IOM Covid removing restrictions

[Happier diner]

46 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Not quite. It’s a border control over risk of importation. That rate has no direct relevance to what we then do to protect hospitals, if it gets here. So it’s not used for that purpose. We use different measures internally, if the virus gets here, to protect the spread and hospitals being overwhelmed. Yes they’re connected. But not necessarily directly.

Im not sure if the figure should be 20 ( where we started last year ) or 30,40, 50. And I’ve no idea what the UK rates will move to. The UK wide 14 day rate hasn’t moved up much. Just in small areas in south east, north west and NI.

Why do you think our hospital would be overloaded by allowing free movement with a country whose hospitals are some considerable way from being overloaded.

[John Wright]

6 minutes ago, madmanxpilot said:

1. The UK infection rate will likely rocket in the coming weeks as people start to mix. But does it matter as much now as it would have before vaccines were in the arms of the majority of the population? No.

Thanks to the vaccines we are now far more able to deal with Covid. The IOMG's fixation on a 30/100K 14 case notification rate does not account for that, and will see us stay at level 2A for a very long time, certainly into next year. 

 

1. Agreed that vaccination does change things. Not sure what the UK rate will do. I’d favour a 2 factor rate. A 14 day rate AND a test positivity rate. The latter gives early warning of trends such as those you mention. The EU figure is <4 and >4 

2.  30/100,000/14 is only a recent figure. Before it was 20/100,00/14. We may be able to move to 40, 50 or another figure. It’s trial and error. There’s no correct answer. And it’s a balance of a number of factors at the end of the day. 

[John Wright]

Just now, Happier diner said:

Why do you think our hospital would be overloaded by allowing free movement with a country whose hospitals are some considerable way from being overloaded.

Did I say that, or even imply that?

[Happier diner]

51 minutes ago, John Wright said:

We use different measures internally, if the virus gets here, to protect the spread and hospitals being overwhelmed. Yes they’re connected. But not necessarily directly.

 

Here

[Happier diner]

On a more positive note we are making cracking progress on second jabs for 55 to 59 age group

We managed another one in the last 4 days! Gone up from 8 to 9.

We'll see this virus off don't you worry

[P.K.]

52 minutes ago, wrighty said:

1-1/R is the basic form, which gives you the proportion of the population that need to be unsusceptible to infection/unable to transmit infection (i.e completely immune).  So if R is 3, you need two-thirds immune.  Higher the R, the higher the proportion.  Gets a bit more complex when you take into account imperfect vaccine efficacy, but not much.  Roughly speaking, if your vaccines are only 90% effective you need 10% extra vaccinated (I know that's mathematically imprecise - just for illustration)

According to a 12th May estimate by the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling (SPI-M) the Indian variant B.1.617.2 is 50% more transmissable than the Kent variant B.1.1.7.

They estimate that R=1.64 for B.1.617.2.

However their summary states:

"The epidemic in England could be either flat, shrinking slowly or growing slightly"

Not the sort of data I would like to base a decision on....

[Banker]

7 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

On a more positive note we are making cracking progress on second jabs for 55 to 59 age group

We managed another one in the last 4 days! Gone up from 8 to 9.

We'll see this virus off don't you worry

We’re only on 70 + age group at present, think 65+ start next 2 weeks, I’m 60 and due 18/06

[John Wright]

12 minutes ago, Happier diner said:

Here

Read the whole sentence. The words “we use different measures internally, if the virus gets here” qualify the words you’ve emphasised and make the sentence mean something very different to the taking of them in isolation.

[Happier diner]

1 minute ago, Banker said:

We’re only on 70 + age group at present, think 65+ start next 2 weeks, I’m 60 and due 18/06

I have to confess I was being facetious. I think the 9 must be from the more vulnerable group as I can't really understand whys its not zero unless they are double counting from another group (or maybe steam packet workers)

[Happier diner]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

Read the whole sentence. The words “we use different measures internally, if the virus gets here” qualify the words you’ve emphasised and make the sentence mean something very different to the taking of them in isolation.

I would call that 'by implication' then. You are implying (in my view) that we should use infection rate as a surrogate for (or an indication of a relationship with) hospitalisation.

[wrighty]

34 minutes ago, P.K. said:

According to a 12th May estimate by the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Modelling (SPI-M) the Indian variant B.1.617.2 is 50% more transmissable than the Kent variant B.1.1.7.

They estimate that R=1.64 for B.1.617.2.

Really? The modelling I've seen from that group has R much higher for the Kent variant.  If India is higher still it should be way more than that.  Are they talking about R0, or the effective R given the estimated immunity we already have?

[Happier diner]

29 minutes ago, John Wright said:

Read the whole sentence. The words “we use different measures internally, if the virus gets here” qualify the words you’ve emphasised and make the sentence mean something very different to the taking of them in isolation.

Being serious, objective and not argumentative (Temporarily). 

If the rate here was the same as the UK (say 40 per 100,000 over 14 days). What would be the impact on our healthcare system be? That's the question in my view. Would it make a significant difference if it was 30?

[trmpton]

Just now, Happier diner said:

Being serious, objective and not argumentative (Temporarily). 

If the rate here was the same as the UK (say 40 per 100,000 over 14 days). What would be the impact on our healthcare system be? That's the question in my view. Would it make a significant difference if it was 30?

No.

Neither of those figures would impact healthcare as I clearly evidenced right through the UK at the moment

[Banker]

1 minute ago, Happier diner said:

Being serious, objective and not argumentative (Temporarily). 

If the rate here was the same as the UK (say 40 per 100,000 over 14 days). What would be the impact on our healthcare system be? That's the question in my view. Would it make a significant difference if it was 30?

I assume it depends on who catches it, if it’s healthy 25 year olds with one jab probably no impact, if it’s some of anti vaxxers in 50/60s who are overweight then maybe some hospitalization.

[Banker]

Cases staying low in UK

North-west England - home to three of the hotspots for the variant first discovered in India - is the only region to record a rise in coronavirus cases, according to new data released this afternoon.

Cases there rose to 38.5 per 100,000 people in the week up to 16 May, up from 31.6 the previous week, Public Health England says.

In most regions cases have fallen slightly or remained mostly unchanged, with the lowest rates of 8.9 cases per 100,000 people found in south-west England.

The age group with the highest infection rate is 10 to 19-year-olds, among whom there are 43.9 cases per 100,000 - a fall from 47.4 the previous week.

The low numbers of deaths and hospital admissions are likely due to the rollout of the vaccines. More than 57 million doses have been given out, with nearly 37 million people - or 70% of all adults - receiving at least one dose so far.