats should bear that out…….also, I suspect at least better hygiene and less close contact is here to stay.

agree but that has been as a byproduct rather than original thinking . What I was trying to say is the approach that we didn't do that for Flu why should we do it for Covid is wrong. Hopefully going forward Flu won't be such a killer.

 

[BeHereNow]

Flu: The World Health Organization estimates that 290,000 to 650,000 people die of flu-related causes every year worldwide.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www..../coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu?amp=true

Estimated yearly deaths from Covid are 3 million.

https://www.who.int/data/stories/the-true-death-toll-of-covid-19-estimating-global-excess-mortality

Quite easy to find if you bother looking. There is no comparison to be had. Covid is a lot more transmissible. Also, Covid has killed all of these people despite social contact being much reduced by lockdown. Imagine how much worse the numbers would be if we were all going around infecting each other. So a more pertinent question is why are you making such a false comparison ?
As to the problem you raised about the terminology. Covid 19 is a type of Coronavirus. Once classified as such the more precise label went into general use. It really shouldn’t cause you any stress.

Well, no, because there is no evidence that lockdowns work, hence why Sweden, Texas and Florida faired pretty similarly to the lockdown places.

The comparison with flu comes in because it is a killer virus, simple as. Covid may very well be somewhat more deadly, but not to the extent that the restrictions were needed IMO. If it’s as bad as you say it is, shouldn’t we have 150,000+ excess deaths over the last 18 months? Is that the case?

 

[Pint of Ale and a Burger]

First jabs seem to be stalling now in the high 80s, so 90% seems a reasonable expectation……..

We’ll muddle through until the end of September with constantly changing and mostly daft (and utterly unreliable) passport and negative test checks that cause chaos before binning it all off.

Case numbers need to be mostly ignored now really (or very soon……assuming they fall over the next 2-3 weeks) - they are so dependent on the number of tests being done. We need to focus on hospitalisations and deaths - if they are under control then we crack on safe in the knowledge that 90% of people+ won’t get seriously ill anyway even if they do catch it.

Yes that makes sense.
I suppose they will have to balance case numbers with percentage of vaccinated which will give them a good idea of what numbers to expect in the hospitals and manage the risks from there.

I suppose in that respect I can see the benefits of negative tests in the short term and why kier starmer has taken that approach rather than get bogged down long term in a digital passport scheme that isn't very popular.

Hopefully you are right and when you put it like that it does look maybe we could get through this and see a decent amount of footy too but with maybe a slightly unusual process to get used to at
The start of the season.

 

[drew]

I agree with most you’ve said, apart from the 150,000 figure. We were told that to judge the severity of the virus, we had to go by how many excess deaths there were. I just wish we had a proper figure of how many people died of Covid, rather than ‘This person was dying, they just happened to have Covid, and it might have been that that dealt the final blow rather than flu or pneumonia’. I think it would clear up a lot of the confusion and conflict. For example, maybe you can explain to why Covid and coronavirus have become interchangeable?

I get what you’re saying about the people with the weak immune systems, my sister is immunocompromised, but what I don’t understand is that people like her could just so easily be taken as ill with the flu, yet no one seems to care about that, for example not everyone should get the flu jab yet are told they should get the Covid jab.

And how would it be possible to get an exact figure that would satisfy you? I would suggest that everyone that died would have had to have had an autopsy to determine whether they died of covid, covid exacerbated an existing condition and accelerated their death or that they had a positive test but that had no bearing on the death. It wouldn't just be people you suspected of dying linked to covid, it would be every death. That's never going to happen. There were 608k deaths in 2020 so that would be 1666 post mortems per day! In 2019, they performed only 224 per day!!!

The alternative is for the attending doctor to make an assessment based on what they know of the symptoms. Easier in hospital but unless a GP has attended a patient at home before their death, they will need to rely on a description of symptoms by those that knew them.

As for your second point, Covid is more virulent that the flu and the consequences can be far more serious. I've yet to hear of anyone suffering from 'long flu' for example. I'm guessing your sister is offered the flu jab every year so to say people don't care about that is being disingenuous. But I'm guessing there is no amount of evidence that would change your view.

 

[drew]

Well, no, because there is no evidence that lockdowns work, hence why Sweden, Texas and Florida faired pretty similarly to the lockdown places.

The comparison with flu comes in because it is a killer virus, simple as. Covid may very well be somewhat more deadly, but not to the extent that the restrictions were needed IMO. If it’s as bad as you say it is, shouldn’t we have 150,000+ excess deaths over the last 18 months? Is that the case?

So covid 'may' be more deadly! Are you for real? Covid is clearly more deadly than flu by a very long way, this being borne out by the statistics!

As for lockdowns, the reason, as has been stated on numerous occasions, is to prevent the spread as much as possible in order that the health service is not so overwhelmed that they have to turn patients away. Look at the recent scenes in India were their health provision failed and people were struggling to even get oxygen supplies!! But I guess you're in the camp that there was nothing wrong with the NHS as they didn't even need to use the Nightingale Hospitals (the real reason of course being that there was one to staff them anyway!)

 

[BeHereNow]

congratulations, you've demonstrated a basic awareness of the idea that different risks can be handled in different ways.

Next week's lesson is titled "Going swimming off Redcar, will I need a shark cage?". See you there!



As you're clearly not interested in anything that disagrees with you, I'm not going to bother sifting through reams of data to check relative mortalities in different age groups due to Covid and different flu strains to give a worthwhile answer. But notwithstanding that, are you suggesting that old people's lives are worthless?



You've literally written a random number with no source

To be honest, I'd be more worried about how you got that big scar in the middle of your forehead.

Forgot to add the link:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...crisis-bad-weather-illness-2017-a8660496.html

Ahh, so you are ok with inadvertently causing deaths, as long as the risk is slightly lower

Not sure where you got the ‘old people’s lives are worthless’ bit from. If you used you brain, you would see that I merely pointed out that the average age of flu and Covid deaths (or Coronavirus, we’re not sure, because not every Coronavirus is Covid) are pretty similar.

 

[PeterOut]

Well, no, because there is no evidence that lockdowns work, hence why Sweden, Texas and Florida faired pretty similarly to the lockdown places.

The comparison with flu comes in because it is a killer virus, simple as. Covid may very well be somewhat more deadly, but not to the extent that the restrictions were needed IMO. If it’s as bad as you say it is, shouldn’t we have 150,000+ excess deaths over the last 18 months? Is that the case?

If only you could do a little of your own research, and step outside of your echo chamber.

The UK has suffered almost 120K excess deaths (about a 17% increase). I belive that the gap between 120 and 150K is (largely) explained by a significant reduction in flu deaths during the first 9 months (lockdowm social distancing, etc).

Sweden has suffered over 11k excess deaths (about 12% increase).

See https://www.ft.com/content/a2901ce8-5eb7-4633-b89c-cbdf5b386938 and https://ourworldindata.org/excess-mortality-covid (and plenty of other similar, fact-based analysis sites)