nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Delta variant

amandstu

How might this play out?

Apparently cases in England may be doubling every 4.5 days and resultant hospitalizations are said to be possibly between 2 and 3 times more likely that with the Alpha variant.

Only 1% prevalence here at the moment seemingly.

Back of envelope modeling in my sitting room is not reassuring and I am not near to getting my second AstraZeneca jab yet( so 30% protected against symptomatic disease?)

EDIT: Have been corrected in this thread that parts of England (not England as a whole) had cases doubling every 4.5 days

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

FishOnABike

snowcat wrote: »

Oh sorry I didnt get a chance to go through all 30 of their CV's. Its good to see the main man is an expert in the field.

Do you often make unfounded claims without the most basic fact checking? Oh, sorry, that was a rhetorical question.

dominatinMC

FileNotFound wrote: »

So I guess we will be locked down forever, next we will need to ban driving altogether as that kills people. Then we can close down all society for fear of risks.

Better buy in the cotton wool so Tony can wrap us all up tight.

I think you got lost in the way to the Conspiracy Theories forum..

Danzy

FileNotFound wrote: »

So when will it end, covid is here to stay, vaccines are not 100% and delta is infecting vaccinated people. So cases will continue.

So as we will always have people at risk, when's the magic line where we accept the risk?

Its a serious question.

I'm edging towards that we should open up a little more and continue to vaccinate.

I think indoor dining needs to reopen.

This variant is a problem but the next could be worse. Or much milder.

If vaccines have removed the risk of hospitalizing or death, to a large degree, it should mean a bit more opening up.

Zero deaths should not be the target, living with it may well mean a 1000 deaths a year, or more.

Like a bad flu year.

GooglePlus

FileNotFound wrote: »

Fair enough it will end, but surely we aren't waiting for some nonsense 0 cases, 100% vaccinated.

We are 66/45 first/second in the adult population now. Low hospital cases and minimal mortality, at risk vaccinated.

I was of the impression that was lockdown aim achieved. But seems a new unknown standard has been set.

That with the potential for fading immunity in the first vaccinated leaves us in a continuous circle potentially.

Would like to know the standard is all. Otherwise my hyperbole above has as much ground as your response really.

There is no standard though, standards are set after the fact and this is all unfolding.

We're not waiting for 0 cases either, where did you hear that? We'll never have 0 cases of Covid in our lifetime, the thing was built to survive.

All that's happened is a variant has come up a bit us on the arse before we had enough vaccinated, so we're taking precaution. Once there's more vaccinated, we'll be laughing.

A blip is all but it's understandable that so many are losing their minds because it's a ****ing **** show.

FileNotFound

dominatinMC wrote: »

I think you got lost in the way to the Conspiracy Theories forum..

Quite the opposite. I have been a fu supporter of the Gov efforts to date.

I just cannot really swallow the lack of a plan in relation to what point we actually open.

Just thinking factually, vaccines are not 100%, info to date has immunity fading, variants can infect vaccinated.

I was of the impression we had an aim. Save the at risk and the hospitals from being overwhelmed.

We have now vaccinated at risk so have done all that really can be done. And the hospitals are in good shape. But yet NPHET is forecasting doom and gloom.

We live in a world full of risks, 1 in 3 will get cancer these days. So when will the covid risk be acceptable is all.

I admit I am allowing my annoyance at the lack of clarity to impact the wording in my comments but claiming conspiracies on my part shows a lacking on yours.

FileNotFound

GooglePlus wrote: »

There is no standard though, standards are set after the fact and this is all unfolding.

We're not waiting for 0 cases either, where did you hear that? We'll never have 0 cases of Covid in our lifetime, the thing was built to survive.

All that's happened is a variant has come up a bit us on the arse before we had enough vaccinated, so we're taking precaution. Once there's more vaccinated, we'll be laughing.

A blip is all but it's understandable that so many are losing their minds because it's a ****ing **** show.

I haven't heard any figure, potential figure. Unless I missed it the government don't have an aim in mind.

If 0 covid is the wrong point can you tell me the right one. Or are you making assumptions? My assumption we would open when the aim of vaccinating at risk and keeping hospitalisation down was clearly wrong.

What is enough vaccinated? Will we get there before we start booster shots?

Its not even the staying locked down, it's the lack of any clarity that's really annoying me.

FileNotFound

Danzy wrote: »

I'm edging towards that we should open up a little more and continue to vaccinate.

I think indoor dining needs to reopen.

This variant is a problem but the next could be worse. Or much milder.

If vaccines have removed the risk of hospitalizing or death, to a large degree, it should mean a bit more opening up.

Zero deaths should not be the target, living with it may well mean a 1000 deaths a year, or more.

Like a bad flu year.

I am of the same mind.

nocoverart

FileNotFound wrote: »

Quite the opposite. I have been a fu supporter of the Gov efforts to date.

I just cannot really swallow the lack of a plan in relation to what point we actually open.

Just thinking factually, vaccines are not 100%, info to date has immunity fading, variants can infect vaccinated.

I was of the impression we had an aim. Save the at risk and the hospitals from being overwhelmed.

We have now vaccinated at risk so have done all that really can be done. And the hospitals are in good shape. But yet NPHET is forecasting doom and gloom.

We live in a world full of risks, 1 in 3 will get cancer these days. So when will the covid risk be acceptable is all.

I admit I am allowing my annoyance at the lack of clarity to impact the wording in my comments but claiming conspiracies on my part shows a lacking on yours.

You’re coming across like you’re frustrated with restrictions but at the same time you seem concerned and worried about the virus as well, or maybe I’m reading it wrong?

RobAMerc

I worked in the HSE for a number of years with access to some pretty senior execs.

Make no mistake, the HSE's primary objective is to look after the HSE and everyone in it ( and I am not talking about health workers ). No one in the HSE wants to be the owner of the next PPars or any other egg on your face balls up that damages the organisation.

NFIT's objective is to protect the organisation at the expense of whatever other group is necessary. If tourism, entertainment, travel etc have to bare the brunt of their descisions so be it. They can do no wrong here. If no one dies of Covid in September, then they will claim a victory. "The alternatives would have been to frightening for us to comprehend if we hadnt shut down......" If the government opens up and the sh*t hits the fan, its the governments fault.

I was in an area quite close to where another hiccup happened some years back. Not a single f**k was given about the victims then either, it was ALL about saving the organisation and their skins.

FileNotFound

nocoverart wrote: »

You’re coming across like you’re frustrated with restrictions but at the same time you seem concerned and worried about the virus as well, or maybe I’m reading it wrong?

No issue with the restrictions at all. I have been hyper compliant to be honest. Was supportive even of letting vaccinated have more freedoms way back to allow a little bit of reopening (knowing I'd be one of the latter to be vaccinated).

It's the lack of a plan that's getting to me. Not fussed about the vaccine passport talk and prob wouldn't go indoor dining for a few weeks after it opens just so the rush is over.

So frustration is with the lack of a real aim. Even a percentage vaccinated. The Gov seem afraid to pick factual points where they will try anything.

Opening will by nature increase cases, but the aim has always been protect vulnerable and don't overwhelm hospitals.

Using hypothetical futures over real now data leaves me annoyed. Admittedly I may be the fool here.

FishOnABike

FileNotFound wrote: »

I haven't heard any figure, potential figure. Unless I missed it the government don't have an aim in mind.

If 0 covid is the wrong point can you tell me the right one. Or are you making assumptions? My assumption we would open when the aim of vaccinating at risk and keeping hospitalisation down was clearly wrong.

What is enough vaccinated? Will we get there before we start booster shots?

Its not even the staying locked down, it's the lack of any clarity that's really annoying me.

There is no hard and fast figure. Any magic number or date for opening up can only ever be a best estimate made with the information available at the time the estimate was made. It's a multivariate problem and if the value of any of the input variables changes so does the output.

We need to keep numbers low enough for hospitals to manage (including minimising impact to other hospital services) until we have herd immunity. The arrival of a more transmissible varient makes this more difficult by having to manage higher case rate growth and needing a higher % vaccinated to achieve herd immunity while needing stronger containment measures until this is achieved.

We can make plans but life is what happens to plans.

CJmasgrande

They stated on the Virgin Tonight show tonight that the UK is currently getting 400 daily cases of Delta in people who are fully vaccinated

Deeper Blue

CJmasgrande wrote: »

They stated on the Virgin Tonight show tonight that the UK is currently getting 400 daily cases of Delta in people who are fully vaccinated

And none of them will have any significant symptoms in all likelihood.

Complete non-story

Micky 32

Deeper Blue wrote: »

And none of them will have any significant symptoms in all likelihood.

Complete non-story

1.5% of cases approx. There was approx 27k today.

MadYaker

It'll be interesting to see if they are forced into a U turn in the coming weeks, hopefully not.

hmmm

FileNotFound wrote: »

So when will it end, covid is here to stay, vaccines are not 100% and delta is infecting vaccinated people. So cases will continue.
.

A few more weeks caution is needed to gather data on Delta risk. People need to stop with the panic and appreciate that circumstances have changed slightly and we have to adapt to them.

The exit route is and always has been mass vaccination.

hmmm

New results from J&J - their vaccine works well against Delta.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1410795398776639493

[Deleted User]

Some neutralization data for J&J. Very good results. Only a 1.6 fold reduction for Delta compared to 3.6 and 3.4 for Beta and Gamma respectively. Seems to be holding up very well against variants.

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.01.450707v1

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2) continues to evolve and recently emerging variants with substitutions in the Spike protein have led to growing concerns over increased transmissibility and decreased vaccine coverage due to immune evasion. Here, sera from recipients of a single dose of our Ad26.COV2.S COVID‐19 vaccine were tested for neutralizing activity against several SARS‐CoV‐2 variants of concern. All tested variants demonstrated susceptibility to Ad26.COV2.S‐induced serum neutralization albeit mainly reduced as compared to the B.1 strain. Most pronounced reduction was observed for the B.1.351 (Beta; 3.6‐fold) and P.1 (Gamma; 3.4‐fold) variants that contain similar mutations in the receptor‐binding domain (RBD) while only a 1.6‐fold reduction was observed for the widely spreading B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant.

iheartpooner

3.5K fully vaccinated who tested positive with Delta from all ages, of which 50 died who were all over 50. That is from all Delta cases till last week.

That’s quite bad! I would like to quadruple shot these guys, they won’t stop dying!

Chris_5339762

Micky 32 wrote: »

1.5% of cases approx. There was approx 27k today.

Exactly. Sort of what you expect. The vaccines are never perfect, so SOME breakthrough will happen but that breakthrough will be less serious, far less serious, than a "wild" infection.

The other way of putting it is that 98.5% of the 27k were unvaccinated.

Peter Flynt

CJmasgrande wrote: »

They stated on the Virgin Tonight show tonight that the UK is currently getting 400 daily cases of Delta in people who are fully vaccinated

The issue with the vaccines is that age is still a factor. For example a fully vaccinated person in their 80s is considered to have the same immunity or ability to fight the infection as an unvaccinated person in their 50s.

Alternatively the vaccines will not prevent infection from the virus. Following vaccination your body has its immunity increased if/when you are exposed to infection.

Numbers of daily cases are, of course, important if a viral variant is proving that vaccination is having no effect against that variant.

The real issue is the number of deaths/hospitalisations relative to the number of cases. If that dramatically falls then all of the freedoms we once had can return and this is the approach the UK is taking, and it's also the reason why the government/NPHET are keeping a close eye on the UK this month.

FileNotFound

hmmm wrote: »

A few more weeks caution is needed to gather data on Delta risk. People need to stop with the panic and appreciate that circumstances have changed slightly and we have to adapt to them.

The exit route is and always has been mass vaccination.

Even pre delta when we entered lockdown in December we had no fixed goal (generic flatten the curve which we did a while back), and here we are in the same lockdown (levels seem to have dissappeared) and more to come.

Reality is that without a proper goal you cannot make a proper plan.

The idea we are only now looking at a vaccine cert for indoor that was mentioned months back is just bad or no planning.

My comments are giving out about organisation, not really anything else.

FileNotFound

Peter Flynt wrote: »

Alternatively the vaccines will not prevent infection from the virus. Following vaccination your body has its immunity increased if/when you are exposed to infection.

I think this is something that has many confused. Vaccines give your body the ability to fight a virus more effectively than before.

It's not an invisible shield.

So we will all keep getting covid for as long as it exists and if we keep mass testing the cases will keep coming. But our bodies with varying degrees of efficacy and success (being as we are all different) will fight it off.

It's why case numbers now become less of a relevant marker going forward.

Then even vaccine efficacy being less than 100% means people will continue to die from covid, just at a much lower rate than pre vaccine.

topdecko

If as seems possible we get a load of JandJ vaccines in the coming weeks and bump up our baseline vaccination level then we should be in a better position in 2-3 weeks. however this creation of deadlines and then recurrent delays and u turns is creating alot of unrest. some of the policies aren't thought through either and are announced off the cuff in an attempt to appease the public.
the idea of vaccinated people having more rights is surely unconstitutional especially when the youth are yet again massively disadvantaged by a condition which doesn't really impact them. You would have the bizzare situation where a young person couldn't get served in a cafe yet would almost certainly make up a large part of the workforce in said cafes. We need coherence and appropriate level of response..... cases rising in UK but what about hospitalizations and deaths..

TonyMaloney

FileNotFound wrote: »

I think this is something that has many confused. Vaccines give your body the ability to fight a virus more effectively than before.

It's not an invisible shield.

So we will all keep getting covid for as long as it exists and if we keep mass testing the cases will keep coming. But our bodies with varying degrees of efficacy and success (being as we are all different) will fight it off.

It's why case numbers now become less of a relevant marker going forward.

Then even vaccine efficacy being less than 100% means people will continue to die from covid, just at a much lower rate than pre vaccine.

I keep hearing a variation of this repeated - "the vaccines were not designed to stop infection, they just give the person protection from serious disease".
And while technically correct it completely ignores that with original covid and other known variants, the vaccines did largely provide immunity from infection.

It was a huge advantage that we've effectively lost to delta.
Vaccinated people helped to protect the non-vaccinated, but that is as good as over now.

timmyntc

TonyMaloney wrote: »

I keep hearing a variation of this repeated - "the vaccines were not designed to stop infection, they just give the person protection from serious disease".
And while technically correct it completely ignores that with original covid and other known variants, the vaccines did largely provide immunity from infection.

It was a huge advantage that we've effectively lost to delta.
Vaccinated people helped to protect the non-vaccinated, but that is as good as over now.

The covid vaccines never prevented transmission. Not even on the original strain.
They are "leaky" vaccines - they immunize but do not prevent infection. So you will be fine, but there is a chance the virus can use you as a vector of transmission to the next person.

This is a well documented phenomenon.
Delta, apart from its extra transmissibility, changes nothing. We haven't "lost" anything to it. So stop spreading misinformation.

FileNotFound

TonyMaloney wrote: »

I keep hearing a variation of this repeated - "the vaccines were not designed to stop infection, they just give the person protection from serious disease".
And while technically correct it completely ignores that with original covid and other known variants, the vaccines did largely provide immunity from infection.

It was a huge advantage that we've effectively lost to delta.
Vaccinated people helped to protect the non-vaccinated, but that is as good as over now.

There is no technically about it - that is 100% what these vaccines and every other vaccine in the world does.

Flu jab efficacy is somewhere below 70% if i recall and only cover a small number of the known variants at any time (4 more prevalent in the precious year or comething similar) - (Stand open for correction on the specifics here). Covid will be the same in years to come.

We haven't actually lost anything to the delta based on actual real world figures coming out of the UK. Cases high but mortality and hospitalization low. At least all thats what all the charts floating round in these threads show.

So I would disagree and say that it is going as planned but people expected magic.

Boggles

FileNotFound wrote: »

I think this is something that has many confused. Vaccines give your body the ability to fight a virus more effectively than before.

It's not an invisible shield.

It could be, we just don't know yet or at least to what extent. Studies are ongoing.

The phrase is "sterilization immunity" - The Messi of vaccine response.

The real 'invisible shield' comes at a population level.

Interesting case from Oz.

A birthday party in Australia has been called a "superspreader" event after 24 guests tested positive for the coronavirus.

The highly infectious Delta variant could have infected every guest at the party had there not been six fully vaccinated healthcare workers in attendance

TonyMaloney

timmyntc wrote: »

The covid vaccines never prevented transmission. Not even on the original strain.
They are "leaky" vaccines - they immunize but do not prevent infection. So you will be fine, but there is a chance the virus can use you as a vector of transmission to the next person.

This is a well documented phenomenon.
Delta, apart from its extra transmissibility, changes nothing. We haven't "lost" anything to it. So stop spreading misinformation.

Yes, vaccines block most transmission of COVID-19

The latest data show that getting a shot not only protects vaccinated individuals, it reduces the chance they can spread the virus to others.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/yes-vaccines-block-most-transmission-of-covid-19

That's from April. It's now out of date.

Because of delta we have lost a huge advantage. Take the time to wrap your head around this so you don't go around accusing people of spreading misinformation.

An apology would be nice once you've managed to grasp it

FileNotFound

timmyntc wrote: »

This is a well documented phenomenon.
Delta, apart from its extra transmissibility, changes nothing. We haven't "lost" anything to it. So stop spreading misinformation.

Tony is a perfect example of the poor communication in relation to current events and vaccines.

He is not trying to give any misinformation I'd say but is rather scared and confused by the NPHET doom and gloom that we see right now.

MY parents are the same, no reasoning with them when Tony Holohan tells them we'll be in the toilet the same month we will have the entire adult population vaccinated????

This is where much of my disquiet comes from.