| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven 23:09 - Jun 7 with 1622 views | StokieBlue |
Already there are a number of MPs and media outlets calling for an end to all restrictions regardless of the data on the 21st June. This article outlines why the decision must be driven by the data rather than some arbitrary date set months ago before the Delta variant was around.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/07/could-a-third-wave-of-covid-be-mor [*]
Essentially it boils down to at the moment we simply don't know enough about the Delta variant to make accurate predictions.
Some specifics from the article:
- The Delta variant is likely between 30% and 100% more transmissible than the Kent variant.
- The Delta variant is possibly associated with a twofold increase in the likelihood of hospitalisation.
- Hospitalisations could reach between 6000 and 10000 per day if restrictions were fully eased.
- Calculations point to an R that is well above one across most areas of Britain at the current time.
What isn't known is the effect that vaccinations will have on any peak of cases, it will definitely help but there is a 17% reduction in efficacy after a single dose with regards to the Delta variant. There are also concerns over long-covid and the fact that there are still many adults who aren't vaccinated (often through choice of course). It's also entirely possible that the vaccines will still offer excellent protection against severe covid.
In the end given all this it would seem ridiculous to rush into anything until a lot of the variables above can be adequately assigned a value and their effects calculated.
I know it's not something any of us want to hear but realism is probably better than ignoring data and going for a date without reasoning.
SB
[*] There are links to the actual SAGE minutes and reports in the article (such as the Warwick Universiry report on the likely admissions per day based on transmissibility). |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |  |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:13 - Jun 7 with 1583 views | Coastalblue |
Front page headlines telling people that their summer and holidays are in danger of being stolen are stoking this up, I should be surprised the rags could be so irresponsible but sadly I'm not.
I lost my livelihood to this pandemic, we need to actually beat it doing whatever it takes not keep doing the minimum and risking spending the next few years dipping in and out of partial lockdowns. |  |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:15 - Jun 7 with 1565 views | pointofblue |
The one thing the government did get right when setting up the roadmap is set out clauses where things may have to change. This is one of them.
The other, possibly more difficult decision, is whether we need to go back a stage or whether the restrictions currently in place are enough to manage the third wave effectively.
And I know I keep saying it, and maybe it’s too simplistic, but other than for vital trade shut the borders. |  |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:19 - Jun 7 with 1529 views | StokieBlue |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:15 - Jun 7 by pointofblue |
The one thing the government did get right when setting up the roadmap is set out clauses where things may have to change. This is one of them.
The other, possibly more difficult decision, is whether we need to go back a stage or whether the restrictions currently in place are enough to manage the third wave effectively.
And I know I keep saying it, and maybe it’s too simplistic, but other than for vital trade shut the borders. |
Certain aspects of the media and some of our elected officials are deliberately ignoring the "variant clause" in the original roadmap whilst making sure they highlight the dates in the roadmap.
It's hugely irresponsible because many won't have looked at the roadmap in detail and know about the clause and thus will think it's another change of direction when in fact it's been a possibility since the roadmap was announced.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:25 - Jun 7 with 1506 views | Swansea_Blue |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:13 - Jun 7 by Coastalblue |
Front page headlines telling people that their summer and holidays are in danger of being stolen are stoking this up, I should be surprised the rags could be so irresponsible but sadly I'm not.
I lost my livelihood to this pandemic, we need to actually beat it doing whatever it takes not keep doing the minimum and risking spending the next few years dipping in and out of partial lockdowns. |
Absolutely. Their dithering has made things considerably worse than it needed to be, both in terms of the death toll, health impacts for survivors (long covid, mental health impact of repeated and long lockdowns) and economic impact.
I still can't work out wy we haven't attempted a zero covid policy, as those countries who have have had far better outcomes across the board. I suspect it may be because of cowardliness around upsetting their support base and incompetence, but I don't really know. |  |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:29 - Jun 7 with 1495 views | Sarge |
I’m struggling to work out why even a more transmissible variant, 40% seems to have become the settled on figure, would result in up to 10,000 hospitalisations a day when this is massively more than has ever happened pre-vaccine and 75% of adults now have some protection and 50% have two doses.
We’re currently seeing near flat hospitalisations and the country is more or less open.
Edit: approx 1% of cases now need hospitalisation, down from 3-4% in the first waves and of that 1%, only 2% of them have had both jabs. (Numbers for the delta variant only) [Post edited 7 Jun 2021 23:38]
| | | |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:31 - Jun 7 with 1478 views | Swansea_Blue |
We all knew Johnson was painting himself into a corner when he announced that the 21st June date was immovable. It's odd because he's also on record saying that we need to be cautious and take things one step at the time, which is correct but also obviously at odds with his June 21st 'freedom day' message. And that probably sums up one of their biggest failings during the whole pandemic - muddled communication. | |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:40 - Jun 7 with 1431 views | StokieBlue |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:29 - Jun 7 by Sarge |
I’m struggling to work out why even a more transmissible variant, 40% seems to have become the settled on figure, would result in up to 10,000 hospitalisations a day when this is massively more than has ever happened pre-vaccine and 75% of adults now have some protection and 50% have two doses.
We’re currently seeing near flat hospitalisations and the country is more or less open.
Edit: approx 1% of cases now need hospitalisation, down from 3-4% in the first waves and of that 1%, only 2% of them have had both jabs. (Numbers for the delta variant only) [Post edited 7 Jun 2021 23:38]
|
There is no settled figure, the modelling shows the error range as between 30% and 100% with 60% being the figure coming from the Imperial models.
That hospitalisation range (it's not a single figure of 10000) is also with a totally open country with no restrictions which makes comparisons to earlier figures difficult as they were during lockdowns. Hospitalisations hit 4000 per day in the second wave, you can't just multiple that number by the increase in transmissibility because the growth isn't linear.
Data on C19 is very laggy, what we see at the moment isn't entirely relevant to what will be the case in a few weeks.
Also worth noting that 25% unvaccinated adults is still millions of people and that even with a vaccination you can still get covid and therefore possibly long covid.
All I am others are saying is that any decisions should be data driven and not political or media driven.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 07:47 - Jun 8 with 1173 views | bluelagos |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 23:29 - Jun 7 by Sarge |
I’m struggling to work out why even a more transmissible variant, 40% seems to have become the settled on figure, would result in up to 10,000 hospitalisations a day when this is massively more than has ever happened pre-vaccine and 75% of adults now have some protection and 50% have two doses.
We’re currently seeing near flat hospitalisations and the country is more or less open.
Edit: approx 1% of cases now need hospitalisation, down from 3-4% in the first waves and of that 1%, only 2% of them have had both jabs. (Numbers for the delta variant only) [Post edited 7 Jun 2021 23:38]
|
Not got sight of the modelling but 10k admissions a day is way in excess of previous peaks, no debate there. But, those peaks were of course hen we were in a lockdown.
The modelling assumes we open up and stay open. What it says to me is quite clearly that if we fully open up too soon, we risk yet another severe lockdown later on (cos 10k admissions a day isn't managable).
So if the choice is a few more weeks as we are (whilst continuing the roll out) and we avoid future lockdowns, it's a bit of a no brainer tbh. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 08:32 - Jun 8 with 1077 views | itfcjoe |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 07:47 - Jun 8 by bluelagos |
Not got sight of the modelling but 10k admissions a day is way in excess of previous peaks, no debate there. But, those peaks were of course hen we were in a lockdown.
The modelling assumes we open up and stay open. What it says to me is quite clearly that if we fully open up too soon, we risk yet another severe lockdown later on (cos 10k admissions a day isn't managable).
So if the choice is a few more weeks as we are (whilst continuing the roll out) and we avoid future lockdowns, it's a bit of a no brainer tbh. |
Surely the 10k cases a day, are in the majority amongst those who are yet to be vaccinated and in that case they are either anti-vaxxers (who I have less than zero time for) or the young who are very unlikely to suffer severely from it.....so much so that the AZ vaccine is seen as more of a risk in U40s than actually getting Covid.
Who are we protecting now, if hospital admissions are not increasing, and deaths are not increasing? |  |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 08:55 - Jun 8 with 1012 views | Ely_Blue |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 08:32 - Jun 8 by itfcjoe |
Surely the 10k cases a day, are in the majority amongst those who are yet to be vaccinated and in that case they are either anti-vaxxers (who I have less than zero time for) or the young who are very unlikely to suffer severely from it.....so much so that the AZ vaccine is seen as more of a risk in U40s than actually getting Covid.
Who are we protecting now, if hospital admissions are not increasing, and deaths are not increasing? |
I think you’ll find the reasons for potentially delaying by a few weeks is to get 2nd doses inside all of the over 50s and allowing them to become effective |  |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 09:05 - Jun 8 with 985 views | Sarge |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 07:47 - Jun 8 by bluelagos |
Not got sight of the modelling but 10k admissions a day is way in excess of previous peaks, no debate there. But, those peaks were of course hen we were in a lockdown.
The modelling assumes we open up and stay open. What it says to me is quite clearly that if we fully open up too soon, we risk yet another severe lockdown later on (cos 10k admissions a day isn't managable).
So if the choice is a few more weeks as we are (whilst continuing the roll out) and we avoid future lockdowns, it's a bit of a no brainer tbh. |
IIIRC we weren’t in a lockdown from June - November last year although we had the tier system which did basically nothing. | | | |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 09:06 - Jun 8 with 981 views | StokieBlue |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 08:32 - Jun 8 by itfcjoe |
Surely the 10k cases a day, are in the majority amongst those who are yet to be vaccinated and in that case they are either anti-vaxxers (who I have less than zero time for) or the young who are very unlikely to suffer severely from it.....so much so that the AZ vaccine is seen as more of a risk in U40s than actually getting Covid.
Who are we protecting now, if hospital admissions are not increasing, and deaths are not increasing? |
It's too early to say that hospitalisations aren't increasing. There is a 2 or 3 week lag in data from C19 and given the R is now above 1 in most of the country there is a chance of exponential growth.
Worth noting that there are currently 128 people in hospital after having a single dose and 28 people after two doses. The vaccines aren't 100%, if enough people get it then hospitalisations will rise.
Whilst I agree that I have no time for anti-vaxxers, if the hospitals suddenly fill up with 5000 per day it impacts everything else the NHS does.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 09:10 - Jun 8 with 969 views | bluelagos |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 08:32 - Jun 8 by itfcjoe |
Surely the 10k cases a day, are in the majority amongst those who are yet to be vaccinated and in that case they are either anti-vaxxers (who I have less than zero time for) or the young who are very unlikely to suffer severely from it.....so much so that the AZ vaccine is seen as more of a risk in U40s than actually getting Covid.
Who are we protecting now, if hospital admissions are not increasing, and deaths are not increasing? |
At the end of the day, I accept there's not much sympathy for anti-vaccers who may/may not die. (Not a position I share - but will leave that debate for now)
But, if the hospitals reach capacity - there is a scenario where they are turning people away. Have a heart attack, sorry the A&E is full. Have a car crash, sorry...
So irrespective of who is getting ill, hospitals getting over run (assuming that is the scenario) isn't something any responsible government could allow to happen.
Haven't got sight of the latest data (I find it too depressing to follow closely) but no way they would be worried if hospital admissions were not forecast to grow (if we open up) | |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 09:11 - Jun 8 with 956 views | bluelagos |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 09:05 - Jun 8 by Sarge |
IIIRC we weren’t in a lockdown from June - November last year although we had the tier system which did basically nothing. |
The peaks were in January/Feb this year. | |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 09:48 - Jun 8 with 865 views | JammyDodgerrr |
Whilst I agree with the delay, and it is definitely going to be useful to gather extra data, get more protection for the over 50s and get the 20s their first jab - we do need to be careful not to drag on too long because the longer we wait, the more we risk another Vax resistant variant and putting more restrictions back in place. We have to risk an exit wave at some point and make the jump to Herd Immunity. This is an excellent twitter thread explaining it better than me.
|  |
| |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 10:56 - Jun 8 with 810 views | StokieBlue |
| This is why the decisions around the 21st June should be data driven on 09:48 - Jun 8 by JammyDodgerrr |
Whilst I agree with the delay, and it is definitely going to be useful to gather extra data, get more protection for the over 50s and get the 20s their first jab - we do need to be careful not to drag on too long because the longer we wait, the more we risk another Vax resistant variant and putting more restrictions back in place. We have to risk an exit wave at some point and make the jump to Herd Immunity. This is an excellent twitter thread explaining it better than me.
|
Delaying reduces the risk of a vaccine resistant mutation occurring within the UK because a delay will mean less interactions and more vaccinations which in turn means less chance for C19 to mutate as we know vaccine do limit the transmission to some extent.
If a vaccine resistant strain comes from abroad then not waiting too long open up is irrelevant as we will have to put restrictions back in place regardless.
Lets see the data in a few weeks as you say and then hopefully make some informed decisions. I think most can agree that's the right way to proceed.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
