Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo · May 15, 2021

crodonilson said:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/sage-89-minutes-coronavirus-covid-19-response-13-may-2021

No it's very much SAGE itself, I draw you to point 9 of the SAGE minutes from the emergency meeting on Thursday where they suggest with high confidence even with only the next stage going ahead in Monday it will lead to at least the number of hospitalisations from the January peak and possibly more. We need to protect our NHS.

They don’t suggest with confidence at all, the very first word of point 9 is IF. They don’t know with certainty what will happen but merely saying what may happen if certain things about this variant are true.

It’s amazing how quiet you’ve been on this thread over the last couple of months when your predicted raises in infections when schools reopened etc didn’t happen, but have jumped all over the latest bit of potential bad news with glee as you seem to love the doomsday scenarios being painted by Sage and the modellers.

Albion Dan · May 15, 2021

crodonilson said:
The many hundreds of thousands of vulnerable unvaccinated people and then amongst the cacinated vulnerable people, not to mention the young people who are yet to be vaccinated.

How are there hundreds of thousands of vulnerable unvaccinated people? All vulnerable people were at the front of the vaccine queue. Young people don’t die from covid and very very very rarely need to go to hospital

With the vaccine numbers and all elderly and vulnerable having been offered the vaccine now as well as the vast majority of all age groups that really have any covid complications I just can’t fathom how there is any justification for not finally getting on with life.

crodonilson · May 15, 2021

Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo said:
They don’t suggest with confidence at all, the very first word of point 9 is IF. They don’t know with certainty what will happen but merely saying what may happen if certain things about this variant are true.

It’s amazing how quiet you’ve been on this thread over the last couple of months when your predicted raises in infections when schools reopened etc didn’t happen, but have jumped all over the latest bit of potential bad news with glee as you seem to love the doomsday scenarios being painted by Sage and the modellers.

I'd love my old life back, pre 2020, but that's not happening for a long time yet, I can't believe people are willing to risk all of the hard work since January to release prematurely from restrictions and put everything at risk. Of course SAGE out 'if' nobody exactly knows but if it wasn't a reasonable assumption I doubt it would make the minutes and early indications are that it could be as much as 60% more transmit (and sage made very prudent assumptions in just 40% more transmissibility).

atomised · May 15, 2021

Albion Dan said:
How are there hundreds of thousands of vulnerable unvaccinated people? All vulnerable people were at the front of the vaccine queue. Young people don’t die from covid and very very very rarely need to go to hospital

With the vaccine numbers and all elderly and vulnerable having been offered the vaccine now as well as the vast majority of all age groups that really have any covid complications I just can’t fathom how there is any justification for not finally getting on with life.

The latest ONS figures I could find suggested over 80% of 50 plus age group showing antibodies rising to in excess of 90% in the oldest age groups. I really struggle to see where these huge numbers will come from

crodonilson · May 15, 2021

dsr-burnley said:
These are the idiots on SAGE last March.

Patrick Vallance (GCSA)
Chris Whitty (CMO)
Andrew Rambaut (Edinburgh)
Angela McLean (CSA MOD)
Brooke Rogers (King’s College London)
Carole Mundell (CSA FCO)
Charlotte Watts (CSA DfID)
David Halpern (CO)
Graham Medley (LSHTM)
James Rubin (King’s College London)
Jeremy Farrar (Wellcome)
John Aston (CSA HO)
John Edmunds (LSHTM)
Jonathan Van Tam (Deputy CMO)
Maria Zambon (PHE)
Neil Ferguson (Imperial)
Osama Rahman (CSA DfE)
Peter Horby (Oxford)
Russell Viner (UCL)
Sharon Peacock (PHE)
Steve Powis (NHS)

And these are the idiots on SAGE this week

Scientific experts (39): Patrick Vallance (GCSA), Chris Whitty (CMO), Adam Kucharski
(LSHTM), Andrew Rambaut (Edinburgh), Angela McLean (MoD, CSA), Calum Semple
(Liverpool), Catherine Noakes (Leeds), Charlotte Watts (FCDO), Fliss Bennee (Welsh
Government), Graham Medley (LSHTM), Gregor Smith (Scottish Government, CMO), Harry
Rutter (Bath), Ian Boyd, Ian Diamond (ONS), Ian Young (Northern Ireland, CSA),
Jeanelle de Gruchy (ADPH), Jenny Harries (UKHSA), Jeremy Farrar (Wellcome), Julia Gog
(Cambridge), John Edmunds (LSHTM), Jonathan Van Tam (dCMO),
Kamlesh Khunti (Leicester), Linda Partridge (Royal Society), Maria Zambon (PHE),
Mark Walport, Mark Wilcox (Leeds), Meera Chand (PHE), Michael Parker (Oxford), Paul
Kellam (Imperial), Peter Horby (Oxford), Ravindra Gupta (Cambridge), Rob Orford (Welsh
Government, CSA), Sharon Peacock (PHE), Sheila Rowan (Scottish Government, CSA),
Steve Powis (NHS England), Susan Hopkins (PHE/NHST&T), Wei Shen Lim (Nottingham),
Wendy Barclay (Imperial), and Yvonne Doyle (PHE).

13 of the idiots from last March (including Whitty, Vallance and Van Tam) are still there. So if you want to call people idiots for wanting Cheltenham to go ahead, then you are calling SAGE idiots. And if you are calling SAGE idiots, then you can't really call them the wisest group in Christendom.

Absolute baloney, how much evidence was there to go on last February?? The Chinese pretty much kept it under wraps until the end of January. There were *some* idiots within SAGE who thought herd immunity was the answer, thankfully they quickly changed their mind on mounting evidence.

Let's be honest, you are anti lockdown last March, anti lockdown in November, anti lockdown in January, let's be honest if your input was of any use the death toll would have been significantly higher.

atomised · May 15, 2021

crodonilson said:
I'd love my old life back, pre 2020, but that's not happening for a long time yet, I can't believe people are willing to risk all of the hard work since January to release prematurely from restrictions and put everything at risk. Of course SAGE out 'if' nobody exactly knows but if it wasn't a reasonable assumption I doubt it would make the minutes and early indications are that it could be as much as 60% more transmit (and sage made very prudent assumptions in just 40% more transmissibility).

If it was discussed it would make the minutes whether it is a feasible scenario or not. That's the idea of minutes. To show all that has been discussed. If they left something out no matter how far fetched and it came to fruition then they would face real problems

crodonilson · May 15, 2021

atomised said:
The latest ONS figures I could find suggested over 80% of 50 plus age group showing antibodies rising to in excess of 90% in the oldest age groups. I really struggle to see where these huge numbers will come from

16 million over 60s in the UK, most recent data suggest nearly 90% have some antibodies, still leaves over 1 and a half million people vulnerable to a more transmissible virus as we open them up to all sorts of risks indoors.

crodonilson · May 15, 2021

Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo said:
They don’t suggest with confidence at all, the very first word of point 9 is IF. They don’t know with certainty what will happen but merely saying what may happen if certain things about this variant are true.

It’s amazing how quiet you’ve been on this thread over the last couple of months when your predicted raises in infections when schools reopened etc didn’t happen, but have jumped all over the latest bit of potential bad news with glee as you seem to love the doomsday scenarios being painted by Sage and the modellers.

Perhaps you should have read minute 6 first then which suggests it is highly likely that the new variant is 50% more contagious and then made additions in point 9 on only 40% more contagious.

dsr-burnley · May 15, 2021

crodonilson said:
Absolute baloney, how much evidence was there to go on last February?? The Chinese pretty much kept it under wraps until the end of January. There were *some* idiots within SAGE who thought herd immunity was the answer, thankfully they quickly changed their mind on mounting evidence.

Let's be honest, you are anti lockdown last March, anti lockdown in November, anti lockdown in January, let's be honest if your input was of any use the death toll would have been significantly higher.

As ever, you are totally missing the point.

This is the point. You said that I was an idiot for wanting the Cheltenham Festival to go ahead. I have provided proof that the SAGE team headed by Vallance also wanted the Cheltenham Festival to go ahead. Either we are both idiots, or neither - but if we are both idiots, Vallance is the bigger idiot because he had what scientific evidence there was, at his disposal.

crodonilson · May 15, 2021

dsr-burnley said:
As ever, you are totally missing the point.

This is the point. You said that I was an idiot for wanting the Cheltenham Festival to go ahead. I have provided proof that the SAGE team headed by Vallance also wanted the Cheltenham Festival to go ahead. Either we are both idiots, or neither - but if we are both idiots, Vallance is the bigger idiot because he had what scientific evidence there was, at his disposal.

Twisting of facts, I don't think you've proved SAGE ever *wanted* Cheltenham to go ahead, bit unfortunately they didn't present an argument for its postponement until the Thursday of the festival by which point the government said **** it we'll carry on anyway. All of which is a sidestep to the question I asked of you and your anti lockdown mantra all the way through this pandemic and the point that SAGE have since the sorry saga back on Spring last year got their act together and we should heed their advice now as we should have done last autumn and winter.

dsr-burnley · May 15, 2021

crodonilson said:
16 million over 60s in the UK, most recent data suggest nearly 90% have some antibodies, still leaves over 1 and a half million people vulnerable to a more transmissible virus as we open them up to all sorts of risks indoors.

The highest number of hospitalisations in the 65+ age group in January was about 150 per 100,000 people in week ending 22nd January. 1.5m x 150 per 100,000 = 2,250 hospitalisations.
The highest number of hospitalisations in the 15-44 age group in January, the same week, was 11 per 100,000. There will be about 10m of them unvaccinated when we get to July - 10m x 11 per 100,000 = 1,100 hospitalisations.

That means that if every week in July is as bad as the worst week in January, we would get 3,350 hospitalisations from your "target audience". This is per week. And yet Warwick have set a target of 10,000 per day. 70,000 per week. They are expecting the overall total in July may be two and a half times as bad as in January even though it is summer and most of us have been vaccinated in whole or in part. It is not credible.

70,000 people is 5% of your vulnerable number. It is not credible to suggest that 5% of the nationwide vulnerable people will all catch the disease badly enough to go to hospital, all in the same week.
70,000 people is 0.7% of the healthy young unvaccinated. It is equally not credible to suggest that 0.7% of the healty young unvaccinated will catch the disease badly enough to go to hospital when the worst ration in January was 0.01%.

Any combination of the two is still impossible based on what we currently know of the virus.

dsr-burnley · May 15, 2021

crodonilson said:
Twisting of facts, I don't think you've proved SAGE ever *wanted* Cheltenham to go ahead, bit unfortunately they didn't present an argument for its postponement until the Thursday of the festival by which point the government said **** it we'll carry on anyway.

If SAGE presented an argument against the Cheltenham Festival on Thursday 12th March 2020 (which surprises me because they didn't meet that day) then please provide a link. As for whether SAGE wanted the Festival to go ahead, I have no idea - I don't know how many of their members are racing fans. But their official advice at the time the Festival started was that there was no evidence that open air events spread the virus, and their official advice at the time the last day started was that public gatherings made relatively little difference to the spread, and so railing at the government for not closing down the Festival is futile.

darkwolf666 · May 15, 2021

dsr-burnley said:
If SAGE presented an argument against the Cheltenham Festival on Thursday 12th March 2020 (which surprises me because they didn't meet that day) then please provide a link. As for whether SAGE wanted the Festival to go ahead, I have no idea - I don't know how many of their members are racing fans. But their official advice at the time the Festival started was that there was no evidence that open air events spread the virus, and their official advice at the time the last day started was that public gatherings made relatively little difference to the spread, and so railing at the government for not closing down the Festival is futile.

Matt Hancock is MP for Newmarket, site of the Jockey Club and flat horse-racing’s HQ and received substantial political donations from those linked to horse-racing - just saying!

Blue Valkyrie · May 15, 2021

I suppose if you are 10 times more likely to survive if you are vaccinated, but 20 times more likely to catch a new variant then you are twice at risk of death ?

That is the only way I can see a bigger wave.

But that makes no allowance for the summer season factor so these warnings of doom seem to make little sense. If it was winter now I'd believe them more.

They might as well say "if a completely new deadly non-covid virus emerges next week we are stuffed". Have some more funding, Sherlock.

Kinky Gerbil · May 15, 2021

beorhthelm said:
yep, and with effects of virus not hospitalising the small % that still fall to the disease, case numbers are pretty irrelevant. we're into realms of academics fishing for research funding.

IF this newest model turns out the way of the others they have published - can we just ignore them moving forward and cut funding?

dazzer6666 · May 15, 2021

crodonilson said:
The many hundreds of thousands of vulnerable unvaccinated people and then amongst the cacinated vulnerable people, not to mention the young people who are yet to be vaccinated.

The vast majority of those likely to get seriously ill have been vaccinated, and evidence currently and very strongly suggests the vaccine is effective against all variants, at least in preventing death and hospitalisation. Really struggling to understand what cohort of the population is going to end up in hospital in such numbers.

Anyone who is vulnerable and unvaccinated needs to take some responsibility for their own safety, not expect 95% of the population to stay locked down to protect a small minority.

Modelling is what it is - essentially predicting a range of scenarios which will include both extremes. Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.

atomised · May 15, 2021

dazzer6666 said:
The vast majority of those likely to get seriously ill have been vaccinated, and evidence currently and very strongly suggests the vaccine is effective against all variants, at least in preventing death and hospitalisation. Really struggling to understand what cohort of the population is going to end up in hospital in such numbers.

Anyone who is vulnerable and unvaccinated needs to take some responsibility for their own safety, not expect 95% of the population to stay locked down to protect a small minority.

Modelling is what it is - essentially predicting a range of scenarios which will include both extremes. Doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.

Unfortunately that's it in a nutshell. Modelling will always include the extremes and in terms of the media it is those extremes that sell units and in terms of those who worry about such things they seem to thrive on those extremes to fuel their panic

Eggman · May 15, 2021

atomised said:
Unfortunately that's it in a nutshell. Modelling will always include the extremes and in terms of the media it is those extremes that sell units and in terms of those who worry about such things they seem to thrive on those extremes to fuel their panic

Yes.

This.

darkwolf666 · May 15, 2021

atomised said:
Unfortunately that's it in a nutshell. Modelling will always include the extremes and in terms of the media it is those extremes that sell units and in terms of those who worry about such things they seem to thrive on those extremes to fuel their panic

100% this. I have tried to convince my wife to stay away from Facebook, newsfeeds and even the TV news, as they all have an agenda of sensationalism to gain audience points.

Unfortunately this style of modelling and reporting of it scares those who are extremely vulnerable, and don’t know how well the vaccine will work, shitless... they really should give some balance to the reporting!

Kinky Gerbil · May 15, 2021

Politics For All
@PoliticsForAlI
Police cars revolving light | NEW: The majority of patients recently admitted to Bolton Hospital with coronavirus were eligible for the vaccine, but hadn’t had one

Via
@Independent

If true, we shouldn’t slow down anything for this

Edit: I realise some can’t take it on medical grounds

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

Waxing chumps like candles since ‘75

Banned

He/Him

Well-known member

He/Him

Well-known member

He/Him

He/Him

Well-known member

He/Him

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Not seen such Bravery!

Im The Scatman

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Im The Scatman

Share this page