Our total reliance on a vaccine and putting life on hold until it's rolled out

[Richard Scott]

Firstly remember that the near 600 is reported today, not actually died today - some historic comparisons of "peak" days show them to be significantly higher than the actual number. Also remember that cases have been (by just about every metric) plateauing for the last few weeks - it is therefore absurd to assume continued, unchecked exponential growth at the upper limit necessary to hit 4k a day. As an "if we rolled back to februrary and instructed pensioners to lick every doorknob" scenario, it's a reasonable worst case, but with all the data we had on the trajectory before the most recent impositions of tiers & lockdowns, it's ludicrous

The doom mongers also need to look at the daily infections have been hovering around 20,000 to 25,000 per day for almost a month so likely that deaths per day will be about reaching their peak now so 4000 looks to be pie in the sky. This current lockdown is looking more likely to be a totally unnecessary measure as a number of people have already eluded to.

 

[Horizon22]

Firstly remember that the near 600 is reported today, not actually died today - some historic comparisons of "peak" days show them to be significantly higher than the actual number. Also remember that cases have been (by just about every metric) plateauing for the last few weeks - it is therefore absurd to assume continued, unchecked exponential growth at the upper limit necessary to hit 4k a day. As an "if we rolled back to februrary and instructed pensioners to lick every doorknob" scenario, it's a reasonable worst case, but with all the data we had on the trajectory before the most recent impositions of tiers & lockdowns, it's ludicrous

Of course but the deaths don't work both ways - yes its a combination of days but that means that other lower days would also be higher. The best data is of course the average, but I haven't seen the stats for that today.

 

[brad465]

The doom mongers also need to look at the daily infections have been hovering around 20,000 to 25,000 per day for almost a month so likely that deaths per day will be about reaching their peak now so 4000 looks to be pie in the sky. This current lockdown is looking more likely to be a totally unnecessary measure as a number of people have already eluded to.

According to ZOE they're on the way back down: they peaked around 606,579 on the 4th a week ago; today's estimate is 581,043. As we've been in lockdown only a week I agree this decision certainly looks nonsensical.

Latest Daily UK COVID-19 Data: Vaccines, Cases, Trends | ZOE

COVID infection & vaccination rates in the UK today, based on public data and reports from millions of users of the ZOE Health Study app

covid.joinzoe.com

 

[3141]

The two doses must be 28 days apart and only start working fully 2 weeks later.

At full capacity, if those numbers are right, every 28 days you can vaccinate 4,675,200 people. You then need to vaccinate the same people for the next 28 days.

If it takes till say the start of February for vaccination to reach full capacity, at that rate you can vaccinate 18,700,800 people by the start of autumn 2021. That's a lot, but it's clearly not loads.

More positively, there are 15.6 million over 60s in the UK, 1.2 million NHS employees, and 500,000 teachers, with spare capacity for another 1.3 million vulnerable people or key workers in that period. That makes it feasible to vaccinate all of them by September next year, that is by the start of that school year and winter flu season.

That to me seems a reasonable point to say that most if not all restrictions should be removed (but to be very clear: I'd imagine removing the harshest restrictions much sooner).

That timeframe obviously improves if some of the single injection vaccines can work, or if vaccination capacity can be increased. My calculations are probably quite cautious too eg you may well be able to get a couple of million in before February. Combine with summer conditions being worse for the virus and perhaps more bullishly the vaccine brings us close to normal by June?

That's a very useful summary of the scale of the problem and the time it may take to vaccinate all those who'd be regarded as priority cases.

Yes, lockdown does indeed have serious economic consequences, effects on people's physical and mental health, and social effects. What seems to me to be missing from many of the recent posts is a recognition that Covid-19 itself has serious effects, the most obvious one being death for some of those who catch it. In addition, if a lot of Covid patients are being treated in hospital there will be deaths amongst other people who cannot get treatment for their medical conditions, and all those deaths have their own economic and social consequences. I can understand that the government pursues lockdown in order to prevent the large number of deaths, from Covid and other causes, that might otherwise happen.

There isn't a course of action that the government can follow that will have outcomes that are all "nice". It has to choose between groups of unpleasant consequences. Until an effective vaccine has been widely deployed an "exit strategy" from lockdown will be an entry strategy into another set of difficulties and dilemmas.

It may well be that lockdowns of various degrees become increasingly unsupportable over the next few months, and the government will have to abandon them before the completion of the timetable cuccir set out above. Then we'll be out of one frying pan and into a different fire.

 

[43066]

Yes, lockdown does indeed have serious economic consequences, effects on people's physical and mental health, and social effects. What seems to me to be missing from many of the recent posts is a recognition that Covid-19 itself has serious effects, the most obvious one being death for some of those who catch it. In addition, if a lot of Covid patients are being treated in hospital there will be deaths amongst other people who cannot get treatment for their medical conditions, and all those deaths have their own economic and social consequences. I can understand that the government pursues lockdown in order to prevent the large number of deaths, from Covid and other causes, that might otherwise happen.

How many more times does it need to be pointed out that death from Covid happens to a tiny minority of those who catch it, most of whom are elderly, most of whom have other serious medical conditions and frankly won’t last much longer anyway (harsh as that sounds).

Lockdowns also cost lives - 200k predicted by the ONS from the first one. What’s most unforgivable of all is that the government has clearly overreacted this time. As noted above cases are already plateauing (and have been for weeks), that’s without the effects of this latest lockdown, suggesting the tiered approach was already having a significant effect.

 

[yorksrob]

That's a very useful summary of the scale of the problem and the time it may take to vaccinate all those who'd be regarded as priority cases.

Yes, lockdown does indeed have serious economic consequences, effects on people's physical and mental health, and social effects. What seems to me to be missing from many of the recent posts is a recognition that Covid-19 itself has serious effects, the most obvious one being death for some of those who catch it. In addition, if a lot of Covid patients are being treated in hospital there will be deaths amongst other people who cannot get treatment for their medical conditions, and all those deaths have their own economic and social consequences. I can understand that the government pursues lockdown in order to prevent the large number of deaths, from Covid and other causes, that might otherwise happen.

There isn't a course of action that the government can follow that will have outcomes that are all "nice". It has to choose between groups of unpleasant consequences. Until an effective vaccine has been widely deployed an "exit strategy" from lockdown will be an entry strategy into another set of difficulties and dilemmas.

It may well be that lockdowns of various degrees become increasingly unsupportable over the next few months, and the government will have to abandon them before the completion of the timetable cuccir set out above. Then we'll be out of one frying pan and into a different fire.

We are only a country of some sixty something million people. 18.7 million of those is a pretty substantial proportion, which @cuccir is suggesting would be possible by spring. It sould take rather fewer than that to vaccinate the very elderly and very medically vulnerable (including those in care homes), which in turn should considerably supress hospitalisation and mortality enough to keep hospitals under control.

That really ought to get us ticking along with something more like the controls that were in place in July/August fairly soon, rather than perpetual lockdown.

 

[yorkie]

I am continually baffled by the groupthink on this forum that Covid is little more than a kind of hoax which will just dissapear if we ignore it....

I think you've made that up. Who do you think says this?!

It is not just another form of flu.

If it was a new form of 'flu, it could be far worse, like the 1918 'flu pandemic, as 'flu can affect younger people much more severely. The average age of a Sars-Cov-2 death is over 80.

Lockdowns are the only way to stop the health system being overwhelmed.

How do you explain countries like Sweden then?!

Do you want Britain to end up like Italy in the first wave?

I'd rather run the risk that we have to prioritise which elderly patients to treat than risk economic disaster and have young and healthy people committing suicide.

I strongly recommend anyone who can spare the time, watches this interview (or simply listen to it while doing something else):

One of the most interesting sources of data for the progress of the Covid-19 pandemic has been the ZOE app — downloaded by over 4.3 million people, who input symptoms and test results every day.

Its founder is Professor Tim Spector, an epidemiologist from KCL, and the app is now funded by the Government and Number Ten receives daily data from it. He received an OBE for services to fighting the pandemic earlier this year.

The ZOE app made headlines recently for demonstrating quite conclusively that the number of daily infections was already levelling off and even coming down in some areas of England at the end of October, prior to the second national lockdown. It painted a very different picture from the apocalyptic scenarios described in the Prime Minister’s briefing.

Professor Spector was refreshingly outspoken when I interviewed him yesterday. He said:
- Had the Government followed data from the ZOE app they would not have -gone into a second lockdown, which he believes was unnecessary
- The Government is tilted too much in the direction of caution and has lost a balanced sense of proportion
- He is worried that they will use the new vaccine news as a “carrot” to keep us locked down for the next three months...

A really good interview, which I thoroughly recommended and makes many excellent points.

I'd be surprised if anyone takes in the points made and still believes our current approach is justified.

 

[Mugby]

The trouble with this latest miracle vaccine which everyone is so keen to worship is that it will encourage Johnson, Hancock, Whitty, Vallance and co. to continue with their crackpot notion of universal vaccination and total elimination of the virus.

 

[Paul_10]

I do get confused when people say the numbers have slowed down yet we all know there is way more people who have COVID so those numbers are quite meaningless too me. The numbers that matters are the hospital admissions and the deaths and both of those are rising.

Good on Van Tam being cautious also and not give false hope like that scientist did yesterday. I'm more than happy too see social distancing continuing for as long as it needs, it's not a big issue these days as the supermarkets are not as strict on this as they once were back in the Spring.

As for this lockdown, waste of time when you see places likes of McDonald's and Greggs open, since when are they essential places!? How on earth can a fast food junk restaurants stay open but normal restaurants have to close? No logic at all there.

 

[bramling]

The trouble with this latest miracle vaccine which everyone is so keen to worship is that it will encourage Johnson, Hancock, Whitty, Vallance and co. to continue with their crackpot notion of universal vaccination and total elimination of the virus.

Have to say I’ve yet to find anyone in my domestic or work life that actually plans to have any vaccine.

Without fail everyone I’ve discussed the subject with says the same thing - not happy that it’s rushed, and not happy to take it straight away, but not ruling it out in the longer term. Obviously these aren’t the terrified types, so their view may differ.

 

[Dai Corner]

I do get confused when people say the numbers have slowed down yet we all know there is way more people who have COVID so those numbers are quite meaningless too me. The numbers that matters are the hospital admissions and the deaths and both of those are rising.

Remember the stats are often 'with Covid' not necessarily 'because of Covid'. People who are admitted to hospital or die for completely different reasons are counted as Covid deaths/admissions if they happen to have tested positive.

 

[Bantamzen]

I do get confused when people say the numbers have slowed down yet we all know there is way more people who have COVID so those numbers are quite meaningless too me. The numbers that matters are the hospital admissions and the deaths and both of those are rising.

Good on Van Tam being cautious also and not give false hope like that scientist did yesterday. I'm more than happy too see social distancing continuing for as long as it needs, it's not a big issue these days as the supermarkets are not as strict on this as they once were back in the Spring.

As for this lockdown, waste of time when you see places likes of McDonald's and Greggs open, since when are they essential places!? How on earth can a fast food junk restaurants stay open but normal restaurants have to close? No logic at all there.

That last statement sums up what I have observed about people in favour of some or all the restrictions. "It doesn't affect me, so...."

Unfortunately even social distancing does affect the lives of millions, and many parts of our economy. So no, it cannot go on for as long as it needs.

 

[yorksrob]

As for this lockdown, waste of time when you see places likes of McDonald's and Greggs open, since when are they essential places!? How on earth can a fast food junk restaurants stay open but normal restaurants have to close? No logic at all there.

The virus doesn't respect what is an essential activity. If it can spread during a brief encounter at McDonalds, it is much more likely to spread in a factory. The logic of this is that the lockdown will always be a waste of time.

 

[Freightmaster]

As for this lockdown, waste of time when you see places likes of McDonald's and Greggs open, since when are they essential places!? How on earth can a fast food junk restaurants stay open but normal restaurants have to close? No logic at all there.

While I agree that some of the lockdown rules are nonsensical, surely you can see that there is an enormous difference
in the risk profile of the two examples you gave...?

MCDonalds/Greggs/etc: customers are in the premises for less than five minutes, wearing a mask at all times

'normal' restaurant/pub: customers are sat at a table for an hour or more, not wearing a mask, in an environment
with inadequate ventilation (can't have doors and windows wide open at this time of year!)


As yorksrob quite rightly points out, the virus couldn't care less whether an activity or venue is 'essential' or not;
the purpose of the lockdown is simply to dissuade people from spending long periods of time in indoor locations
other than their home/place of work.




MARK

 

[6862]

I am continually baffled by the groupthink on this forum that Covid is little more than a kind of hoax which will just dissapear if we ignore it. It is not just another form of flu. Lockdowns are the only way to stop the health system being overwhelmed. Do you want Britain to end up like Italy in the first wave?

I don't think many people on here think it is a hoax. I think there is rather a general consensus that while it is serious, the measures that have been taken are disproportionate to the threat it poses. That's very different from the people that deny it or think it's a hoax.

 

[island]

While I agree that some of the lockdown rules are nonsensical, surely you can see that there is an enormous difference
in the risk profile of the two examples you gave...?

MCDonalds/Greggs/etc: customers are in the premises for less than five minutes, wearing a mask at all times

'normal' restaurant/pub: customers are sat at a table for an hour or more, not wearing a mask, in an environment
with inadequate ventilation (can't have doors and windows wide open at this time of year!)

Leaving aside the fact that the effectiveness of masks has not been well-established, in line with the current CovidSecure rules pub and restaurant customers are to be sat at tables 2m apart (or 1m with back to back seating, screens between groups, or the like). And modern air conditioning and extraction systems are highly effective.

 

[Bantamzen]

I don't think many people on here think it is a hoax. I think there is rather a general consensus that while it is serious, the measures that have been taken are disproportionate to the threat it poses. That's very different from the people that deny it or think it's a hoax.

This is another observation I've made, whenever someone challenges the views of those most in favour of lockdowns etc, the increasingly standard response is to dismiss the person making the challenge as being and anti-vaxxer or conspiracist. In the eyes of many the issue is binary, lockdowns or conspiracy nutters. Sadly the reality is far more complex.

 

[AndyY]

While I agree that some of the lockdown rules are nonsensical, surely you can see that there is an enormous difference
in the risk profile of the two examples you gave...?

MCDonalds/Greggs/etc: customers are in the premises for less than five minutes, wearing a mask at all times

'normal' restaurant/pub: customers are sat at a table for an hour or more, not wearing a mask, in an environment
with inadequate ventilation (can't have doors and windows wide open at this time of year!)


As yorksrob quite rightly points out, the virus couldn't care less whether an activity or venue is 'essential' or not;
the purpose of the lockdown is simply to dissuade people from spending long periods of time in indoor locations
other than their home/place of work.

I cannot agree more with you on the point about masks, but sadly on this forum, the word "masks" is worse than a swear word. Completely ignoring the fact that in East Asia where use of masks are almost universal (no "exemptions", no wearing it round your neck or in the style of Borat), the virus is under control despite the high population density.
(Anyway, I had better not ramble on lest I get another strike for going off topic.)


Nevertheless, I agree that some of the lockdown measures are excessive and arbitrary. If Greggs is safe as you said, then surely there is no reason to close shops selling clothes if they have good ventilation, and people are not allowed to try them on?

 

[samxool]

Have to say I’ve yet to find anyone in my domestic or work life that actually plans to have any vaccine.

Without fail everyone I’ve discussed the subject with says the same thing - not happy that it’s rushed, and not happy to take it straight away, but not ruling it out in the longer term. Obviously these aren’t the terrified types, so their view may differ.

the vaccine is not rushed. No part of the vaccine creating and testing process has been skipped or shortened (at least in the west). Whats different this time, is the sheer amount of money and manpower being thrown into this.
This is NOT a rushed vaccine.

 

[bengley]

the vaccine is not rushed. No part of the vaccine creating and testing process has been skipped or shortened (at least in the west). Whats different this time, is the sheer amount of money and manpower being thrown into this.
This is NOT a rushed vaccine.

What is the dictionary definition of rush?

 

[samxool]

What is the dictionary definition of rush?

what part of "No part of the vaccine creating and testing process has been skipped or shortened" do you not understand?

 

[APT618S]

the vaccine is not rushed. No part of the vaccine creating and testing process has been skipped or shortened (at least in the west). Whats different this time, is the sheer amount of money and manpower being thrown into this.
This is NOT a rushed vaccine.

So why are the vaccine manufacturers lobbying for legal protection against lawsuits against any side-effects.
Ref:

APM Health Europe - Covid-19 vaccine makers lobby EU for legal protection

LONDON, 28 Aug (APM) - The European pharma industry's vaccines lobby is putting pressure on the EU for exemptions which would protect its members from lawsuits if there are problems with any new coronavirus vaccines, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday.

www.apmhealtheurope.com

 

[Darandio]

the vaccine is not rushed. No part of the vaccine creating and testing process has been skipped or shortened (at least in the west). Whats different this time, is the sheer amount of money and manpower being thrown into this.
This is NOT a rushed vaccine.

Of course the testing process has been shortened. The phases of clinical trials have always been effectively set in stone where one is completed before moving to the next. In this case phases have been overlapped and different phases entered while earlier ones were still ongoing. By any definition that is a shortened process.

 

[Ianno87]

So why are the vaccine manufacturers lobbying for legal protection against lawsuits against any side-effects.
Ref:

APM Health Europe - Covid-19 vaccine makers lobby EU for legal protection

LONDON, 28 Aug (APM) - The European pharma industry's vaccines lobby is putting pressure on the EU for exemptions which would protect its members from lawsuits if there are problems with any new coronavirus vaccines, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday.

www.apmhealtheurope.com

For all I know, such legal protections could be completely normal procedure for a vaccine.

 

[Cdd89]

There are lots of steps that can be removed without compromising safety. For example removing things like “the committee only meets once a month”.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

There are lots of steps that can be removed without compromising safety. For example removing things like “the committee only meets once a month”.

Definitely a good example imho!

 

[MikeWM]

Of course the testing process has been shortened. The phases of clinical trials have always been effectively set in stone where one is completed before moving to the next. In this case phases have been overlapped and different phases entered while earlier ones were still ongoing. By any definition that is a shortened process.

And a key part of the process is to monitor the incidence and frequency of any long-term effects. There is literally no way that step can be shortened, and in many respects it is the most important step of all. Especially in this case, where a number of the candidates, including the Pfizer one that everyone is so excited about, is based on a new approach which has never been done before.

 

[Paul_10]

While I agree that some of the lockdown rules are nonsensical, surely you can see that there is an enormous difference
in the risk profile of the two examples you gave...?

MCDonalds/Greggs/etc: customers are in the premises for less than five minutes, wearing a mask at all times

'normal' restaurant/pub: customers are sat at a table for an hour or more, not wearing a mask, in an environment
with inadequate ventilation (can't have doors and windows wide open at this time of year!)


As yorksrob quite rightly points out, the virus couldn't care less whether an activity or venue is 'essential' or not;
the purpose of the lockdown is simply to dissuade people from spending long periods of time in indoor locations
other than their home/place of work.




MARK

Maybe about Greggs you have a point regarding short amount of time being inside but certainly not McDonalds/Burger King. You wait for your food, you can still sit in and eat your food(that may not apply to them all and admittedly I have not been in one since lockdown so that may not be the case now) and alot of the customers are teens who we all know a large proportion don't wear masks so could easily be spreaders of the disease.

 

[6Gman]

the vaccine is not rushed. No part of the vaccine creating and testing process has been skipped or shortened (at least in the west). Whats different this time, is the sheer amount of money and manpower being thrown into this.
This is NOT a rushed vaccine.

This. Development phases which are normally sequential are being run in parallel. That's how it's being speeded up.

Maybe about Greggs you have a point regarding short amount of time being inside but certainly not McDonalds/Burger King. You wait for your food, you can still sit in and eat your food(that may not apply to them all and admittedly I have not been in one since lockdown so that may not be the case now) and alot of the customers are teens who we all know a large proportion don't wear masks so could easily be spreaders of the disease.

You cannot sit inside to eat.

 

[Darandio]

This. Development phases which are normally sequential are being run in parallel. That's how it's being speeded up.

Which is shortening the process, something the poster you quoted disagreed with yet you somehow seem to be agreeing.

If running these phases in parallel was the best way to do it then it would have been the normal process in the first place. It wasn't.