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

[Deleted User]

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

The 93% protection against serious illness is the important thing in the long run.

In the short term its disappointing that vaccinated people can get infected (as they can spread covid to the unvacinated) but they won't suffer severe symptoms as the protection from the vaccine will extend that far.

We will get there but we may need a higher % of the population vaccinated before it is safe to reopen than we would have hoped for.

It just shows you all vaccines are virtually the same.

Phillip Nolan suspected as much months ago in a briefing.

Probably why young people are opting for J&J in droves.

Sobit1964

Woody79 wrote: »

It just shows you all vaccines are virtually the same.

Phillip Nolan suspected as much months ago in a briefing.

Probably why young people are opting for J&J in droves.

I think the term might be risk reduction - as I recall [please correct this], AZ was 1.1%, PZ 0.8%, MD 0.7% - not numbers that we ever hear anything about.

I hope to be fully debunked on this, as it seemed unbelievable to me.

[Deleted User]

Sobit1964 wrote: »

I think the term might be risk reduction - as I recall [please correct this], AZ was 1.1%, PZ 0.8%, MD 0.7% - not numbers that we ever hear anything about.

I hope to be fully debunked on this, as it seemed unbelievable to me.

????

No idea what your talking about.

FishOnABike

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It just shows you all vaccines are virtually the same.

Phillip Nolan suspected as much months ago in a briefing.

Probably why young people are opting for J&J in droves.

Also possibly because many might be going to or returning to college or hoping to start permanent employment somewhere so a one dose vaccine is more convenient when someone can't be sure when they might get a first dose and if they'll be in the same place when it comes to a second dose. One single shot avoids any such complications.

OwenM

brickster69 wrote: »

And so it starts

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/spains-covid-19-cases-jump-youth-infection-surges-2021-07-05/?taid=60e348a7fdc7d30001f56b6d&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=trueanthem&utm_source=twitter

The drama...

cheezums

brickster69 wrote: »

And so it starts

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/spains-covid-19-cases-jump-youth-infection-surges-2021-07-05/?taid=60e348a7fdc7d30001f56b6d&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=trueanthem&utm_source=twitter

Bunch of young people catch a sniffle. Gripping stuff.

is_that_so

brickster69 wrote: »

And so it starts

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/spains-covid-19-cases-jump-youth-infection-surges-2021-07-05/?taid=60e348a7fdc7d30001f56b6d&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=trueanthem&utm_source=twitter

This bit is pertinent! High time we got past the terror of the large daily case numbers.

Hospital admissions have so far been largely unaffected and national intensive care occupancy stands at less than 7%.

tom1ie

brickster69 wrote: »

And so it starts

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/spains-covid-19-cases-jump-youth-infection-surges-2021-07-05/?taid=60e348a7fdc7d30001f56b6d&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=trueanthem&utm_source=twitter

But will hospitalisations increase? Vaccinations have to be factored in.

Floppybits

is_that_so wrote: »

This bit is pertinent! High time we got past the terror of the large daily case numbers.

The main metric with this variant is the number of hospitisations of people with covid. If the vaccines are working then we should some increase but not on the scale of what we have seen previously and if this is the case then it doesn't matter how many people have covid like it doesn't matter how many people have the flu.

is_that_so

Floppybits wrote: »

The main metric with this variant is the number of hospitisations of people with covid. If the vaccines are working then we should some increase but not on the scale of what we have seen previously and if this is the case then it doesn't matter how many people have covid like it doesn't matter how many people have the flu.

Yes, that's been my view since last year but they all work off 5 day, 7 day and 14 day cases so it completely dictates where we go. In pre-vaccination days that was fine but now that link to hospitalisations is far weaker.

Floppybits

is_that_so wrote: »

Yes, that's been my view since last year but they all work off 5 day, 7 day and 14 day cases so it completely dictates where we go. In pre-vaccination days that was fine but now that link to hospitalisations is far weaker.

The number of hospitalisations should be the key figure now going forward and not the number of cases. This would be like in pre-covid counting the number of people who had a coldor flu. Everyone at some stage whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated is going to get Covid, for some it will be mild, for other serious enough to have a stay in hospital and possibly ICU (as an asthmatic I would be count myself in this group) similar to what we saw in the past with Flu and other respiratory illnesses but the vaccines should lessen the impact.

TonyMaloney

Floppybits wrote: »

The number of hospitalisations should be the key figure now going forward and not the number of cases. This would be like in pre-covid counting the number of people who had a coldor flu. Everyone at some stage whether they are vaccinated or unvaccinated is going to get Covid, for some it will be mild, for other serious enough to have a stay in hospital and possibly ICU (as an asthmatic I would be count myself in this group) similar to what we saw in the past with Flu and other respiratory illnesses but the vaccines should lessen the impact.

As ever, you can predict hospitalisations by looking at cases.

Why on earth would we stop now?

The Continental Op

I look at it another way. If the numbers are increasing then so to will the number of mutations. New mutations might be better but just a likely to be worse. So every effort should be made to keep the numbers down even if hospitals aren't filling up.

Floppybits

The Continental Op wrote: »

I look at it another way. If the numbers are increasing then so to will the number of mutations. New mutations might be better but just a likely to be worse. So every effort should be made to keep the numbers down even if hospitals aren't filling up.

Ah come on, if that is the case then we will never ever get back to normality because the next variant maybe worse. We have the vaccine and that lessens the impact and should see hospitalisations drop. We need to start living with this like we do with colds and flu and other illnesses.

Biscuitus

The problem is it could mutate into a variant that the current vaccines are ineffective against which would completely undo all the progress made so far sending is back into summer 2020.

ACitizenErased

Biscuitus wrote: »

The problem is it could mutate into a variant that the current vaccines are ineffective against which would completely undo all the progress made so far sending is back into summer 2020.

Highly, highly unlikely. Any mutation that impacts the spike protein, which the vaccines target, would cause the virus to lose it's advantage over other viruses and SARS-COVI-2 would descend into nothingness.

is_that_so

TonyMaloney wrote: »

As ever, you can predict hospitalisations by looking at cases.

Why on earth would we stop now?

They can't be predicted with any level of accuracy now based on the profile of those unvaccinated. The NAMA models are using 2-3%, quite a bit above what the UK are experiencing. From our perspective the number of cases controls what we do. As we've seen our 500 cases a day for months has not affected our hospitalisations at all. That suggests the 5,7 and 14 day model they rely on and its progression to a specific level of more severe disease is no longer as closely linked.

As I like to repeat - 5000 daily cases and empty hospitals is a cold!

[Deleted User]

TonyMaloney wrote: »

As ever, you can predict hospitalisations by looking at cases.

Why on earth would we stop now?

Firstly it should be the positivity rate, not cases that should be used. The more you test, the more cases you get, even if the underlying case numbers are the same.

You have to drastically alter your model to take account vaccinations and what is appearing to be the much milder but more transmissible Delta variant.

The UK data actually looks very good.

Here are the cases - terrible right?

However if we look at what % of cases are positive, it is only slightly up:

How could this be? Well, it's because they have been testing like crazy, not least because they say Delta presents like hayfever :

And then if we look at hospital admissions:

These are ALL good.

Finally, if we look at ground zero for Delta, India, who basically have no one vaccinated, their deaths are nothing like what the UK or Ireland had from Alpha, despite media scaremongering. Of course India has different demographics but the point still stands.

I'm sure someone will chip in with a highly zoomed in graphic with no numbers on the X axis showing a massive upswing, as many "scientists" like Feigl Ding or anyone from Independent SAGE or ISAG shamefully do regularly.

Regrettably there will be a lot of cases, and some deaths regrettably, but it will be much much smaller than the first two waves of deaths we had ( we didn't have 3 waves in Ireland, we had two, as the last graph clearly shows ).

Paddigol

Biscuitus wrote: »

The problem is it could mutate into a variant that the current vaccines are ineffective against which would completely undo all the progress made so far sending is back into summer 2020.

Well, if that's the logic we need to seal our borders as any mutation is 99.99999% certain to originate outside the country and be brought in, as with previous variants.

All we can do is recognise the seriousness of the Delta variant, adapt our strategy accordingly to ensure that as many people as possible are vaccinated before opening up indoor hospitality. After that we can only wait and see how the virus reacts over the coming months/ years. But we can't live under a rock until/ in the hope that it disappears completely.

adubintipp2

The Continental Op wrote: »

I look at it another way. If the numbers are increasing then so to will the number of mutations. New mutations might be better but just a likely to be worse. So every effort should be made to keep the numbers down even if hospitals aren't filling up.

Is it not possible to say this about any endemic virus? This is why we have a global public health infrastructure (WHO, CDC, ECDC etc. ) monitoring a range of diseases. We don’t lock down society because chicken pox might get more deadly any day now!

Floppybits

adubintipp2 wrote: »

Is it not possible to say this about any endemic virus? This is why we have a global public health infrastructure (WHO, CDC, ECDC etc. ) monitoring a range of diseases. We don’t lock down society because chicken pox might get more deadly any day now!

This is the thing now that the fear that has been created over this virus has made people risk adverse and don't want any restrictions lifted till its eradicated which is never gonna be the case with Covid. Just need to learn to live with it, we have the vaccines and most people are getting them that's as much as we can do, we cant keep hiding under the bed hoping it will go away.

PintOfView

Sobit1964 wrote: »

I think the term might be risk reduction - as I recall [please correct this], AZ was 1.1%, PZ 0.8%, MD 0.7% - not numbers that we ever hear anything about.

I hope to be fully debunked on this, as it seemed unbelievable to me.

Let me fully dubunk you

See below ...

PintOfView wrote: »

click the link at end of prev line ^^ to go to the original post on another thread
(note: it's one of the conspiracy threads!!)

Lumen

Deleted User wrote: »

The UK data actually looks very good.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your central thesis, but it's (probably unintentionally) misleading that you've used different end dates for the graphs due to the availability of data.

For instance, the cases data is a week fresher than the positivity rate data.

Biscuitus

ACitizenErased wrote: »

Highly, highly unlikely. Any mutation that impacts the spike protein, which the vaccines target, would cause the virus to lose it's advantage over other viruses and SARS-COVI-2 would descend into nothingness.

Good to know. Thanks for the explanation.

MerlinSouthDub

TonyMaloney wrote: »

As ever, you can predict hospitalisations by looking at cases.

Why on earth would we stop now?

The rate of hospitalisation will fall as more people get vaccinated, and as the age of those infected goes down even further.

Using the hospitalisation rate from previous waves will be miles off the right answer.

FileNotFound

TonyMaloney wrote: »

As ever, you can predict hospitalisations by looking at cases.

Why on earth would we stop now?

What model would you use if you feel we should discount data from pre Delta?

Info on cases vs. hospitalisation from UK (many differences as you have highlighted) show risk of hospitalisation extremely low versus previous variants.

Actually curious. I do feel we should be driven by hospital numbers and of course cases translate but the best info we have (in my opinion) right now shows quite a low risk (relative to covid prior).

Ar we at 1 in 1000 now? or 1 in 3000 I wonder. Or is it 1 in 100.

Would be great to see NPHET giving some good stats on this.

[Deleted User]

Lumen wrote: »

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with your central thesis, but it's (probably unintentionally) misleading that you've used different end dates for the graphs due to the availability of data.

For instance, the cases data is a week fresher than the positivity rate data.

True, but the trend was already significantly very much up on the cases by the 30th of June. Time will tell. My suspicion is that cases will hit a vaccine and prior infection immunity wall soon in the UK and start trending downwards again. We shall see what happens. I have no good explanation for the Indian data - unless it's just they only collect small amounts of it.

One thing's for sure - if we get another wave like the Christmas one we are all screwed and the vaccines are ineffective. Not what I believe is going to happen, but that's what the data would tell us.

Micky 32

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

The rate of hospitalisation will fall as more people get vaccinated, and as the age of those infected goes down even further.

Using the hospitalisation rate from previous waves will be miles off the right answer.

For some reason certain people forget that we now have vaccines and still think it’s 2020. It strengthens my belief some don’t want this ending. In the next couple of months millions more will be in arms. The landscape is rapidly changing for the good.

[Deleted User]

Micky 32 wrote: »

For some reason certain people forget that we now have vaccines and still think it’s 2020. It strengthens my belief some don’t want this ending. In the next couple of months millions more will be in arms. The landscape is rapidly changing for the good.

For those people who believe it's still 2020 - what is the endgame for you? Permanent lockdowns? People dying because they don't get diagnosed in time? Millions on 20 year waiting lists until they become terminally ill? The complete collapse of whole sections of the economy? We are rapidly getting there already. At some point a call would have to be made to end this.

Fortunately I see great evidence that the vaccines will work to a degree to allow proper reopening of society.

TonyMaloney

MerlinSouthDub wrote: »

The rate of hospitalisation will fall as more people get vaccinated, and as the age of those infected goes down even further.

Using the hospitalisation rate from previous waves will be miles off the right answer.

I know