lightsaber wrote:

Dupli wrote:

Aesma wrote:

It matters if everyone is vaccinated. If everyone isn't vaccinated, what matters is the impact on the health system.

art : Well BoJo said we should get used to more death so unfortunately it seems he expects things to get worse on that front.

What should matter is hospital and intensive care capacity.

And that is not looking good: normal care is being postponed again.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/b ... ssion=true

And this is almost 2 weeks before opening up. It is clear 50% vaccinated is not enough to stop delta.

Hospital admissions are not the only public health problem. Long covid could burden the health system for a long time. UK is already planning to open new facilities to treat long covid for children
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-nhs ... n-12332812

data from the Office for National Statistics suggests that 7.4% of children aged between two and 11 and 8.2% of those aged 12 to 16 report continued symptoms

There is no vaccine for that younger age group yet, and low availability for the older.

The fact such a highly vaccinated country has such climbing cases is of concern. We need vaccines for kids (younger children). We as in the world (not just USA, UK, and EU). Interesting times ahead... The UK opening cannot go well.

To everyone:
Does anyone have any links on studies on transmission among kids? It seems like the world is being complacent on how prior Covid19 didn't really get to kids except through parents (during lockdown mind you, so less exposure).

Late edit:
I use the two dose to compare. However, I do question the effectiveness of the attenuated virus vaccines (they do not seem to slow the spread as well as AdrenoVirus or mRNA).
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

At 60% fully vaccinated, Israel seems to benefit from a much slower climb than the UK's 50%.
The USA's 47% isn't enough. In particular, it will get into the dense urban centers which have large pockets of unvaccinated. Most of the EU, Delta should spread faster than the UK. Interesting times...

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... LD~POL~GRC

With Israel saying Pfizer only stopping 64% Delta infection, and Delta have a R0=5-6, it is simply not possible to stop transmission even if literally every single person are vaccinated, as in that case the R would still be (5~6)×(1-64%)=(1.8~2.15), aka in completely vaccinated environment each infected individual can still transmit the virus to 2 other individuals

dtw2hyd wrote:

par13del wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Israel re-instated mask mandate as soon as data showed breakthroughs.

UK's plan appears to be mass infection to achieve herd immunity. Close to 675,000 kids missed school of sickness induced at schools through natural infection. WHO calling UK's plan epidemiological stupidity.

We still have time to act, but CDC is in no mood. Though not publicly discussed our plan also appears to be herd immunity thru mass infection.

Our pediatric 12+ vaccination rates are very low for fall school opening without masks. We are still chasing anti-vaxxers, I haven't seen any PSAs asking kids to get vaccinated.

Vaccines are being thrown away, lotteries put in place, media blitz ads all over TV by any number of celebrities and local officials, job requirements being updated, etc etc etc and with all that the vaccine hesitancy remains, so what else do the scientific experts want governments to do, vaccinate the population by force? It may be epidemiological stupidity to the experts, unfortunately for them they have not convinced enough of the population that they should blindly follow them wherever they lead or say to go. It's funny how only the regular man in the street has a problem with indefinate lock downs, working from home and no socializing.

Governments shouldn't punish children ie., no vaccines + no masks + no good ventilation for the mistakes of anti-vaxx adults. Goes for both UK(no pediatric vaccinations) and USA(12+ vaccination rates are low). Selectively punish adults if that's what it takes.

So these experts need to say how rather than just saying what you cannot do, be a part of the solution.

Another reason to vaccinate instead of letting "natural immunity": vaccines provide better immunity
http://www.kidsresearch.org.au/news/stu ... 9-variants

About children:
https://theconversation.com/amp/childre ... -19-150523

In the meantime, the Netherlands has reached 5.475 cases/day, it was 826 a week ago, almost 700% increase in a week.

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Dupli wrote:

And that is not looking good: normal care is being postponed again.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/b ... ssion=true

And this is almost 2 weeks before opening up. It is clear 50% vaccinated is not enough to stop delta.

Hospital admissions are not the only public health problem. Long covid could burden the health system for a long time. UK is already planning to open new facilities to treat long covid for children
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-nhs ... n-12332812

There is no vaccine for that younger age group yet, and low availability for the older.

The fact such a highly vaccinated country has such climbing cases is of concern. We need vaccines for kids (younger children). We as in the world (not just USA, UK, and EU). Interesting times ahead... The UK opening cannot go well.

To everyone:
Does anyone have any links on studies on transmission among kids? It seems like the world is being complacent on how prior Covid19 didn't really get to kids except through parents (during lockdown mind you, so less exposure).

Late edit:
I use the two dose to compare. However, I do question the effectiveness of the attenuated virus vaccines (they do not seem to slow the spread as well as AdrenoVirus or mRNA).
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

At 60% fully vaccinated, Israel seems to benefit from a much slower climb than the UK's 50%.
The USA's 47% isn't enough. In particular, it will get into the dense urban centers which have large pockets of unvaccinated. Most of the EU, Delta should spread faster than the UK. Interesting times...

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... LD~POL~GRC

With Israel saying Pfizer only stopping 64% Delta infection, and Delta have a R0=5-6, it is simply not possible to stop transmission even if literally every single person are vaccinated, as in that case the R would still be (5~6)×(1-64%)=(1.8~2.15), aka in completely vaccinated environment each infected individual can still transmit the virus to 2 other individuals

Except that while someone might test positive, they might not produce enough virus to infect other vaccinated. Those who do not catch a virus do not transmit.

R=Ro*(1-%category*chance transmit)*(1-%category* chance receive) on a first order basis. If we assume chance to transmit is chance to test positive (a reasonable assumption).

R= 6*(1-100%*64)*(1-100%*.64) = .7776

So a 100% vaccinated will stop the virus.
Need a vaccination rate of 92.5% to bring R<1, worst case for Ro=6
86.5% for Ro initial being a 5.0.

The issue is vaccines that do a poor chance of stopping transmission. This is, in my opinion, why the attenuated virus vaccines are doing so poorly.

There are solutions. e.g., masks Another is a 3rd jab, ideally another vaccine or a variant booster. Also, most vaccinated are mild cases.

Ro drops with social distancing and other behavior changes. Unfortunately, people are not willing to isolate anymore fully. But local cells will be different.

For example, my children are in a camp where 100% of the eligible are vaccinated and only young kids are not. They spend a lot of time outside distanced, wear masks except during lunch which is well distanced, barriers at desks... That all drops R.

Higher density areas have it tougher. Low vaccinated areas have it tougher. But a fully vaccinated population with the better vaccines will Stop Delta.

That said, when I look at the world, I cannot find a country well enough vaccinated to stop it. Germany seems to be doing incredibly well of the countries with good data and testing. But that could just be until they open up...

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases

Lightsaber

par13del wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

par13del wrote:

Vaccines are being thrown away, lotteries put in place, media blitz ads all over TV by any number of celebrities and local officials, job requirements being updated, etc etc etc and with all that the vaccine hesitancy remains, so what else do the scientific experts want governments to do, vaccinate the population by force? It may be epidemiological stupidity to the experts, unfortunately for them they have not convinced enough of the population that they should blindly follow them wherever they lead or say to go. It's funny how only the regular man in the street has a problem with indefinate lock downs, working from home and no socializing.

Governments shouldn't punish children ie., no vaccines + no masks + no good ventilation for the mistakes of anti-vaxx adults. Goes for both UK(no pediatric vaccinations) and USA(12+ vaccination rates are low). Selectively punish adults if that's what it takes.

So these experts need to say how rather than just saying what you cannot do, be a part of the solution.

They have been saying, no one is listening.
-Reinstate mask mandate
-Increase indoor ventilation
-Increase the pace of vaccinations. For UK approve pediatric vaccinations.
-Go on with the lives. No one is suggesting lock downs.

If an anti-vaxxer dies, it is on them, no one cares. If a vaccinated person (or) vaccine ineligible person(<12) dies/gets long COVID because mask mandate was lifted, it is on the regulators. No way to sugar coat this.

The Lancet editor made an interesting comment, these relaxations indirectly encouraging hesitancy, giving a false hope that pandemic is over, those who are on the fence delaying their shots, hence further declining vaccination rates.

dtw2hyd wrote:

par13del wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Governments shouldn't punish children ie., no vaccines + no masks + no good ventilation for the mistakes of anti-vaxx adults. Goes for both UK(no pediatric vaccinations) and USA(12+ vaccination rates are low). Selectively punish adults if that's what it takes.

So these experts need to say how rather than just saying what you cannot do, be a part of the solution.

They have been saying, no one is listening.
-Reinstate mask mandate
-Increase indoor ventilation
-Increase the pace of vaccinations. For UK approve pediatric vaccinations.
-Go on with the lives. No one is suggesting lock downs.

If an anti-vaxxer dies, it is on them, no one cares. If a vaccinated person (or) vaccine ineligible person(<12) dies/gets long COVID because mask mandate was lifted, it is on the regulators. No way to sugar coat this.

The Lancet editor made an interesting comment, these relaxations indirectly encouraging hesitancy, giving a false hope that pandemic is over, those who are on the fence delaying their shots, hence further declining vaccination rates.

Those that were on the fence were looking for any excuse to say no.

I agree problems with those eligible to be vaccinated and unvaccinated, they have the problems, but so will the rest of us. Medical care is being limited from Colorado (1st link, when beds are that full, elective surgeries such as stints and colonoscopies cannot happen) to the UK and I'm sure elsewhere. They transmit to more people if infected (full Ro). Vaccinated might not get sick and might not be sick enough.

Masks and distancing I am a believer in.

Link on few beds in Mesa county Colorado:
https://health.mesacounty.us/covid19/datadashboard/

As a parent of an under 12 child... ugh.

Lockdowns won't work anymore, people are done. This is going to get too interesting...

Lightsaber

I should add my relative in a hospital sees breakthrough cases.
About 2% of the population cannot build immunity (cancer and kidney patients, HIV, or other imniosupresed).

Morbidly Obese and very elderly occupy hospital beds, but make it through.

People who spend a good part of a day with an infectious Unvaccinated are getting enough exposure to be hospitalized despite vaccines, but turn around quick if healthy (but they needs O2 and meds).

The above is just word if mouth and anecdotal, but the unmasked vaccinated who let unvaccinated into their home risk the hospital.

Lightsaber

Interesting Political angle at the issues affecting US vaccinations, and misinformation sources of Fox News. and other far right sources.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/th ... -fox-news/

We found a similar gap in Republicans’ willingness to get a COVID-19 vaccine. Overall, Republicans were among those most likely to say they’re hesitant or resistant to getting vaccinated. But 58 percent of Republicans who get their news from mainstream outlets and 54 percent of Republicans who get their news from Fox News said they had either already received a dose of a COVID-19 vaccine or would get vaccinated as soon as possible. Just 32 percent of Republicans who get their news from far-right news sources said the same. What’s more, 32 percent of these Republicans said they would refuse the vaccine, versus 11 percent of Republicans who get their news from mainstream outlets and 16 percent of Republicans who get their news from Fox News. That said, all three groups of Republicans expressed similar levels of hesitancy about getting vaccinated — 31 percent of mainstream news Republicans and 29 percent of Fox News Republicans said they weren’t sure if they’d get vaccinated, compared to 37 percent of far-right news Republicans who said the same.

lightsaber wrote:

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

The fact such a highly vaccinated country has such climbing cases is of concern. We need vaccines for kids (younger children). We as in the world (not just USA, UK, and EU). Interesting times ahead... The UK opening cannot go well.

To everyone:
Does anyone have any links on studies on transmission among kids? It seems like the world is being complacent on how prior Covid19 didn't really get to kids except through parents (during lockdown mind you, so less exposure).

Late edit:
I use the two dose to compare. However, I do question the effectiveness of the attenuated virus vaccines (they do not seem to slow the spread as well as AdrenoVirus or mRNA).
https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

At 60% fully vaccinated, Israel seems to benefit from a much slower climb than the UK's 50%.
The USA's 47% isn't enough. In particular, it will get into the dense urban centers which have large pockets of unvaccinated. Most of the EU, Delta should spread faster than the UK. Interesting times...

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... LD~POL~GRC

With Israel saying Pfizer only stopping 64% Delta infection, and Delta have a R0=5-6, it is simply not possible to stop transmission even if literally every single person are vaccinated, as in that case the R would still be (5~6)×(1-64%)=(1.8~2.15), aka in completely vaccinated environment each infected individual can still transmit the virus to 2 other individuals

Except that while someone might test positive, they might not produce enough virus to infect other vaccinated. Those who do not catch a virus do not transmit.

R=Ro*(1-%category*chance transmit)*(1-%category* chance receive) on a first order basis. If we assume chance to transmit is chance to test positive (a reasonable assumption).

R= 6*(1-100%*64)*(1-100%*.64) = .7776

So a 100% vaccinated will stop the virus.
Need a vaccination rate of 92.5% to bring R<1, worst case for Ro=6
86.5% for Ro initial being a 5.0.

The issue is vaccines that do a poor chance of stopping transmission. This is, in my opinion, why the attenuated virus vaccines are doing so poorly.

There are solutions. e.g., masks Another is a 3rd jab, ideally another vaccine or a variant booster. Also, most vaccinated are mild cases.

Ro drops with social distancing and other behavior changes. Unfortunately, people are not willing to isolate anymore fully. But local cells will be different.

For example, my children are in a camp where 100% of the eligible are vaccinated and only young kids are not. They spend a lot of time outside distanced, wear masks except during lunch which is well distanced, barriers at desks... That all drops R.

Higher density areas have it tougher. Low vaccinated areas have it tougher. But a fully vaccinated population with the better vaccines will Stop Delta.

That said, when I look at the world, I cannot find a country well enough vaccinated to stop it. Germany seems to be doing incredibly well of the countries with good data and testing. But that could just be until they open up...

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases

Lightsaber

Except, the chance of receiving infection is already chance of being tested positive, and thus you cannot multiple it twice.
In case R0=6 without controk neasure it will transmit like this:
1→6→36→216
With vaccine stopping 64% infection it will goes like this:
1→2.15→4.62→9.94
Much better, but still increasing exponentially

dtw2hyd wrote:

They have been saying, no one is listening.
-Reinstate mask mandate
-Increase indoor ventilation
-Increase the pace of vaccinations. For UK approve pediatric vaccinations.
-Go on with the lives. No one is suggesting lock downs.

If an anti-vaxxer dies, it is on them, no one cares. If a vaccinated person (or) vaccine ineligible person(<12) dies/gets long COVID because mask mandate was lifted, it is on the regulators. No way to sugar coat this.

The Lancet editor made an interesting comment, these relaxations indirectly encouraging hesitancy, giving a false hope that pandemic is over, those who are on the fence delaying their shots, hence further declining vaccination rates.

In order:
Mask mandate - takes one idiot to spoil the pot, majority comply that is not news worthy, someone does not its all over the news. As seen during emergency orders, enforcement has ----been problematic, not enough police officers are available for the number of business houses and other functions available in an open society, as for legal liability is someone is infected at a store.....
Increase indoor ventilation - a physical issue that for a lot of small business a financial death blow, is the money there yes, however maintaining lives via salaries was the priority.
--imagine if the millions spent on ventilators and additional hospitals with no staff.....
Increase pace of vaccinations - this the biggest issue faced the world over, even countries who do not have enough vaccines have hesitancy.

No idea how to deal with the last other than to just let them be and suffer the consequences, incentives in some countries are being challenged in courts for discrimination, easier access for vaccinated is blamed for creating societies within society, even when done by the private sector, the push back is still there. I guess having the families of the anti-vaxxers who have suffered hospitalizations or death do ads on TV like the smokers may help, do those smoker ads even work or turn folks off from TV????
What is known as of now is that many people are just tired of all the government mandates, when that point is reached, civil disobedience is the next order of business, not enough jails available, and in progressive where prisons are not highly regarded.....

par13del wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

They have been saying, no one is listening.
-Reinstate mask mandate
-Increase indoor ventilation
-Increase the pace of vaccinations. For UK approve pediatric vaccinations.
-Go on with the lives. No one is suggesting lock downs.

If an anti-vaxxer dies, it is on them, no one cares. If a vaccinated person (or) vaccine ineligible person(<12) dies/gets long COVID because mask mandate was lifted, it is on the regulators. No way to sugar coat this.

The Lancet editor made an interesting comment, these relaxations indirectly encouraging hesitancy, giving a false hope that pandemic is over, those who are on the fence delaying their shots, hence further declining vaccination rates.

In order:
Mask mandate - takes one idiot to spoil the pot, majority comply that is not news worthy, someone does not its all over the news. As seen during emergency orders, enforcement has ----been problematic, not enough police officers are available for the number of business houses and other functions available in an open society, as for legal liability is someone is infected at a store.....
Increase indoor ventilation - a physical issue that for a lot of small business a financial death blow, is the money there yes, however maintaining lives via salaries was the priority.
--imagine if the millions spent on ventilators and additional hospitals with no staff.....
Increase pace of vaccinations - this the biggest issue faced the world over, even countries who do not have enough vaccines have hesitancy.

No idea how to deal with the last other than to just let them be and suffer the consequences, incentives in some countries are being challenged in courts for discrimination, easier access for vaccinated is blamed for creating societies within society, even when done by the private sector, the push back is still there. I guess having the families of the anti-vaxxers who have suffered hospitalizations or death do ads on TV like the smokers may help, do those smoker ads even work or turn folks off from TV????
What is known as of now is that many people are just tired of all the government mandates, when that point is reached, civil disobedience is the next order of business, not enough jails available, and in progressive where prisons are not highly regarded.....

Vaccine prevents serious illness and death, masks reduce viral load of "any variant". Combination of both would end the pandemic quicker. I would think it is just common sense. Without masks even vaccinated people turned into low-level virus factories, while unvaccs continue to spread.

Even during colder days businesses were keeping entry doors open, now automatic entry doors are back in operation. Which shows lack of guidance, nothing to do with spending $$Billions on HVAC upgrades. Michigan approved a whopping $4.4 Billion education budget, not sure how much of it going to school ventilation system upgrades.

I am not sure this herd immunity idea originated in the USA or in the UK. The noise from the UK makes it sound like this is the UK's idea, but USCDC actions prove they are fully in it.

Both countries imported Delta unabated, yet the USA didn't see major outbreaks like the UK. My theory the imports to the USA went into already well vaccinated communities. Looking at low infection rate in US, the UK is going ahead full steam, even claiming 100K infections and related deaths are manageable. Also in some areas of the UK, the Delta ran out of steam because there we no more vulnerable people

Whether this is an expert alliance or blind leading another blind, time will tell.

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

c933103 wrote:

With Israel saying Pfizer only stopping 64% Delta infection, and Delta have a R0=5-6, it is simply not possible to stop transmission even if literally every single person are vaccinated, as in that case the R would still be (5~6)×(1-64%)=(1.8~2.15), aka in completely vaccinated environment each infected individual can still transmit the virus to 2 other individuals

Except that while someone might test positive, they might not produce enough virus to infect other vaccinated. Those who do not catch a virus do not transmit.

R=Ro*(1-%category*chance transmit)*(1-%category* chance receive) on a first order basis. If we assume chance to transmit is chance to test positive (a reasonable assumption).

R= 6*(1-100%*64)*(1-100%*.64) = .7776

So a 100% vaccinated will stop the virus.
Need a vaccination rate of 92.5% to bring R<1, worst case for Ro=6
86.5% for Ro initial being a 5.0.

The issue is vaccines that do a poor chance of stopping transmission. This is, in my opinion, why the attenuated virus vaccines are doing so poorly.

There are solutions. e.g., masks Another is a 3rd jab, ideally another vaccine or a variant booster. Also, most vaccinated are mild cases.

Ro drops with social distancing and other behavior changes. Unfortunately, people are not willing to isolate anymore fully. But local cells will be different.

For example, my children are in a camp where 100% of the eligible are vaccinated and only young kids are not. They spend a lot of time outside distanced, wear masks except during lunch which is well distanced, barriers at desks... That all drops R.

Higher density areas have it tougher. Low vaccinated areas have it tougher. But a fully vaccinated population with the better vaccines will Stop Delta.

That said, when I look at the world, I cannot find a country well enough vaccinated to stop it. Germany seems to be doing incredibly well of the countries with good data and testing. But that could just be until they open up...

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases

Lightsaber

Except, the chance of receiving infection is already chance of being tested positive, and thus you cannot multiple it twice.
In case R0=6 without controk neasure it will transmit like this:
1→6→36→216
With vaccine stopping 64% infection it will goes like this:
1→2.15→4.62→9.94
Much better, but still increasing exponentially

Please simulate contacts
Unvaccinated with unvaccinated has your first progression 1 to 6 to 36 to 216, that we can agree on.

Vaccinated has a much lower change of exposing a vaccinated enough to infect them. (Lower viral load.)
1 to 0.7776, higher if they are around each other a lot.

You are making the assumption a vaccine only protects the individual from infection.
Strong evidence a vaccine reduces the chance of infecting another person:
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-05- ... ssion.html
One dose:
It found immunization with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren't vaccinated.

After two doses, a 90% reduction in transmission for AZ and Pfizder:
https://www.verywellhealth.com/cdc-stud ... es-5121080

Now, as before the risk of infection was about the risk of transmission, I assumed the same. It is possible for a vaccine, like AZ is, to be more effective stopping transmission than preventing the person inoculated from being infected.

This is why a 50% effective rate is acceptable for a vaccine. What is unusual with Covid19 is with attenuated virus vaccines, the transmission remains high.

All of the adreno virus vaccines (AZ, J&J, Sputnik V) and mRNA (Moderna, Pfizer) are amazingly good at stopping transmission.

Theoretically, you could have a vaccine where 90% of the people were infected (10% effective) and yet they do not pass on the virus (unlikely, I admit, but theoretically possible).
It isn't Ro*effectiveness it is Ro* (1-%transmit)*(1-%receive). You are assuming 100% of the vaccinated who get the virus produce enough virus to infect someone else. Thankfully, we are not in that dooms day scenario. If that were the case, the UK, US, Israel, and others would have much steeper growth curves.

Individuals care about how much a vaccine protects them.
Health authorities care how much a vaccine prevents transmission.

Now, the two tend to be correlated, but with Covid19, not so much.
AZ does much better preventing transmission than it does preventing infection. Ok, great from a health authority perspective.
SinoVac and SinoPharm seem to have little benefit in transmission. I speculate this is why Chile and the UAE are doing far worse from a virus infection standpoint than their vaccination rates suggest.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... BR~QAT~ARE

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

I've done a very amateur model of virus propagation and modified it for delta and vaccine effectiveness. Now, I make assumptions on how well natural immunity after a prior infection works and how fast it fades away, but the virus would be spreading far faster if every one who caught it was that infectious. In particular the high fraction of asymptomatic.

We'll be ok with a higher level of vaccination. I calculate with pretty darn high levels.

Think, the Measles vaccine is only 97% effective with an Ro of 50! (most contagious disease I know about). The population is far from fully vaccinated, yet it dies off (ok, it came back..., but people stopped vaccinating as it became so rare). There is another aspect which is people do not transmit as much if vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html

I doubt I'll convince anyone. While I have my concerns on this virus, it needs to be in perspective.

Lightsaber

par13del wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

They have been saying, no one is listening.
-Reinstate mask mandate
-Increase indoor ventilation
-Increase the pace of vaccinations. For UK approve pediatric vaccinations.
-Go on with the lives. No one is suggesting lock downs.

If an anti-vaxxer dies, it is on them, no one cares. If a vaccinated person (or) vaccine ineligible person(<12) dies/gets long COVID because mask mandate was lifted, it is on the regulators. No way to sugar coat this.

The Lancet editor made an interesting comment, these relaxations indirectly encouraging hesitancy, giving a false hope that pandemic is over, those who are on the fence delaying their shots, hence further declining vaccination rates.

In order:
Mask mandate - takes one idiot to spoil the pot, majority comply that is not news worthy, someone does not its all over the news. As seen during emergency orders, enforcement has ----been problematic, not enough police officers are available for the number of business houses and other functions available in an open society, as for legal liability is someone is infected at a store.....
Increase indoor ventilation - a physical issue that for a lot of small business a financial death blow, is the money there yes, however maintaining lives via salaries was the priority.
--imagine if the millions spent on ventilators and additional hospitals with no staff.....
Increase pace of vaccinations - this the biggest issue faced the world over, even countries who do not have enough vaccines have hesitancy.

No idea how to deal with the last other than to just let them be and suffer the consequences, incentives in some countries are being challenged in courts for discrimination, easier access for vaccinated is blamed for creating societies within society, even when done by the private sector, the push back is still there. I guess having the families of the anti-vaxxers who have suffered hospitalizations or death do ads on TV like the smokers may help, do those smoker ads even work or turn folks off from TV????
What is known as of now is that many people are just tired of all the government mandates, when that point is reached, civil disobedience is the next order of business, not enough jails available, and in progressive where prisons are not highly regarded.....

- Of course it would be best for everyone to continue wearing mask, but even if only some do, they can still have some effects akin to population that aren't 100% vaccinated
- In door ventilation can alternatively be improved by air purifiers which cost money but not that much especially if government willing to put out budgets for those.
- Civil disobedient against government restrictions ... One can say Japan is already seeing that?

Dupli wrote:

In the meantime, the Netherlands has reached 5.475 cases/day, it was 826 a week ago, almost 700% increase in a week.

To add some context:

The increase is almost completely caused by the 10-19 and 20-29 year old.
https://coronadashboard.rijksoverheid.nl/landelijk/positief-geteste-mensen

Not coincidentally the group which:
1. Has been travelling (holiday) to some Delta hotspots in southern Europe for a month;
2. is the last in line to get vaccinated (15 year old can make an appointment);
3. Are being tested a lot (Testing for Entry) to go to a cultural, social or sporting activity;
3. Have the most social contacts after dropping the lock down (two weeks ago).

Although the hospitalisations remain low and haven't increased yet, it's raising concerns it is expected that a number of restrictions will be imposed.

marcelh wrote:

Dupli wrote:

In the meantime, the Netherlands has reached 5.475 cases/day, it was 826 a week ago, almost 700% increase in a week.

To add some context:

The increase is almost completely caused by the 10-19 and 20-29 year old.
https://coronadashboard.rijksoverheid.nl/landelijk/positief-geteste-mensen

Not coincidentally the group which:
1. Has been travelling (holiday) to some Delta hotspots in southern Europe for a month;
2. is the last in line to get vaccinated (15 year old can make an appointment);
3. Are being tested a lot (Testing for Entry) to go to a cultural, social or sporting activity;
3. Have the most social contacts after dropping the lock down (two weeks ago).

Although the hospitalisations remain low and haven't increased yet, it's raising concerns it is expected that a number of restrictions will be imposed.

Per the hospitalizations, are they vaccinated individuals? Such statistics can be used to encourage vaccinations (if available). We know that the infection statistics are / have been used to justify restrictions, unfortunately, after more than a year, more and more of the general population are getting tired and compliance with restrictions is declining, even if slowly in some countries.

In countries with nearly all willing people are now vaccinated (say, for argument, 75%) would it not be useful now to start releasing data showing the hospitalisation rates of fully vaccinated people who contract COVID-19 versus the hospitalisation rates of unvaccinated people who contract COVID-19? Could projections of the chances of unvaccinated people contracting the virus also be made public? That might help reduce vaccine resistance where people refusing vaccination believe that if most other people get vaccinated the chances of the remaining unvaccinated people catching COVID-19 are very small. In other words change the perceived message from this:

if you get vaccinated, you won't get COVID-19

to this:

many, many people - vaccinated or not - will get COVID-19 but if you are not vaccinated you are much more likely to become infected, much more likely to become severely ill and much more likely to die

We need vaccine passport for travel in the U.S. The vaccine and masks are the only solution so we need to require vaccine passport to get more people vaccinated. People from unvaccinated areas should not be traveling to more vaccinated areas spreading the virus and putting pressure on healthcare systems. The choice to be unvaccinated is hurting our social and economic systems.

art wrote:

In countries with nearly all willing people are now vaccinated (say, for argument, 75%) would it not be useful now to start releasing data showing the hospitalisation rates of fully vaccinated people who contract COVID-19 versus the hospitalisation rates of unvaccinated people who contract COVID-19? Could projections of the chances of unvaccinated people contracting the virus also be made public? That might help reduce vaccine resistance where people refusing vaccination believe that if most other people get vaccinated the chances of the remaining unvaccinated people catching COVID-19 are very small. In other words change the perceived message from this:

if you get vaccinated, you won't get COVID-19

to this:

many, many people - vaccinated or not - will get COVID-19 but if you are not vaccinated you are much more likely to become infected, much more likely to become severely ill and much more likely to die

There is no way to prove that because both groups are spreading by not wearing masks. That is an intentional mistake by regulators, equally culpable as anti-vaxxers.

At this point protecting children by vaccinating eligible kids and implementing good mitigation measures in schools should be the priority. Control spread at schools to control community spread.

Spread in school, waning immunity(6+ months) among vaccinated, anti-vaxxers continue to spread, everyone unmasked, we are looking at a gloomy winter.

An explanation of vaccine hesitancy in the US: people are afraid of being charged for it.
https://newrepublic.com/article/162658/ ... se-billing

around one-third of unvaccinated people cited fear of cost as a significant reason they’ve yet to get the jab

Apparently, many people do know that the jabs are supposed to be free. They just don’t believe it. As one still unvaccinated 42-year-old put it, “This is America—your health care is not free.… I just feel like that is how the vaccination process is going to go. They’re going to try to capitalize on it.”

This is not going to be solved by messaging about the vaccine benefits. It seems a lack of trust in the government in general and the healthcare system in particular is a cause of vaccine hesitancy. In fact, it would be interesting to know how strong the correlation is between trust and vaccine uptake across countries. Is there someone who has a dataset on that?

What is the difference between Australia and the U.S.? Australia is headed for more lockdowns with such few cases overall compared to the U.S. and the population is supportive of these science based measures. I know they are having huge vaccination issues (access to the vaccine) there so is that the difference? We have so many more cases than Australia in the U.S. and we refuse to lockdown again or at least even bring back mandatory mask mandates to save lives. Why is the U.S. so anti science and fact compared to other developed nations like Australia? I have been to Australia and they seem conservative/libertarian there in many regions too, but still lockdown when the science says they should.

Areas of the U.S. that are poorly vaccinated should be headed for lockdown or mask mandates at this point. It is a huge policy error to reopen these areas so soon based on the COVID19 numbers.

Pi7472000 wrote:

What is the difference between Australia and the U.S.? Australia is headed for more lockdowns with such few cases overall compared to the U.S. and the population is supportive of these science based measures. I know they are having huge vaccination issues (access to the vaccine) there so is that the difference? We have so many more cases than Australia in the U.S. and we refuse to lockdown again or at least even bring back mandatory mask mandates to save lives. Why is the U.S. so anti science and fact compared to other developed nations like Australia? I have been to Australia and they seem conservative/libertarian there in many regions too, but still lockdown when the science says they should.

Areas of the U.S. that are poorly vaccinated should be headed for lockdown or mask mandates at this point. It is a huge policy error to reopen these areas so soon based on the COVID19 numbers.

Unlike US, no other country looking to vaccinate 100% population.

67% of eligible adult population got one shot. Still so much talk about hesitancy.

US is anti-science in the sense politicians are calling the shots without any science to back it up. Science as a subject, we do poor compared other developed nations, but we use the term a lot.

Had CDC strictly gone by science from get go (ie., without any political or commercial special interests groups driving their decisions), there would be have more trust and compliance.

Pi7472000 wrote:

What is the difference between Australia and the U.S.? Australia is headed for more lockdowns with such few cases overall compared to the U.S. and the population is supportive of these science based measures. I know they are having huge vaccination issues (access to the vaccine) there so is that the difference? We have so many more cases than Australia in the U.S. and we refuse to lockdown again or at least even bring back mandatory mask mandates to save lives. Why is the U.S. so anti science and fact compared to other developed nations like Australia? I have been to Australia and they seem conservative/libertarian there in many regions too, but still lockdown when the science says they should.

Areas of the U.S. that are poorly vaccinated should be headed for lockdown or mask mandates at this point. It is a huge policy error to reopen these areas so soon based on the COVID19 numbers.

How long will Australians tolerate a lockdown every time a case pops up? Eventually the public there, like in the US will lose patience as lockdowns were never intended to stop and eradicate the virus, they were intended to reduce mobility so that the hospitals won't be overrun.

Also trust the science is ultimately not scientific, science is meant to be questioned and in the event of new evidence it changes. The science suggests lockdown prevent a run on the hospitals and are is not a sustainable way to stamp out a virus as infectious as this.

The areas in the US that are poorly vaccinated are by choice, not by a lack of supply. Why should those who have got the vaccine pay when people aren't getting it are creating the risk for themselves. If these vaccines works like the scientific experts say they do then the vaccinated have little to nothing to worry about. If you lockdown especially with a highly vaccinated population and low hospitalizations then the actions suggest that the vaccines really don't work.

In the so-called hotspots in the US this might be an option in local areas but not on a large scale anymore. What should be done is that private businesses take the lead on requiring vaccination especially if cases are high. This is controversial but it keeps the economy open. Quebec is planning this to avoid lockdown and Israel has done this also with their green pass.

Pi7472000 wrote:

What is the difference between Australia and the U.S.? Australia is headed for more lockdowns with such few cases overall compared to the U.S. and the population is supportive of these science based measures. I know they are having huge vaccination issues (access to the vaccine) there so is that the difference? We have so many more cases than Australia in the U.S. and we refuse to lockdown again or at least even bring back mandatory mask mandates to save lives. Why is the U.S. so anti science and fact compared to other developed nations like Australia? I have been to Australia and they seem conservative/libertarian there in many regions too, but still lockdown when the science says they should..

As I have said before, and it is obviously my personal opinion but I truly do believe it is a simple and sensible explanation, is that the reason many Americans have seemingly turned on "science", is purely driven by ideological considerations. Which in large swaths of the current American population, means it is a "tribal" consideration.

Science has been tagged by many conservative voices and personalities as liberal, leftist, even communist, and even anti-American. Scientists have been clumped in the category of "East Coast Elites" or of an international intelligentsia. Simply put, that makes this group and by extension whatever they say or champion (i.e."science", climate change, vaccinations, masks, evolution, renewables, etc), radioactive and against their "values" (a total conflation of course). This is the result of the Tribe first, rational thought second attitude that has seeped into American politics.

It happens in the left too, with the so-called more extreme elements of the "cancel culture" wokes, where anyone or anything with even a minute stain on their resume, based on their self-selected criteria, must be eliminated from any position in society that may indicate leadership or role modeling, because otherwise you are somehow giving legitimacy to some horrible institution of oppression (another conflation).

There is no logic to it, it's pure drone mentality. If the conservative side really started to believe babies were leftists trying to undermine Mrrrica, it is to the point that not an insignificant few would flip on abortion. If the liberal side started to believe corporations are trying to profit too much from conservation and renewables, some would probably start buying and burning oil barrels too.

Many people today just are not actual independent thinking individuals.

StarAC17 wrote:

Pi7472000 wrote:

What is the difference between Australia and the U.S.? Australia is headed for more lockdowns with such few cases overall compared to the U.S. and the population is supportive of these science based measures. I know they are having huge vaccination issues (access to the vaccine) there so is that the difference? We have so many more cases than Australia in the U.S. and we refuse to lockdown again or at least even bring back mandatory mask mandates to save lives. Why is the U.S. so anti science and fact compared to other developed nations like Australia? I have been to Australia and they seem conservative/libertarian there in many regions too, but still lockdown when the science says they should.

Areas of the U.S. that are poorly vaccinated should be headed for lockdown or mask mandates at this point. It is a huge policy error to reopen these areas so soon based on the COVID19 numbers.

How long will Australians tolerate a lockdown every time a case pops up? Eventually the public there, like in the US will lose patience as lockdowns were never intended to stop and eradicate the virus, they were intended to reduce mobility so that the hospitals won't be overrun.

Also trust the science is ultimately not scientific, science is meant to be questioned and in the event of new evidence it changes. The science suggests lockdown prevent a run on the hospitals and are is not a sustainable way to stamp out a virus as infectious as this.

The areas in the US that are poorly vaccinated are by choice, not by a lack of supply. Why should those who have got the vaccine pay when people aren't getting it are creating the risk for themselves. If these vaccines works like the scientific experts say they do then the vaccinated have little to nothing to worry about. If you lockdown especially with a highly vaccinated population and low hospitalizations then the actions suggest that the vaccines really don't work.

In the so-called hotspots in the US this might be an option in local areas but not on a large scale anymore. What should be done is that private businesses take the lead on requiring vaccination especially if cases are high. This is controversial but it keeps the economy open. Quebec is planning this to avoid lockdown and Israel has done this also with their green pass.

I agree that we need a vaccine passport in the U.S. like they have in Israel. We will need lockdowns like we see in Australia again though here in hotspots and states with low vaccination rates. Australia's population has been much more science based and not resisted lockdown or masks like the U.S. They are in much better shape the U.S. with overall cases. They have done a horrible job with vaccine distribution there though.

We are seeing strains on hospitals in poorly vaccinated states. Science has shown lockdowns do work as seen in China, Europe, Australia, Japan, New Zealand etc. If we don't want to face winter lockdowns then we need more people vaccinated. Vaccines do work and are safe and effective, but only if enough people get vaccinated. We will see the virus mutate if not enough people get vaccinated.

Pi7472000 wrote:

What is the difference between Australia and the U.S.? Australia is headed for more lockdowns with such few cases overall compared to the U.S. and the population is supportive of these science based measures. I know they are having huge vaccination issues (access to the vaccine) there so is that the difference? We have so many more cases than Australia in the U.S. and we refuse to lockdown again or at least even bring back mandatory mask mandates to save lives. Why is the U.S. so anti science and fact compared to other developed nations like Australia? I have been to Australia and they seem conservative/libertarian there in many regions too, but still lockdown when the science says they should.

Australia didn't get much lockdown in 2020-2021. So they're happy to get a few in order to continue having their almost-corona-free environment and to continue nit deal with much lockdown in the future.
Meanwhile there're already many cases in the US, coupled with many lockdowns of extensive length. So of course people won't want it anymore as soon as data seems to indocate things are now better.


As for vaccine, their lack of access to vaccine is a direct consequence of their insignificant number of cases, causing other countries to believe it is better to send vaccines to countries with more cases than to Australia.

Minimal outbreaks: testing, tracking, isolation, and targeted lock downs are effective.

StarAC17 wrote:

How long will Australians tolerate a lockdown every time a case pops up? Eventually the public there, like in the US will lose patience as lockdowns were never intended to stop and eradicate the virus, they were intended to reduce mobility so that the hospitals won't be overrun.

That is not actually true. Quite a few countries have used lockdowns to eradicate the virus, and continue to do so. China is doing that, again and again, but also new Zealand, Australia. And they are successful, and popular.

One of the most striking things about this pandemic is that most western governments gave up on eradication very early, already in February 2020 ("it's just a flu..."). At the time eradication was still possible.
We switched to a herd immunity strategy from the start (natural or through vaccines) and are still following that strategy. And not successful at all, despite health and economic cost which are far higher than the first group of countries.

Dupli wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

How long will Australians tolerate a lockdown every time a case pops up? Eventually the public there, like in the US will lose patience as lockdowns were never intended to stop and eradicate the virus, they were intended to reduce mobility so that the hospitals won't be overrun.

That is not actually true. Quite a few countries have used lockdowns to eradicate the virus, and continue to do so. China is doing that, again and again, but also new Zealand, Australia. And they are successful, and popular.

One of the most striking things about this pandemic is that most western governments gave up on eradication very early, already in February 2020 ("it's just a flu..."). At the time eradication was still possible.
We switched to a herd immunity strategy from the start (natural or through vaccines) and are still following that strategy. And not successful at all, despite health and economic cost which are far higher than the first group of countries.

Had China been transparent about this from the start we might have had a chance but once it spread to Italy and then to North America (most cases in North America came from Europe) it was going to get everywhere and it has. Furthermore there is a lot of evidence that this virus was circulating long before it was actually identified. Had we locked down in February 2020 we would have had a chance but there was no reason to and no expert was waiving the red flag that this was going to be a Pandemic.

I think the western nations gave up on eradication because the virus is mild in 95% of the people it infects. Meaning 95% of people don't need hospitalization, had we known about the long-hauler symptoms up front we probably would have been more aggressive than we were initially but this is most people is a mild infection.

I will use NZ as an example they stopped local transmission with a short lockdown (5 weeks I think) very early. A case comes in here and there and there is a lockdown and while they have been more effective than Australia every now and then a case shows up and sometimes it can't be traced. Australia is getting more cases because it gets more international arrivals.

Australia/NZ's success in keeping the virus out has been the fact that the only way in which is air, have developed a very effective quarantine system and both countries are sparsely populated. Taiwan had the same quarantine system with aggressive contact tracing and no lockdowns until May of this year.

Not saying that these method's don't work but they won't have support forever and these countries will have their borders closed far longer than other places and even when they have vaccinated an acceptable amount of citizens they will have to deal with outbreaks and community transmission.

The possibility of achieving this everywhere else is nearly impossible. You would have had to suspend the free-movement in the EU and stop interstate travel in the US, interprovincial travel in Canada to even have a chance. What we know now is that a lot of the transmission has been essential workers that would be exempt from quarantines. This is a good article about the covid zero countries.

https://www.theatlantic.com/internation ... ne/619231/

lightsaber wrote:

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Except that while someone might test positive, they might not produce enough virus to infect other vaccinated. Those who do not catch a virus do not transmit.

R=Ro*(1-%category*chance transmit)*(1-%category* chance receive) on a first order basis. If we assume chance to transmit is chance to test positive (a reasonable assumption).

R= 6*(1-100%*64)*(1-100%*.64) = .7776

So a 100% vaccinated will stop the virus.
Need a vaccination rate of 92.5% to bring R<1, worst case for Ro=6
86.5% for Ro initial being a 5.0.

The issue is vaccines that do a poor chance of stopping transmission. This is, in my opinion, why the attenuated virus vaccines are doing so poorly.

There are solutions. e.g., masks Another is a 3rd jab, ideally another vaccine or a variant booster. Also, most vaccinated are mild cases.

Ro drops with social distancing and other behavior changes. Unfortunately, people are not willing to isolate anymore fully. But local cells will be different.

For example, my children are in a camp where 100% of the eligible are vaccinated and only young kids are not. They spend a lot of time outside distanced, wear masks except during lunch which is well distanced, barriers at desks... That all drops R.

Higher density areas have it tougher. Low vaccinated areas have it tougher. But a fully vaccinated population with the better vaccines will Stop Delta.

That said, when I look at the world, I cannot find a country well enough vaccinated to stop it. Germany seems to be doing incredibly well of the countries with good data and testing. But that could just be until they open up...

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases

Lightsaber

Except, the chance of receiving infection is already chance of being tested positive, and thus you cannot multiple it twice.
In case R0=6 without controk neasure it will transmit like this:
1→6→36→216
With vaccine stopping 64% infection it will goes like this:
1→2.15→4.62→9.94
Much better, but still increasing exponentially

Please simulate contacts
Unvaccinated with unvaccinated has your first progression 1 to 6 to 36 to 216, that we can agree on.

Vaccinated has a much lower change of exposing a vaccinated enough to infect them. (Lower viral load.)
1 to 0.7776, higher if they are around each other a lot.

You are making the assumption a vaccine only protects the individual from infection.
Strong evidence a vaccine reduces the chance of infecting another person:
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-05- ... ssion.html
One dose:
It found immunization with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren't vaccinated.

After two doses, a 90% reduction in transmission for AZ and Pfizder:
https://www.verywellhealth.com/cdc-stud ... es-5121080

Now, as before the risk of infection was about the risk of transmission, I assumed the same. It is possible for a vaccine, like AZ is, to be more effective stopping transmission than preventing the person inoculated from being infected.

This is why a 50% effective rate is acceptable for a vaccine. What is unusual with Covid19 is with attenuated virus vaccines, the transmission remains high.

All of the adreno virus vaccines (AZ, J&J, Sputnik V) and mRNA (Moderna, Pfizer) are amazingly good at stopping transmission.

Theoretically, you could have a vaccine where 90% of the people were infected (10% effective) and yet they do not pass on the virus (unlikely, I admit, but theoretically possible).
It isn't Ro*effectiveness it is Ro* (1-%transmit)*(1-%receive). You are assuming 100% of the vaccinated who get the virus produce enough virus to infect someone else. Thankfully, we are not in that dooms day scenario. If that were the case, the UK, US, Israel, and others would have much steeper growth curves.

Individuals care about how much a vaccine protects them.
Health authorities care how much a vaccine prevents transmission.

Now, the two tend to be correlated, but with Covid19, not so much.
AZ does much better preventing transmission than it does preventing infection. Ok, great from a health authority perspective.
SinoVac and SinoPharm seem to have little benefit in transmission. I speculate this is why Chile and the UAE are doing far worse from a virus infection standpoint than their vaccination rates suggest.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... BR~QAT~ARE

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

I've done a very amateur model of virus propagation and modified it for delta and vaccine effectiveness. Now, I make assumptions on how well natural immunity after a prior infection works and how fast it fades away, but the virus would be spreading far faster if every one who caught it was that infectious. In particular the high fraction of asymptomatic.

We'll be ok with a higher level of vaccination. I calculate with pretty darn high levels.

Think, the Measles vaccine is only 97% effective with an Ro of 50! (most contagious disease I know about). The population is far from fully vaccinated, yet it dies off (ok, it came back..., but people stopped vaccinating as it became so rare). There is another aspect which is people do not transmit as much if vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html

I doubt I'll convince anyone. While I have my concerns on this virus, it needs to be in perspective.

Lightsaber

R0 of Measles is like 15 instead of 50.

Dupli wrote:

StarAC17 wrote:

How long will Australians tolerate a lockdown every time a case pops up? Eventually the public there, like in the US will lose patience as lockdowns were never intended to stop and eradicate the virus, they were intended to reduce mobility so that the hospitals won't be overrun.

That is not actually true. Quite a few countries have used lockdowns to eradicate the virus, and continue to do so. China is doing that, again and again, but also new Zealand, Australia. And they are successful, and popular.

One of the most striking things about this pandemic is that most western governments gave up on eradication very early, already in February 2020 ("it's just a flu..."). At the time eradication was still possible.
We switched to a herd immunity strategy from the start (natural or through vaccines) and are still following that strategy. And not successful at all, despite health and economic cost which are far higher than the first group of countries.

Who told the world to treat it like flu?

https://www.cna.com.tw/news/firstnews/202107115006.aspx
According to Shanghai Fuxing Group from China, TSMC and Foxconn signed contracts with China's Shanghai Fuxing Group for 10 Million doses of Pfizer/Biontech vaccines. The announcement claim Fuxing have monopoly in developing and commercializing the vaccine in China Mainland, HK, Macau, Taiwan, but claim that those vaccines are to be produced in Europe. The announcement also claim that those vaccines are to be donated to the Public Health Organization in the Area of Taiwan.
The news was announced on Shanghai Stock Exchange as an company announcement
All other involved entities haven't confirm such announcement yet

https://tw.appledaily.com/property/2021 ... WSVN6TGYQ/
Reportedly the contract require Taiwan Authority approving the vaccine to become valid. And there are also report that it would cost an extra 3USD per dose as well as 4 weeks time in order to repackage the vaccine in Taiwan against Chinese markings and trademarks.

par13del wrote:

marcelh wrote:

Dupli wrote:

In the meantime, the Netherlands has reached 5.475 cases/day, it was 826 a week ago, almost 700% increase in a week.

To add some context:

The increase is almost completely caused by the 10-19 and 20-29 year old.
https://coronadashboard.rijksoverheid.nl/landelijk/positief-geteste-mensen

Not coincidentally the group which:
1. Has been travelling (holiday) to some Delta hotspots in southern Europe for a month;
2. is the last in line to get vaccinated (15 year old can make an appointment);
3. Are being tested a lot (Testing for Entry) to go to a cultural, social or sporting activity;
3. Have the most social contacts after dropping the lock down (two weeks ago).

Although the hospitalisations remain low and haven't increased yet, it's raising concerns it is expected that a number of restrictions will be imposed.

Per the hospitalizations, are they vaccinated individuals?

Unfortunately, I haven’t found that information.
Good news is that from today, all 12 year old can make an appointment for vaccination. Also the gap between first and second jab (5 weeks) will be decreased.

lightsaber wrote:

c933103 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Except that while someone might test positive, they might not produce enough virus to infect other vaccinated. Those who do not catch a virus do not transmit.

R=Ro*(1-%category*chance transmit)*(1-%category* chance receive) on a first order basis. If we assume chance to transmit is chance to test positive (a reasonable assumption).

R= 6*(1-100%*64)*(1-100%*.64) = .7776

So a 100% vaccinated will stop the virus.
Need a vaccination rate of 92.5% to bring R<1, worst case for Ro=6
86.5% for Ro initial being a 5.0.

The issue is vaccines that do a poor chance of stopping transmission. This is, in my opinion, why the attenuated virus vaccines are doing so poorly.

There are solutions. e.g., masks Another is a 3rd jab, ideally another vaccine or a variant booster. Also, most vaccinated are mild cases.

Ro drops with social distancing and other behavior changes. Unfortunately, people are not willing to isolate anymore fully. But local cells will be different.

For example, my children are in a camp where 100% of the eligible are vaccinated and only young kids are not. They spend a lot of time outside distanced, wear masks except during lunch which is well distanced, barriers at desks... That all drops R.

Higher density areas have it tougher. Low vaccinated areas have it tougher. But a fully vaccinated population with the better vaccines will Stop Delta.

That said, when I look at the world, I cannot find a country well enough vaccinated to stop it. Germany seems to be doing incredibly well of the countries with good data and testing. But that could just be until they open up...

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases

Lightsaber

Except, the chance of receiving infection is already chance of being tested positive, and thus you cannot multiple it twice.
In case R0=6 without controk neasure it will transmit like this:
1→6→36→216
With vaccine stopping 64% infection it will goes like this:
1→2.15→4.62→9.94
Much better, but still increasing exponentially

Please simulate contacts
Unvaccinated with unvaccinated has your first progression 1 to 6 to 36 to 216, that we can agree on.

Vaccinated has a much lower change of exposing a vaccinated enough to infect them. (Lower viral load.)
1 to 0.7776, higher if they are around each other a lot.

You are making the assumption a vaccine only protects the individual from infection.
Strong evidence a vaccine reduces the chance of infecting another person:
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-05- ... ssion.html
One dose:
It found immunization with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren't vaccinated.

After two doses, a 90% reduction in transmission for AZ and Pfizder:
https://www.verywellhealth.com/cdc-stud ... es-5121080

Now, as before the risk of infection was about the risk of transmission, I assumed the same. It is possible for a vaccine, like AZ is, to be more effective stopping transmission than preventing the person inoculated from being infected.

This is why a 50% effective rate is acceptable for a vaccine. What is unusual with Covid19 is with attenuated virus vaccines, the transmission remains high.

All of the adreno virus vaccines (AZ, J&J, Sputnik V) and mRNA (Moderna, Pfizer) are amazingly good at stopping transmission.

Theoretically, you could have a vaccine where 90% of the people were infected (10% effective) and yet they do not pass on the virus (unlikely, I admit, but theoretically possible).
It isn't Ro*effectiveness it is Ro* (1-%transmit)*(1-%receive). You are assuming 100% of the vaccinated who get the virus produce enough virus to infect someone else. Thankfully, we are not in that dooms day scenario. If that were the case, the UK, US, Israel, and others would have much steeper growth curves.

Individuals care about how much a vaccine protects them.
Health authorities care how much a vaccine prevents transmission.

Now, the two tend to be correlated, but with Covid19, not so much.
AZ does much better preventing transmission than it does preventing infection. Ok, great from a health authority perspective.
SinoVac and SinoPharm seem to have little benefit in transmission. I speculate this is why Chile and the UAE are doing far worse from a virus infection standpoint than their vaccination rates suggest.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... BR~QAT~ARE

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

I've done a very amateur model of virus propagation and modified it for delta and vaccine effectiveness. Now, I make assumptions on how well natural immunity after a prior infection works and how fast it fades away, but the virus would be spreading far faster if every one who caught it was that infectious. In particular the high fraction of asymptomatic.

We'll be ok with a higher level of vaccination. I calculate with pretty darn high levels.

Think, the Measles vaccine is only 97% effective with an Ro of 50! (most contagious disease I know about). The population is far from fully vaccinated, yet it dies off (ok, it came back..., but people stopped vaccinating as it became so rare). There is another aspect which is people do not transmit as much if vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html

I doubt I'll convince anyone. While I have my concerns on this virus, it needs to be in perspective.

Lightsaber

I'd say I'm not that surprised that there's case growth even in highly vaccinated countries resulting from the Delta variant. I'm also not surprised that cases are growing in some states with high vaccination rates.

One thing that's important to remember is only 48% of the total population in the US is fully vaccinated. Even among the top 10 states by % fully vaccinated, vaccination rates probably aren't enough to reach herd immunity (I'll list them below and give % population over 12 fully vaccinated):
Vermont --- 75%
Massachusetts --- 72%
Connecticut --- 71%
Maine --- 71%
Rhode Island --- 68%
Maryland --- 67%
New Jersey --- 66%
Washington (state) --- 66%
New Mexico --- 65%
New Hampshire --- 65%

Notoriously absent from this list are larger states that have unvaccinated pockets, so I'll list that information below... we're quite far from herd immunity:
California --- 60%
Texas --- 51%
Florida --- 54%
New York --- 64%
Pennsylvania --- 59%

Source: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

And because I'm California-based and we're having some Delta problems here, I also thought it would be good to note which counties are "highly" vaccinated (Hint: They're mostly Bay Area counties. Also, these are percentages of the total population, not population >12 years old since I couldn't find that data):
Marin --- 72%
San Francisco --- 68%
Santa Clara --- 67%
San Mateo --- 66%
Alameda --- 64%
Contra Costa --- 63%
Alpine --- 61%
Napa --- 60%
Santa Cruz --- 60%
Sonoma --- 59%

Again, the five most populated are missing from the top 10, so here they are:
Los Angeles --- 52%
San Diego --- 57%
Orange --- 54%
Riverside --- 42%
San Bernardino --- 39%

Source: https://www.latimes.com/projects/califo ... tribution/

The point I'm making here is that the places that may have conceivably achieved some form of herd immunity are very small and can be subverted by new strains/variants that have better escape mechanisms from other more populated areas that are not likely to have herd immunity. Teenagers should be vaccinated to keep out the variants - and potentially, boosters will be needed for the late fall/winter. LA County is going through a quite nasty Delta surge, despite having a larger percentage of vaccinated residents than the country as a whole.

hbernal1 wrote:

Again, the five most populated are missing from the top 10, so here they are:
Los Angeles --- 52%
San Diego --- 57%
Orange --- 54%
Riverside --- 42%
San Bernardino --- 39%

Source: https://www.latimes.com/projects/califo ... tribution/

The point I'm making here is that the places that may have conceivably achieved some form of herd immunity are very small and can be subverted by new strains/variants that have better escape mechanisms from other more populated areas that are not likely to have herd immunity. Teenagers should be vaccinated to keep out the variants - and potentially, boosters will be needed for the late fall/winter. LA County is going through a quite nasty Delta surge, despite having a larger percentage of vaccinated residents than the country as a whole.

Interesting numbers. The fact the five most populated counties in California lack enough vaccine highlights how this will spread.

We also need vaccines ASAP for all school kids, age 3 and up ASAP. Delta might not hospitalize kids much, but they'll go to school, take it home and then it will go through whatever business has low vaccination.

We'll need boosters.

Urban areas with high densities will see rapid spreads. Bars, restaurants, gyms, schools, and sporting events will spread this. Not to mention air travel (it amazes me how many cannot wear a mask properly).

Cest la vie.

Lightsaber

My area is in a lockdown, you can only go out for essential goods, 1 person from a household can go to the supermarket. Exercise allowed outside but only within local government area or 10km radius.

The cases are going up quickly. Our government put in a pretty soft-lockdown to begin with and nobody took notice. Everyone socialised and partied as they wanted. With the inevitable results.

Now we look like being locked down possibly another 4 weeks.

We don't have enough people vaccinated yet either.

What is also stupid is that people are using the 'exercise' reason as a loophole to go out and socialise. They put some activewear on, go walk to a local park and then stand around talking. Soon that will have to be stopped then nobody will be allowed to exercise because of these selfish people.

hbernal1 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

c933103 wrote:

Except, the chance of receiving infection is already chance of being tested positive, and thus you cannot multiple it twice.
In case R0=6 without controk neasure it will transmit like this:
1→6→36→216
With vaccine stopping 64% infection it will goes like this:
1→2.15→4.62→9.94
Much better, but still increasing exponentially

Please simulate contacts
Unvaccinated with unvaccinated has your first progression 1 to 6 to 36 to 216, that we can agree on.

Vaccinated has a much lower change of exposing a vaccinated enough to infect them. (Lower viral load.)
1 to 0.7776, higher if they are around each other a lot.

You are making the assumption a vaccine only protects the individual from infection.
Strong evidence a vaccine reduces the chance of infecting another person:
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-05- ... ssion.html
One dose:
It found immunization with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren't vaccinated.

After two doses, a 90% reduction in transmission for AZ and Pfizder:
https://www.verywellhealth.com/cdc-stud ... es-5121080

Now, as before the risk of infection was about the risk of transmission, I assumed the same. It is possible for a vaccine, like AZ is, to be more effective stopping transmission than preventing the person inoculated from being infected.

This is why a 50% effective rate is acceptable for a vaccine. What is unusual with Covid19 is with attenuated virus vaccines, the transmission remains high.

All of the adreno virus vaccines (AZ, J&J, Sputnik V) and mRNA (Moderna, Pfizer) are amazingly good at stopping transmission.

Theoretically, you could have a vaccine where 90% of the people were infected (10% effective) and yet they do not pass on the virus (unlikely, I admit, but theoretically possible).
It isn't Ro*effectiveness it is Ro* (1-%transmit)*(1-%receive). You are assuming 100% of the vaccinated who get the virus produce enough virus to infect someone else. Thankfully, we are not in that dooms day scenario. If that were the case, the UK, US, Israel, and others would have much steeper growth curves.

Individuals care about how much a vaccine protects them.
Health authorities care how much a vaccine prevents transmission.

Now, the two tend to be correlated, but with Covid19, not so much.
AZ does much better preventing transmission than it does preventing infection. Ok, great from a health authority perspective.
SinoVac and SinoPharm seem to have little benefit in transmission. I speculate this is why Chile and the UAE are doing far worse from a virus infection standpoint than their vaccination rates suggest.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... BR~QAT~ARE

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

I've done a very amateur model of virus propagation and modified it for delta and vaccine effectiveness. Now, I make assumptions on how well natural immunity after a prior infection works and how fast it fades away, but the virus would be spreading far faster if every one who caught it was that infectious. In particular the high fraction of asymptomatic.

We'll be ok with a higher level of vaccination. I calculate with pretty darn high levels.

Think, the Measles vaccine is only 97% effective with an Ro of 50! (most contagious disease I know about). The population is far from fully vaccinated, yet it dies off (ok, it came back..., but people stopped vaccinating as it became so rare). There is another aspect which is people do not transmit as much if vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html

I doubt I'll convince anyone. While I have my concerns on this virus, it needs to be in perspective.

Lightsaber

I'd say I'm not that surprised that there's case growth even in highly vaccinated countries resulting from the Delta variant. I'm also not surprised that cases are growing in some states with high vaccination rates.

One thing that's important to remember is only 48% of the total population in the US is fully vaccinated. Even among the top 10 states by % fully vaccinated, vaccination rates probably aren't enough to reach herd immunity (I'll list them below and give % population over 12 fully vaccinated):
Vermont --- 75%
Massachusetts --- 72%
Connecticut --- 71%
Maine --- 71%
Rhode Island --- 68%
Maryland --- 67%
New Jersey --- 66%
Washington (state) --- 66%
New Mexico --- 65%
New Hampshire --- 65%

Notoriously absent from this list are larger states that have unvaccinated pockets, so I'll list that information below... we're quite far from herd immunity:
California --- 60%
Texas --- 51%
Florida --- 54%
New York --- 64%
Pennsylvania --- 59%

Source: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

And because I'm California-based and we're having some Delta problems here, I also thought it would be good to note which counties are "highly" vaccinated (Hint: They're mostly Bay Area counties. Also, these are percentages of the total population, not population >12 years old since I couldn't find that data):
Marin --- 72%
San Francisco --- 68%
Santa Clara --- 67%
San Mateo --- 66%
Alameda --- 64%
Contra Costa --- 63%
Alpine --- 61%
Napa --- 60%
Santa Cruz --- 60%
Sonoma --- 59%

Again, the five most populated are missing from the top 10, so here they are:
Los Angeles --- 52%
San Diego --- 57%
Orange --- 54%
Riverside --- 42%
San Bernardino --- 39%

Source: https://www.latimes.com/projects/califo ... tribution/

The point I'm making here is that the places that may have conceivably achieved some form of herd immunity are very small and can be subverted by new strains/variants that have better escape mechanisms from other more populated areas that are not likely to have herd immunity. Teenagers should be vaccinated to keep out the variants - and potentially, boosters will be needed for the late fall/winter. LA County is going through a quite nasty Delta surge, despite having a larger percentage of vaccinated residents than the country as a whole.

If you say NE is not vaccinated enough, we will never achieve herd immunity. If I recall correctly original plan was 70%, never 100%. I think serosurveillance is better way to measure herd immunity.

Overall commonsense is lacking, even well educated families with all eligible members fully vaccinated living their normal lives, no masks, large gatherings with no masks, indoors gatherings, again no masks, air travel and vacationing, all this freedom lifestyle with their un-vaccinated & unmasked kids in toe.

People are ignoring their own under 12 kids, not only that all kids vacc and unvacc congregate unmasked. When I ask they say there is no vaccine and CDC said masks are not required. Two separate irrelevant answers. Cannot connect the dots.

It appears CDC/FDA and Pfizer are at odds about booster shots. Not sure what politics at play here rather than doing the right thing.

dtw2hyd wrote:

hbernal1 wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

Please simulate contacts
Unvaccinated with unvaccinated has your first progression 1 to 6 to 36 to 216, that we can agree on.

Vaccinated has a much lower change of exposing a vaccinated enough to infect them. (Lower viral load.)
1 to 0.7776, higher if they are around each other a lot.

You are making the assumption a vaccine only protects the individual from infection.
Strong evidence a vaccine reduces the chance of infecting another person:
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-05- ... ssion.html
One dose:
It found immunization with either the Pfizer or AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the chance of onward virus transmission by 40-60%. This means that if someone became infected after being vaccinated, they were only around half as likely to pass their infection on to others compared to infected people who weren't vaccinated.

After two doses, a 90% reduction in transmission for AZ and Pfizder:
https://www.verywellhealth.com/cdc-stud ... es-5121080

Now, as before the risk of infection was about the risk of transmission, I assumed the same. It is possible for a vaccine, like AZ is, to be more effective stopping transmission than preventing the person inoculated from being infected.

This is why a 50% effective rate is acceptable for a vaccine. What is unusual with Covid19 is with attenuated virus vaccines, the transmission remains high.

All of the adreno virus vaccines (AZ, J&J, Sputnik V) and mRNA (Moderna, Pfizer) are amazingly good at stopping transmission.

Theoretically, you could have a vaccine where 90% of the people were infected (10% effective) and yet they do not pass on the virus (unlikely, I admit, but theoretically possible).
It isn't Ro*effectiveness it is Ro* (1-%transmit)*(1-%receive). You are assuming 100% of the vaccinated who get the virus produce enough virus to infect someone else. Thankfully, we are not in that dooms day scenario. If that were the case, the UK, US, Israel, and others would have much steeper growth curves.

Individuals care about how much a vaccine protects them.
Health authorities care how much a vaccine prevents transmission.

Now, the two tend to be correlated, but with Covid19, not so much.
AZ does much better preventing transmission than it does preventing infection. Ok, great from a health authority perspective.
SinoVac and SinoPharm seem to have little benefit in transmission. I speculate this is why Chile and the UAE are doing far worse from a virus infection standpoint than their vaccination rates suggest.

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... BR~QAT~ARE

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... by+dose%29

I've done a very amateur model of virus propagation and modified it for delta and vaccine effectiveness. Now, I make assumptions on how well natural immunity after a prior infection works and how fast it fades away, but the virus would be spreading far faster if every one who caught it was that infectious. In particular the high fraction of asymptomatic.

We'll be ok with a higher level of vaccination. I calculate with pretty darn high levels.

Think, the Measles vaccine is only 97% effective with an Ro of 50! (most contagious disease I know about). The population is far from fully vaccinated, yet it dies off (ok, it came back..., but people stopped vaccinating as it became so rare). There is another aspect which is people do not transmit as much if vaccinated.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/measles/index.html

I doubt I'll convince anyone. While I have my concerns on this virus, it needs to be in perspective.

Lightsaber

I'd say I'm not that surprised that there's case growth even in highly vaccinated countries resulting from the Delta variant. I'm also not surprised that cases are growing in some states with high vaccination rates.

One thing that's important to remember is only 48% of the total population in the US is fully vaccinated. Even among the top 10 states by % fully vaccinated, vaccination rates probably aren't enough to reach herd immunity (I'll list them below and give % population over 12 fully vaccinated):
Vermont --- 75%
Massachusetts --- 72%
Connecticut --- 71%
Maine --- 71%
Rhode Island --- 68%
Maryland --- 67%
New Jersey --- 66%
Washington (state) --- 66%
New Mexico --- 65%
New Hampshire --- 65%

Notoriously absent from this list are larger states that have unvaccinated pockets, so I'll list that information below... we're quite far from herd immunity:
California --- 60%
Texas --- 51%
Florida --- 54%
New York --- 64%
Pennsylvania --- 59%

Source: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#vaccinations

And because I'm California-based and we're having some Delta problems here, I also thought it would be good to note which counties are "highly" vaccinated (Hint: They're mostly Bay Area counties. Also, these are percentages of the total population, not population >12 years old since I couldn't find that data):
Marin --- 72%
San Francisco --- 68%
Santa Clara --- 67%
San Mateo --- 66%
Alameda --- 64%
Contra Costa --- 63%
Alpine --- 61%
Napa --- 60%
Santa Cruz --- 60%
Sonoma --- 59%

Again, the five most populated are missing from the top 10, so here they are:
Los Angeles --- 52%
San Diego --- 57%
Orange --- 54%
Riverside --- 42%
San Bernardino --- 39%

Source: https://www.latimes.com/projects/califo ... tribution/

The point I'm making here is that the places that may have conceivably achieved some form of herd immunity are very small and can be subverted by new strains/variants that have better escape mechanisms from other more populated areas that are not likely to have herd immunity. Teenagers should be vaccinated to keep out the variants - and potentially, boosters will be needed for the late fall/winter. LA County is going through a quite nasty Delta surge, despite having a larger percentage of vaccinated residents than the country as a whole.

If you say NE is not vaccinated enough, we will never achieve herd immunity. If I recall correctly original plan was 70%, never 100%. I think serosurveillance is better way to measure herd immunity.

Overall commonsense is lacking, even well educated families with all eligible members fully vaccinated living their normal lives, no masks, large gatherings with no masks, indoors gatherings, again no masks, air travel and vacationing, all this freedom lifestyle with their un-vaccinated & unmasked kids in toe.

People are ignoring their own under 12 kids, not only that all kids vacc and unvacc congregate unmasked. When I ask they say there is no vaccine and CDC said masks are not required. Two separate irrelevant answers. Cannot connect the dots.

It appears CDC/FDA and Pfizer are at odds about booster shots. Not sure what politics at play here rather than doing the right thing.

Isn't booster shot already cleared the regulatory process?
And the original number for herd immunity did not take into account variants both being more ready for transmission as well as resistance against vaccines

dtw2hyd wrote:

If you say NE is not vaccinated enough, we will never achieve herd immunity. If I recall correctly original plan was 70%, never 100%. I think serosurveillance is better way to measure herd immunity.

Overall commonsense is lacking, even well educated families with all eligible members fully vaccinated living their normal lives, no masks, large gatherings with no masks, indoors gatherings, again no masks, air travel and vacationing, all this freedom lifestyle with their un-vaccinated & unmasked kids in toe.

People are ignoring their own under 12 kids, not only that all kids vacc and unvacc congregate unmasked. When I ask they say there is no vaccine and CDC said masks are not required. Two separate irrelevant answers. Cannot connect the dots.

It appears CDC/FDA and Pfizer are at odds about booster shots. Not sure what politics at play here rather than doing the right thing.

Plan was 70% when Ro was 3, then Ro was 3.7, now Ro is 5+. So a higher vaccination rate is required. Cest la vie. People do not want vaccines nor surveillance, in particular survelliance that requires extracting blood. That is a problem. It means a rapid spread.

We direly need a vaccine for under 12. We need it down to age 3 before school start (pre-schools, kids need pre-schools). I agree people cannot connect on masks and vaccinations. That is why my under 12 year old is playing with vaccinated 12+ (with their parent approval) to minimize risk.

My relative's hospital system in Mesa County Colorodo overloaded. We'll see that in the urban centers. All they need is pockets of unvaccinated. 70% vaccinated was assuming children didn't transmit. Oops... bad assumption. It also assumed natural immunity lasts longer than it does.
Our national vaccination rate isn't enough to matter. 48% fully vaccinated will slow the virus, re is certainly won't stop it:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/hea ... 896029002/

The US and France are turning up, I estimate 5 weeks or so behind the UK. We'll hit our exponential growth soon.
All the countries opening up are having bad spikes except for Israel. They're having a spike but some lockdown, masks, and a higher vaccination rate (60% fully with Pfizer, while countries with attenuated virus vaccines are suffering).

https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/co ... SP~POL~ISR

There is a push to accept SinoVac or SinoPharm, yet Chile is so vaccinated and has issues:
https://www.msn.com/en-ph/news/national ... NewsSearch

Lightsaber

c933103 wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

If you say NE is not vaccinated enough, we will never achieve herd immunity. If I recall correctly original plan was 70%, never 100%. I think serosurveillance is better way to measure herd immunity.
...
It appears CDC/FDA and Pfizer are at odds about booster shots. Not sure what politics at play here rather than doing the right thing.

Isn't booster shot already cleared the regulatory process?
And the original number for herd immunity did not take into account variants both being more ready for transmission as well as resistance against vaccines

Pfizer intends to apply for EUA for booster.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vacc ... orization/

CDC insisting "fully vaccinated" don't need booster.
https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19 ... ster-shots

I keep telling people "fully vaccinated" is a loose definition just like being "permanently employed" in private sector the USA.

Perhaps big pharma needs to focus on treatment options now that they have been funded for vaccines. The major push for vaccines among the nations who paid for the development is for boosters, as most of their population who want the vaccine has already taken it. Yes the next push is for kids under 12, but now you run into parent protection which is much greater than hesitancy from someone who has already lived half of their lives, no one knows the long term effect on kids, that requires years.
Pills / nasal sprays even if containing limited vaccine tech, the run on the hospitals can be solved in multiple ways, in the developed world that has been done by vaccines, basically in looking around the world we are seeing it run its course, countries that have had little to no vaccines are already declining, and as more details come out on the side affects it not just AZ that folks are refusing, Pfizer and Moderna heart issues are now front and center.

par13del wrote:

Perhaps big pharma needs to focus on treatment options now that they have been funded for vaccines. The major push for vaccines among the nations who paid for the development is for boosters, as most of their population who want the vaccine has already taken it. Yes the next push is for kids under 12, but now you run into parent protection which is much greater than hesitancy from someone who has already lived half of their lives, no one knows the long term effect on kids, that requires years.
Pills / nasal sprays even if containing limited vaccine tech, the run on the hospitals can be solved in multiple ways, in the developed world that has been done by vaccines, basically in looking around the world we are seeing it run its course, countries that have had little to no vaccines are already declining, and as more details come out on the side affects it not just AZ that folks are refusing, Pfizer and Moderna heart issues are now front and center.

I don't thibk risk on "long term effect" on kids would be greater than on other population?
And there are already tons of vaccines kids are getting

par13del wrote:

Perhaps big pharma needs to focus on treatment options now that they have been funded for vaccines. The major push for vaccines among the nations who paid for the development is for boosters, as most of their population who want the vaccine has already taken it. Yes the next push is for kids under 12, but now you run into parent protection which is much greater than hesitancy from someone who has already lived half of their lives, no one knows the long term effect on kids, that requires years.
Pills / nasal sprays even if containing limited vaccine tech, the run on the hospitals can be solved in multiple ways, in the developed world that has been done by vaccines, basically in looking around the world we are seeing it run its course, countries that have had little to no vaccines are already declining, and as more details come out on the side affects it not just AZ that folks are refusing, Pfizer and Moderna heart issues are now front and center.

The treatment options are bad.

Ok, Remdesivir has good success. My doctor friends and relatives agree that it works on about 70% of patients. But not everyone and one of my coronavirus doctor contacts had the horror of a healthy 16 year old dying on them fast.

There are two correlations I see in hospitalized kids.
1. Mostly unhealthy. Obesity is a major factor. Doctors notice those who get some sunlight (just 20 minutes) and over 7,000 steps a day have a better recovery. Because of who I am related to, I received an amazing amount of free consultation in the Coronavirus medical community and activity, UV exposure, and waist size are correlated in how the outcome went. Unmoving kids have issues.
2. Exposure. Uf adults are in the house and unvaccinated, kids are getting massive initial exposure and this is believed to be a major contributor. I've talked with several local pediatricians and none have yet seen a case where the child wasn't exposed by an adult living with them who was unvaccinated.

https://www.goodrx.com/blog/coronavirus ... n-the-way/

It takes money and years to develop medications and they will be riskier.

Take Toculizumab. Here in the USA I know doctors who swear by it saving lives. Above link has the UK's NIH not recommending it. Why? 100% instance of negative side effects. It is where on the first do no harm you choose to stand. I understand both sides.

Anyone hopeing for a miracle cure doesn't understand why we vaccinate for viruses: anti-viral treatments have a poor historical success rate and a history of side effects worse than the vaccines.

I will vaccinate the first day a FDA emergency approved vaccine is available for my under 12 child. Then again, I have a relative in the vaccine testing community who is also working a coronavirus ward.

Vaccine risk to be approved: low not zero, but low risk with effectiveness.

Limited production and new drugs will be expensive. Part of why the NIH doesn't like Toculizumab is it costs tens of thousands for the regimen.

If big pharma has a drug, it would almost be ready. Anything new is a long time away. Since vaccines limit the market... I don't see a lot of new R&D. No one expected to he vaccines to be this good.

Get a vaccine out for kids.

Unvaccinated parents risk their kids. Interesting times ahead. My interpretation is the next wave is here late July to mid-August in the USA:
https://ourworldindata.org/covid-cases

I hope to be wrong, but Spain and the Netherlands are happening faster than I thought... But if I am right both the United States and EU will be in crisis 4 to 6 weeks from now...

Only vaccines will slow the spread.
O couldn't care less about the unvaccinated adults. I care about kids and the 2% of the population who need others to slow the spread.

Every doctor I know working coronavirus is reporting a nurse shortage. Now anecdotal and limited geographic scope, but the medical staff are burned out.

e.g., nursing homes cannot staff
https://www.wmur.com/article/nursing-ho ... s/36868326

Lightsaber

https://www.rfi.fr/tw/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8 ... B%E6%83%85

China: A border city in Yunnan, China have entered full lockdown following a few dozens of cases. From initial discovery on July 4 to yesterday, there are a total of 60 cases (including 1 asymptomatic) published by government according to another source.
The special thing about this is, such cluster occurred, despite they claim 96.92% adult population in the Autonomous Area where the state is located, have been fully vaccinated.
The A.A. have a population of 1.31 million, and official data as of July 4 claimed that 1.70 million dose have been taken in the A.A. with 934k people fully vaccinated, aka 71% entire population completed the two course vaccination course, and 83% received at least one dose.
It was early-June when China's SinoPharm and SinoVac announced they have authority clearance to use their vaccines for vaccinating kids as young as 3 years old.
Given China's vaccination program, most of the doses are probably Chinese vaccines.
And accordimg to official announcement, viruses found in this cluster of infection are of Delta strain.

The political/human realities seem to be:
1 - We aren't going to get enough people vaccinated to achieve herd immunity, due to hesitancy and high percentage need due to increased transmissability (Delta)
2 - Improved treatments and drug therapies are going to help but not completely eliminate critical cases
3 - Third world won't be highly vaccinated for many years
4 - Variants will continue to evolve as humans continue to incubate and provide opportunities for mutations

Conclusion: COVID is here and will be here for many years, likely decades or forever - endemic like the flu. Eventually population will co-evolve with the virus making it less lethal, but it sucks for us over the next few years. International travel will continue to be suppressed due to continuing breakouts and efforts to contain (mostly futile/temporary).

This is our new world.

https://news.mingpao.com/pns/%e6%b8%af% ... 5940793868
Hong Kong: By now, about 2.5 million people out of 7.5 million population have been vaccinated. 1.07 million picked SinoVac and 1.49 million picked Pfizer/Biontech.
A pro-China legislator recently published a video, claim after he have taken two SinoVac shots in February and Marvh, he recently did an antibody test, which have a threshold of 50AU/mL to be consider positive, and his result was less than 100, which indicate it is a borderline result. After consulting doctor, it was claimed that as long as there are antibodies then they can fight against the virus.
Another one claim that, she have came across some cases, where some people have been vaccinated woth SinoVac for more than 3 months, and oerformed antibody tests due to plan to travel to Mainland China. However, some of them failed to oresent any antibodies in the test, while others are marginal. She say it is inconvenient for her to reveal what's the brand of vaccine in question, but hope the government provide guidance on booster shot as soon as possible.
And a legislator received SinoVac shot claim that, a number of legislators only get an antibody level of "tens to 100-ish", while friends getting Pfizer/Biontech have their antibody level at "1000+". He claim doctor say after getting vaccines T-cells can also help fight against viruses, but the antibody level the higher the merrier, and describe the current situation as endangering the life of people, claim he would personally pick Pfizer/Biontech vaccine if additional shot is required next year.
Meanwhile, government expert claim if vaccination rate can reach 80-90%, then there are no need to worry about variants, and sufficient protection can be provided by vaccine regardless of variants with such level of vaccination rate. The expert also tell citizens not to worry too much about antivody efficiency since T cell can also offer protection effect after getting vaccinated.

Chemist wrote:

The political/human realities seem to be:
1 - We aren't going to get enough people vaccinated to achieve herd immunity, due to hesitancy and high percentage need due to increased transmissability (Delta)
2 - Improved treatments and drug therapies are going to help but not completely eliminate critical cases
3 - Third world won't be highly vaccinated for many years
4 - Variants will continue to evolve as humans continue to incubate and provide opportunities for mutations

Conclusion: COVID is here and will be here for many years, likely decades or forever - endemic like the flu. Eventually population will co-evolve with the virus making it less lethal, but it sucks for us over the next few years. International travel will continue to be suppressed due to continuing breakouts and efforts to contain (mostly futile/temporary).

This is our new world.

I think we can knock it back in 2022. Sadly, not a chance in 2021 due to the need for more vaccine.

This virus has too many long haul symptoms to let go forever.

It will create interesting travel dynamics.

Lightsaber

par13del wrote:

Perhaps big pharma needs to focus on treatment options now that they have been funded for vaccines. The major push for vaccines among the nations who paid for the development is for boosters, as most of their population who want the vaccine has already taken it. Yes the next push is for kids under 12, but now you run into parent protection which is much greater than hesitancy from someone who has already lived half of their lives, no one knows the long term effect on kids, that requires years.
Pills / nasal sprays even if containing limited vaccine tech, the run on the hospitals can be solved in multiple ways, in the developed world that has been done by vaccines, basically in looking around the world we are seeing it run its course, countries that have had little to no vaccines are already declining, and as more details come out on the side affects it not just AZ that folks are refusing, Pfizer and Moderna heart issues are now front and center.

Merck's MK-4482 treatment is supposed to be pretty good, but in classic Merck fashion it's taking them forever to get to EUA.

cjg225 wrote:

par13del wrote:

Perhaps big pharma needs to focus on treatment options now that they have been funded for vaccines. The major push for vaccines among the nations who paid for the development is for boosters, as most of their population who want the vaccine has already taken it. Yes the next push is for kids under 12, but now you run into parent protection which is much greater than hesitancy from someone who has already lived half of their lives, no one knows the long term effect on kids, that requires years.
Pills / nasal sprays even if containing limited vaccine tech, the run on the hospitals can be solved in multiple ways, in the developed world that has been done by vaccines, basically in looking around the world we are seeing it run its course, countries that have had little to no vaccines are already declining, and as more details come out on the side affects it not just AZ that folks are refusing, Pfizer and Moderna heart issues are now front and center.

Merck's MK-4482 treatment is supposed to be pretty good, but in classic Merck fashion it's taking them forever to get to EUA.

Trials on hospitalized patients ended because once you are that bad, it doesn't seem to help:
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/202 ... ments.html

It helps early or in minor cases. I'm more excited for it being a flu treatment.

What I cannot find is the side effects. No medicine doesn't have a side effect. We're worried about vaccines with rare side effects but celebrating medicines, some with such bad side effects some health authorities do not recommend it.

Lightsaber

No medicine doesn't have a side effect.

It sounds almost like bad grammar, but it isn't. Any medicine, supplement, even food or exercise that can affect your health for the better can in different people, different doses, opposite sex, age etc affect your health for the worse. In the case of medicines when someone is in the ICU almost no medicine is a magic bullet that helps every organ in the body. It more likely in large enough doses helps particular organ(s), but may hurt others.

It is easier the stay healthy than to get better. Vaccines are the magic bullet, er .... shot.

No mention of Macron's speech last night ?

He basically explained that a 4th wave is coming, the only mitigating factor is vaccination, and as a consequence, when restrictions will have to be imposed, they will be imposed on non vaccinated people. On top of that, healthcare staff (including hospital admin etc.,) must vaccinate or they will be suspended without pay.

He hinted that vaccination might become mandatory for everyone.

Also, something that wasn't anticipated : people vaccinated for 6 months or longer can now get a 3rd jab.