When will it all end?

doublejobbing 2

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

.........In seven days we will be well into the final week of February. A time back in January when NPHET predicted that we could be hitting 200 to 400 cases a day.................

We'll likely be in the 400 to 600 cases per day by then. The cases aren't dropping as fast since they started testing close contacts again about 2 weeks ago.

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

......

Baffles me how week on week we can do drops from 8000 to 5000 to 3000 to 1000 and not keep dropping by 50 to 100% every week like up until that point.

that's the nature of exponential decay....... it slows down...... add in folk getting careless again also.

markodaly

josip wrote: »

I think she's wrong at the 2:33.
With all of the vulnerable vaccinated, a new wave of infections won't result in "tens of thousands of deaths".
Lots of cases yes, but not deaths.
And it was at that point I started to suspect that she may have arrived at her conclusions before conducting her analysis.

Yea, you are right. Professor Azra Ghani, Epidemiologist from Imperial College London, who studied Mathematics at Cambridge and is elected to the Academy of Medical Sciences, whose entire field of specialty is this subject, modelling outbreaks.... is wrong.

While you josip, random guy on boards.ie and the internet some other dudes are right.....

:P:pac::D;)

markodaly

Le Bruise wrote: »

I don't know if there's anyone who thinks we can open up as normal after vaccinating a 'few' people? Sure we can relax some restrictions after the vulnerable are sorted...but normality can only resume after a critical mass has been vaccinated (barring disaster).

...AND when case numbers are very low and stay low.
Thats the key bit people are missing.

St.Spodo

markodaly wrote: »

For those who think we can just vaccinate a few and open up as normal.

That's interesting, thanks for sharing.

Wouldn't a 90% reduction in deaths among those who are vaccinated be on the pessimistic side of things? The evidence of the phase 3 trials and the emerging real world data is that the vaccines we are using offer much greater protection from death than that.

bucketybuck

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

See above. Not re-hashing this. But if we still need social distancing with critical mass vaccination, then I ask for the bajillionth time, two simple questions:

One: What's the point of the vaccine if we still have to be worried about further COVID waves even once we reach critical mass?

Two: If the vaccine isn't good enough to let us out of this hellish social distancing era, then what would be good enough?

Good luck with that. I made this same point to that poster last month and he just ignored it, hundreds of posts from him doing everything except acknowledge the logic.

If you vaccinate the vulnerable and deaths don't fall then your vaccine doesn't work. If the death rate does fall then there is no longer any need for restrictions. Its one or the other.

Le Bruise

markodaly wrote: »

...AND when case numbers are very low and stay low.
Thats the key bit people are missing.

That will depend on the vaccines affect on transmission...signs are good so far.

plodder

Le Bruise wrote: »

That will depend on the vaccines affect on transmission...signs are good so far.

Even still, I don't see why case numbers should be a factor so long as hospitalisations stay low. If the link between cases and hospitalisations is not broken, then that's a different matter obviously.

markodaly

markodaly wrote: »

Yea, you are right. Professor Azra Ghani, Epidemiologist from Imperial College London, who studied Mathematics at Cambridge and is elected to the Academy of Medical Sciences, whose entire field of specialty is this subject, modelling outbreaks.... is wrong.

While you josip, random guy on boards.ie and the internet some other dudes are right.....

:P:pac::D;)

Is that the same college that employed that guyfreguson that got all the modeling data wrong on predicted numbers and on top of that got caught with his trousers down breaking lockdown. Here’s hoping they're employing more credible people now!

Le Bruise

plodder wrote: »

Even still, I don't see why case numbers should be a factor so long as hospitalisations stay low. If the link between cases and hospitalisations is not broken, then that's a different matter obviously.

Agreed they become less important, was just replying to the other posters comment regarding case numbers (and that they should drop significantly if/when the vaccines affect transmission) . Assume they'll stop looking at case numbers and concentrate on hospitalisations at some point. Should be few and far between once a critical mass of vaccinations has been achieved.

Ginger n Lemon

hynesie08 wrote: »

God, I can't believe that all schools are opening fully and unrestricted in Scotland on Monday....

Spends 8 seconds on Google......

Oh they're not.

They are re opening on Monday.

UK Covid live: Sturgeon confirms phased return for Scottish schools from Monday

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/feb/16/uk-covid-live-coronavirus-sturgeon-return-scottish-schools-latest-updates

I dont know where you got the "unrestricted" bit. I suppose lockdown does play with our minds sometimes.

PS try to spend more than 8 seconds reading actual post in the future :pac:

El_Duderino 09

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I've answered that question repeatedly and you've ignored the answer in every post in which I've posted it, that's why I'm not doing so again.



As I've repeatedly said, yes. Leo Varadkar did, when he stated that mass vaccination would correlate with the return of mass gatherings and that it was only a matter of when we achieved mass vaccination.

Again I ask you, what in your view is the end game? You seem to be fully on board with this "mass vaccination doesn't mean we can stop socially distancing" and I'm saying fair enough, BUT we need an answer to this question. Current social distancing rules, if people follow them to the letter, categorically rule out the forming of relationships by anyone who is currently single. It is totally and completely insane to suggest that this is a long term solution and not a stopgap.

Do you mean the time Leo said that IF things go well we MIGHT see a return to mass gatherings and PERHAPS even Festivals? Because I'd say that they would stand by that - it's so full of caveats that it's impossible to hold them to it. It was a crafted statement. Did you honestly, seriously take that as some kind of guarantee of a return to mass gatherings and festivals?

What to i think is the end game? I don't claim to know. The government hasn't been explicit about it and I don't want to make up a set of criteria and then get cross when the government doesn't follow my criteria. That's what you seem to have done and it hasn't made you happier. I would expect that there will be a relaxation as the weather warms and the numbers go down and stabilise. As the vaccine is rolled out, it will allow more scope for reduced restrictions and hopefully all businesses can stay open next winter without any lockdowns. If things go great, maybe things will be better than that (that's not a guarantee, BTW).

On the September target of vaccinating 80% of the population by the end of September: As 20ish% if the population are under 18 and the vaccine hasn't been approved for the under 18s yet, that would mean vaccinating 100% of adults by the ned of September. One vaccine company announced that they're beginning the process of testing the vaccine on some under 18s (i think they said 12-18s but I'm not certain about the ages). they said they hope to have approval for and begin administering the vaccine by the end of the year. In other words, they're not going be be started on the under 18s by the September deadline, let alone 80% done.

The September target is not realistic.

markodaly

markodaly wrote: »

Yea, you are right. Professor Azra Ghani, Epidemiologist from Imperial College London, who studied Mathematics at Cambridge and is elected to the Academy of Medical Sciences, whose entire field of specialty is this subject, modelling outbreaks.... is wrong.

While you josip, random guy on boards.ie and the internet some other dudes are right.....

:P:pac::D;)

I haven't watched the video, but you do realise that "experts" in many fields have been completely wrong innumerable times throughout history? This is not an argument as to why josip is wrong (or right - he may well be full of it, as I said this is a general comment), it's a logical fallacy called "appeal to authority".

Also mathematicians of any sort have a tendency to model ideal conditions and forget about practical human considerations .... for example, everyone is immediately infected, no one has past immunity and the illness progresses exactly the same way in everyone, none of which is true. One of the big criticisms of the Imperial model was that they had no biologists on their team, only physical scientists. Biology is far more messy than physical science.

El_Duderino 09

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

On the September target of vaccinating 80% of the population by the end of September: As 20ish% if the population are under 18 and the vaccine hasn't been approved for the under 18s yet, that would mean vaccinating 100% of adults by the ned of September. One vaccine company announced that they're beginning the process of testing the vaccine on some under 18s (i think they said 12-18s but I'm not certain about the ages). they said they hope to have approval for and begin administering the vaccine by the end of the year. In other words, they're not going be be started on the under 18s by the September deadline, let alone 80% done.

The September target is not realistic.

It is extremely questionable to be vaccinating under 18s for this. If the authors of this paper are correct, and they make some powerful arguments, it may be even damaging and counterproductive to do so ....

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6530/741

El_Duderino 09

bucketybuck wrote: »

Good luck with that. I made this same point to that poster last month and he just ignored it, hundreds of posts from him doing everything except acknowledge the logic.

If you vaccinate the vulnerable and deaths don't fall then your vaccine doesn't work. If the death rate does fall then there is no longer any need for restrictions. Its one or the other.

If only the world were so black/white. It's not a case that the vaccine is either 100% effective and 100% of people get the vaccine or else the vaccine is 0% effective and 0% uptake. The reality is likely to be that the vaccine is 90ish% effective and uptake is yet to be seen.

e.g. if 80% of the adult population get the vaccine by the time the weather gets cold towards the end of the year, then the calculation is something like the following.
80% of the adult population get a vaccine which is 90% effective =80%*80%*.90% = 58% immunity. So starting from that base at the start of the cold season would mean they could carry on continue to vaccinate more people into the winter.

That's a huge improvement on last year and would mean we could have much more contact and ewer restricti0ons next winter. And that's good. It's not a fairy tale, magic potion. But it's a realistic likely outcome.

El_Duderino 09

Le Bruise wrote: »

That will depend on the vaccines affect on transmission...signs are good so far.

Are they? What has been found?

El_Duderino 09

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It is extremely questionable to be vaccinating under 18s for this. If the authors of this paper are correct, and they make some powerful arguments, it may be even damaging and counterproductive to do so ....

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6530/741

Ok. That's not my point at all. If the government plans to vaccinate 80% of the whole population by the end of September, they're either planning to vaccinate 100% of the adult population or they plan to include children. Either case is not realistic at the moment.

Le Bruise

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Are they? What has been found?

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/feb/09/pfizerbiontech-covid-vaccine-reducing-viral-load-data-israel-suggests

https://www.timesofisrael.com/vaccinated-people-less-likely-to-transmit-coronavirus-israeli-study-suggests/

https://www.breakingnews.ie/covid-vaccine/early-data-on-vaccine-effect-on-covid-transmission-encouraging-says-minister-1081821.html

As I said, the signs are good so far

Le Bruise

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Ok. That's not my point at all. If the government plans to vaccinate 80% of the whole population by the end of September, they're either planning to vaccinate 100% of the adult population or they plan to include children. Either case is not realistic at the moment.

The plan is to vaccinate a critical mass of the adult population by September.

https://www.independent.ie/news/health-minister-claims-critical-mass-of-population-can-be-vaccinated-by-september-40080238.html

Ginger n Lemon

Le Bruise wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/feb/09/pfizerbiontech-covid-vaccine-reducing-viral-load-data-israel-suggests

https://www.timesofisrael.com/vaccinated-people-less-likely-to-transmit-coronavirus-israeli-study-suggests/

https://www.breakingnews.ie/covid-vaccine/early-data-on-vaccine-effect-on-covid-transmission-encouraging-says-minister-1081821.html

As I said, the signs are good so far

Its a bit baffling you have to show proof of things being good.

But it is very indicative of how some think nowadays, starting point is doom and gloom death and destruction unless you can prove otherwise.

Avoid Ronan Glynns sessions

Ginger n Lemon

Le Bruise wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/feb/09/pfizerbiontech-covid-vaccine-reducing-viral-load-data-israel-suggests

https://www.timesofisrael.com/vaccinated-people-less-likely-to-transmit-coronavirus-israeli-study-suggests/

https://www.breakingnews.ie/covid-vaccine/early-data-on-vaccine-effect-on-covid-transmission-encouraging-says-minister-1081821.html

As I said, the signs are good so far

Israel’s largest COVID-19 testing lab says it has found evidence indicating that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine significantly reduces the transmissibility of the coronavirus, offering a tentative answer to one of the world’s most burning questions.

Brilliant, brilliant news.

El_Duderino 09

Le Bruise wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/feb/09/pfizerbiontech-covid-vaccine-reducing-viral-load-data-israel-suggests

https://www.timesofisrael.com/vaccinated-people-less-likely-to-transmit-coronavirus-israeli-study-suggests/

https://www.breakingnews.ie/covid-vaccine/early-data-on-vaccine-effect-on-covid-transmission-encouraging-says-minister-1081821.html

As I said, the signs are good so far

Good initial news alright. From the Guardian article you linked "Erlich cautioned that the paper, which has yet to be peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal, was just an initial study. While it was understood that a smaller viral load was better, it was not clear whether this reduction would be enough to block transmission. “My expectation is … that if you are positive following vaccination, you probably will transmit the disease to a smaller number of people, on average,” he said."

That's good.

dalyboy

Considering that the vulnerable and elderly will be vaccinated by end of May or beginning of June we need to send a clear and precise message to NPHET, the government , pro downers and potty zero loon professor.

Pick a date , advertise it and cameras on the ready.

National HUGS day.
Human behaviour liberty party

Hug a granny , hug a granddad , hug a stranger , hug a vulnerable person etc.

Then send these photos to the RTE dooms day machine , NPHET, all the political parties , looney left etc

It’ll end when we say it ends. This could be could be the spark.

El_Duderino 09

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Good initial news alright. From the Guardian article you linked "Erlich cautioned that the paper, which has yet to be peer-reviewed or published in a medical journal, was just an initial study. While it was understood that a smaller viral load was better, it was not clear whether this reduction would be enough to block transmission. “My expectation is … that if you are positive following vaccination, you probably will transmit the disease to a smaller number of people, on average,” he said."

That's good.

If it also means that IF vaccination prevents severe disease, it would reduce COVID to the status of a common cold.

El_Duderino 09

Ginger n Lemon wrote: »

Its a bit baffling you have to show proof of things being good.

But it is very indicative of how some think nowadays, starting point is doom and gloom death and destruction unless you can prove otherwise.

Avoid Ronan Glynns sessions

No, it isn't baffling. It's just necessary to tell the difference between what's real and what's not. Whether it's good or bad news, doesn't enter into it. But I think you raise an interesting point - whether intentionally or other wise. I think some people have much lower threshold for evidence for news they want to hear than news they don't want to hear.

El_Duderino 09

Le Bruise wrote: »

The plan is to vaccinate a critical mass of the adult population by September.

https://www.independent.ie/news/health-minister-claims-critical-mass-of-population-can-be-vaccinated-by-september-40080238.html

What is the critical mass? And to what is it critical?

From the article "It is still possible to have a critical mass of the adult population vaccinated against Covid-19 by September" ... “With regard to September, can I caveat it again, as I've tried to do many, many times by saying it's all highly provisional". ... “It got construed publicly as making promises,” he said. “These are not promises".

“But I can say that, based on the highly conditional forecast we have, it would still be possible to meet the September date".

“But again, it is highly, highly dependent on supply.”

I would like to know what a "critical mass" is, but if it's 80% of the population then I really wouldn't bet on them getting close to it.

Do you know what the critical mass is?

El_Duderino 09

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If it also means that IF vaccination prevents severe disease, it would reduce COVID to the status of a common cold.

Where did it say that?

Maybe that will happen and if it does then, great.

Silentcorner

doublejobbing 2 wrote: »

In seven days we will be well into the final week of February. A time back in January when NPHET predicted that we could be hitting 200 to 400 cases a day.

With where we are now I find it hard to believe we will get close to this

Baffles me how week on week we can do drops from 8000 to 5000 to 3000 to 1000 and not keep dropping by 50 to 100% every week like up until that point.

The numbers have dropped and yet if you look around where you live you will see a lot more movement of people than you would have back in the first two weeks of January.

The lockdown is not causing the drop in numbers.

The flu does the same every year, it spikes then drops in the space of about 6 weeks....then next season, we get a mutation or variant and off it goes again in winter time.

Just like the flu, this virus will be with us over the next few months but in tiny numbers, our health service will not even feel in any way under pressure, in higher numbers in Sept/Oct just like now....but that won't stop us chasing cases like morons.

What we are doing is the scientific equivalent of that old saying..."the beatings will continue until morale improves"!

And the media are egging it on...it turns my stomach to listen to "experts" and politicians talk about Covid Zero policy...there was no flu season last year, does anyone think we have eradicated the flu forever?

Silentcorner

Silentcorner wrote: »

The flu does the same every year, it spikes then drops in the space of about 6 weeks....then next season, we get a mutation or variant and off it goes again in winter time.

Just like the flu, this virus will be with us over the next few months but in tiny numbers, our health service will not even feel in any way under pressure, in higher numbers in Sept/Oct just like now....but that won't stop us chasing cases like morons.

Here's a paper providing strong evidence for this and also providing a possible explanation: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-81419-w

Europe and the northern USA are starting a long COVID-19 crisis this autumn, as they will return to a level above the October sun UV daily dose only at the end of March 2021.

End of March guys cases will fall off a cliff.

SheepsClothing

Silentcorner wrote: »

The numbers have dropped and yet if you look around where you live you will see a lot more movement of people than you would have back in the first two weeks of January.

The lockdown is not causing the drop in numbers.

The flu does the same every year, it spikes then drops in the space of about 6 weeks....then next season, we get a mutation or variant and off it goes again in winter time.

Just like the flu, this virus will be with us over the next few months but in tiny numbers, our health service will not even feel in any way under pressure, in higher numbers in Sept/Oct just like now....but that won't stop us chasing cases like morons.

What we are doing is the scientific equivalent of that old saying..."the beatings will continue until morale improves"!

And the media are egging it on...it turns my stomach to listen to "experts" and politicians talk about Covid Zero policy...there was no flu season last year, does anyone think we have eradicated the flu forever?

What's happening in South America at the moment then? Shouldn't they be seeing barely any covid, just like the flu? If it's seasonal after all?

Silentcorner

SheepsClothing wrote: »

What's happening in South America at the moment then? Shouldn't they be seeing barely any covid, just like the flu? If it's seasonal after all?

I have no idea...but I do know in warmer climates the flu doesn't strike the same way it does in this part of the world.

And we are really only concerned with what we do here in Ireland and how it strikes the 5m or so of us!