EPTCoronavirus and You - Page 392
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control. It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you. Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly. This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here. Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On June 17 2021 00:03 xM(Z wrote: - of course the reason matters because it takes away the holier than thou attitude from you. when you do it for yourself, you're just as egotistical as the one who doesn't want to get vaccinated. - you don't seem to know what kind of "disease" covid is. -that wasn't about herd immunity but about personal immunity; that % chance for the vaccine to work, is the chance that you'll get immunized. 40% is the chance to be vaccinated and have no immunity what so ever. - we have EU based covid certificates; it includes the people who had the disease, the ones vaccinated and the ones tested. we have walk in/drive in vaccination points, caravans that travel around vaccinating people, gatherings where people are given beer and some (local)food then get vaccinated, and so on and so forth. whatever works. the vaccines need to be administered because they were ordered and payed for. i have two certificates; one for each time i had covid. Let's get this cracked. - In a purely mathematical context, reasons really don't matters. I don't really give a shit as to why a person is getting the vaccine, as long as it means less risks in the medium to long term. Same for people who aren't getting it, it means more risks in the medium to long term. In simpler terms if you're egoistic, but that has a positive impact on the society, more power to you. Are you not getting the vaccine because people on the internet are being smug about it ? It should have absolutly no impact on your decision. - The more people are vaccinated, the faster we get under a 1 for 1 transmission rate, the faster it will die down. Im really not arguing about the % of the immunization cuz, once again, if it's above 50%, the rnaught will drop and so will the number of cases. - What does that have to do with anything ? You're just describing the carrot method, that makes you feel like a dog  it is clear that they are rewarded for compliance and nothing else. it is like you train a dog: he does something you say it's good, then you give it a bone. It's also good to remember that even without a lockdown in Sweden, they couldn't reach a sufficiently high % of immunized which would have slowed down the virus. We simply need everybody who can take the vaccine, to take it. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On June 16 2021 21:37 Gorsameth wrote: Down from 85% in April. Worldometer still puts the US in 6th for most new cases per day and some states are moving to stop reporting numbers, if any actually have yet I don't know but if they have it places an * next to any number. Vaccination % is at about 50% with plenty states in the low 40's. So things are going better but lets not all run outside and hug each other just yet. I don't think that is an absurd position to take. The US is about 70th in the world in new cases when adjusted for population. You're a smart guy so I think you knew in advance that the US is nowhere near the top of the list in new cases per capita which is why you decided to use gross numbers instead. | ||
|
Oleo
Netherlands279 Posts
On June 16 2021 20:36 BlackJack wrote: https://nypost.com/2021/06/05/democrats-think-healthy-people-should-continue-to-stay-home-poll/ The political divide on this is bonkers. What's it going to take for the Dems to give up on COVID? Even when vaccinated they want to stay home as much as possible? I imagine at this point it's more about needing to appear anti-Trump than anything else. Bullshit. The question was which of 2 choices is the better advice for healthy people with no symptoms of coronavirus: a) to stay home as much as possible to avoid contracting or spreading the coronavirus. b) to lead their normal lives as much as possible and avoid interruptions to work and business. 71 Percent of Democrats prefer a over b. This does not equate to "Even when vaccinated they want to stay home as much as possible? I imagine at this point it's more about needing to appear anti-Trump than anything else.". With better questions that 71% will be much more lower. A is the sensible option by the way. Why try to throw away all you gained just before you reach the finishline, B for instance includes non-symptomatic people to go on businesstrips to Brasil and India to pick up some fresh new variants. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
| ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
I don't really post in this thread that often anymore. I've stopped caring about COVID a while ago. California finally fully reopened yesterday so even we are reluctantly limping across the finish line. I'm sure Canada will be there soon as well. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21964 Posts
On June 17 2021 06:15 BlackJack wrote: No, simply that worldometer doesn't list new cases per capita in the overview, just for total cases and deathsThe US is about 70th in the world in new cases when adjusted for population. You're a smart guy so I think you knew in advance that the US is nowhere near the top of the list in new cases per capita which is why you decided to use gross numbers instead. The Delta variant is bad news and apparently doesn't care much if people have had their first vaccination or not. Pretending like everything is back to normal simply risks another wave. Can places start/continue to open up and ease restrictions? If the vaccination grade allows it then sure, but charging headlong forward risks another flare up. Its been going on for over a year, you can last a little longer and open up safely. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4360 Posts
https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/health/astrazeneca-vaccine-should-now-only-be-given-to-those-aged-60-and-above-atagi-recommends/news-story/bb5321c5a7ac7880d6b0f7340ba3ac69 | ||
|
Slydie
1927 Posts
Please don't worry too much about Delta. Some vaccines do seem to protect against all the major mutations so far, and the reason is that they trigger multiple immune responses: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/vaccines-offer-significant-protection-against-covid-19-delta-variant-u-k-analysis-shows-11623690999 On the negative side, CureVac might be to ineffective to be approved for use at only 47%, which is comparable to the worst Chinese ones: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-germanys-curevac-vaccine-only-47-effective/a-57929473 | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21964 Posts
On June 17 2021 16:19 Slydie wrote: The bit of the WSJ article that I can read mentions double dose, and yes the double dose is effective against delta. Its the single dose that is less effective against Delta then against other variantsI am very curious about what kind of waves can be expected at different levels of immunity. My impression is that already at 20%, it makes a major difference, and then the severity goes down until effective herd immunity at 70%. If you have used as many dosis of vaccine as there are people, I think there is no risk of overloading the healthcare system at all. Please don't worry too much about Delta. Some vaccines do seem to protect against all the major mutations so far, and the reason is that they trigger multiple immune responses: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/vaccines-offer-significant-protection-against-covid-19-delta-variant-u-k-analysis-shows-11623690999 On the negative side, CureVac might be to ineffective to be approved for use at only 47%, which is comparable to the worst Chinese ones: https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.dw.com/en/coronavirus-germanys-curevac-vaccine-only-47-effective/a-57929473 The UK saw a new spike, tho a lot less severe then previous spikes, because of Delta and there vaccination rate is better then the US (75% single shot, 50% double shots). Delta isn't a problem once people are fully vaccinated. But its a potential problem until they are. | ||
|
Slydie
1927 Posts
On June 17 2021 17:44 Gorsameth wrote: The bit of the WSJ article that I can read mentions double dose, and yes the double dose is effective against delta. Its the single dose that is less effective against Delta then against other variants The UK saw a new spike, tho a lot less severe then previous spikes, because of Delta and there vaccination rate is better then the US (75% single shot, 50% double shots). Delta isn't a problem once people are fully vaccinated. But its a potential problem until they are. The question is, is it Delta really a problem in the UK, as both hospitalisations and deaths are at a very low level despite the surge in cases... https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare I feel like we are assuming the worst far too much. We should worry about serious illness and death, not mutations and positive tests. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
On June 17 2021 09:58 JimmiC wrote: You picked a number that thought it showed what you wanted it too. I think if you were willing to critically think about you would understand that Averaging out a massive country like the US. When Vermot is at 3900 per 100k (hawii is even better!) and North Dakota is at 14497 it is pretty easy to see that making a blanket about the US based on a average is pretty pointless for almost everywhere. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1109004/coronavirus-covid19-cases-rate-us-americans-by-state/ Numbers are only useful if you use them to try to come up with conclusions, not if you try to find numbers that match the conclusions you have already made. It is extremely bizarre to think that someone in ND and someone in Vermont should have the same thoughts on an issue given that the circumstances are completely different. It is so nice to be near the end, I'm glad we are continuing to the right thing so the end is as soon as possible. And I'm not saying I think place X should lock down or whatever, I really have not dug into the numbers enough nor would I be the right person to make that call, I'm saying that it is best for the economy, heath, basically everyone if the number is close to or at 0 then it is if it hovers in the not so bad we have shut things down but you are still hearing about deaths and people getting sick all the time. There is a reason one of the most commonly used indicators of economies future performance is consumer confidence. I don't know what you're talking about. I didn't seek out that poll to to "match the conclusions I already made." I heard about that poll on the last episode of Real Time with Bill Maher. Bill Maher, a liberal, brought it up to shit on his fellow Democrats for having ridiculous views. Also the sentence I bolded there is absolutely ridiculous in my opinion. I'll even take it a step further and say that if any restriction is kept for even 1 day longer than is absolutely necessary to prevent anything short of the complete failure of a healthcare system then it's absolutely a sin. Hundreds of thousands of businesses were closed down over this. Meanwhile Jeff Bezos gained $70 billion in wealth as all these "Stay at home as much as you can" cowards ordered all their shit online. Mom and pop small businesses had to close down for not being essential but Walmart got to stay open because they also sold food so they were essential. I get it, it's a difficult thing but nobody wants to see the collapse of the healthcare system which could lead to chaos so tough decisions were made. That time is over. The healthcare system is nowhere near at risk for collapsing. The idea that the government should still have the authority to keep any restrictions in place until we get "close to 0" is absolutely outrageous. It's obviously coming from a position of privilege. P.S. Also the fact that you are "hearing about deaths and people getting sick all the time" is just because the media knows how to make money by scaring you. Here in San Francisco in 2020 drug overdoses killed over twice as many people as COVID and that was at a time when 0% of the population was vaccinated. Which do you think got more media coverage? The media doesn't care if people are dying they care if people are dying of something that can also kill you. Heart disease and cancer will never get the kind of media attention that terrorism, mass shootings, plane crashes, or shark attacks will get. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
emperorchampion
Canada9496 Posts
On June 17 2021 20:29 Slydie wrote: The question is, is it Delta really a problem in the UK, as both hospitalisations and deaths are at a very low level despite the surge in cases... https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare I feel like we are assuming the worst far too much. We should worry about serious illness and death, not mutations and positive tests. I think we will have a better idea by next week. Cases have been raising around 50% per week over past two-three weeks due to delta, hospitalisations are only now up 40% from last week. So at least 1 week lag on the hospitalisations (I was hoping that this would stay put, but finally starting to rise :/), we will see on the deaths. Based on what mathematics of exponential growth say could happen, I think there is cause for caution, at least in the next few weeks. | ||
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37044 Posts
| ||
|
Lmui
Canada6216 Posts
In any place where vaccination levels are high, and it hasn't taken hold yet, I think the risk is acceptable. In a place like UK though where vaccination levels are high, haven't yet hit levels required for herd immunity against it and Delta is prevalent the risk is at a point where you're forced to take active measures to stem the spread. UK is doing well and will probably hit 70%+ first dosed, 55%+ double dosed in the next month or two, and we'll see if that's enough to stop Delta. If it's not then we need to be able to vaccinate children 6mo-11yo as well to have enough herd immunity to stop it in most countries, especially places that have higher vaccine hesitancy than UK. Sad to say, but Canada has started tapering off in first doses fairly hard in most provinces. We might hit 70% total population immunized in a month or so, but it's going to be a slow slog for the same reasons as everywhere else. In BC, we have the resources to do full genome sequencing on every case, so we're catching every delta case as they spread. http://www.bccdc.ca/Health-Info-Site/Documents/VoC/VoC_weekly_06112021.pdf It's risen to around 10% of cases over the last month and a half, but we're only talking about ~10 cases a day, so the sample size is pretty small at this point, but it seems to be increasing, or at least not dropping at the same rate as the other variants so far. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
iPlaY.NettleS
Australia4360 Posts
For comparison - Recent UK data for the delta strain is around 70% of admissions being unvaccinated, little under two thirds of visits requiring at least overnight stay being unvaccinated and a little over half of deaths being unvaccinated (small sample for deaths) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/11/delta-variant-is-linked-to-90-of-covid-cases-in-uk | ||
| ||
