Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to ErroneousBee,GSVsowhat,Shelford,Hypster,Wasron, for Donating to support the site

Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 5626
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 577 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360392

Postby XFool » November 26th, 2020, 5:38 pm

AstraZeneca now announced a further global trial.

CEO says AstraZeneca likely to run new global trial of COVID-19 vaccine - Bloomberg News

Reuters

“Now that we’ve found what looks like a better efficacy we have to validate this, so we need to do an additional study,” Soriot was quoted as saying.

Lootman
Lemon Half
Posts: 8997
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:58 pm
Has thanked: 82 times
Been thanked: 1555 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360394

Postby Lootman » November 26th, 2020, 5:44 pm

XFool wrote:AstraZeneca now announced a further global trial.

CEO says AstraZeneca likely to run new global trial of COVID-19 vaccine - Bloomberg News

Reuters

The article omits to mention that nobody over age 55 was in the "half dose" group for which 90% success was claimed. Such a group would be at less risk anyway.

If AZN have to perform a do-over to get to the numbers the regulators want, at least outside the UK, then this hands a disadvantage to AZN.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ ... ca-vaccine

And if there is any chance the US regulator will not approve it, then that will really be a slap in the face. I would want a different vaccine in that case.

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 5626
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 577 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360396

Postby XFool » November 26th, 2020, 5:51 pm

Lootman wrote:The article omits to mention that nobody over age 55 was in the "half dose" group for which 90% success was claimed. Such a group would be at less risk anyway.

You are saying those NOT over 55 are in the "at less risk" group - just to be clear!

Lootman wrote:If AZN have to perform a do-over to get to the numbers the regulators want, at least outside the UK, then this hands a disadvantage to AZN.

And if there is any chance the US regulator will not approve it, then that will really be a slap in the face. I would want a different vaccine in that case.

It seems likely to put the date back for this vaccine. I would still take it if the trials all go well.

sg31
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1343
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:35 am
Has thanked: 813 times
Been thanked: 585 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360398

Postby sg31 » November 26th, 2020, 5:54 pm

AF62 wrote:
dealtn wrote:
AF62 wrote:
However why have three tiers if unless you are cut off from civilisation you will never get into tier 1?


How do you incentivise people in Tier 2 to moderate their behaviour if there is no Tier 1? Tiering is to be reviewed regularly so don't simply focus on the "current" tierings.


But the people in town I live in and all the surrounding area have modified their behaviour and infection rates in this area are on the bottom of the 'below average' scale. However it seems we are in tier 2 because the decision is being made on a county level, and there are people in cities 30 miles away who have not modified their behaviour and their infection rate is high.

However if the argument is that a tier 1 surrounded by tier 2 wouldn't work as people would travel to avoid the restrictions, then basing it on a county level is utterly stupid. Eight miles away there is a town across the county border which also has a high infection rate and those people are far more likely to visit my town than those from the cities in the county with the high infection rates. Thus if you are working on a wider area basis unless you do that on a cross county basis then there is no point.

So it would seem that until the whole of the south of England falls to a tier 1 infection level that nobody in the south of England will make it to tier 1.


The district council covering the area where i live has a moderate infection rate, The parish were I live has a very low infection rate but there are 3 parishes nearby where the infection rate is very high.

How granular do we expect the tiers to be? Counties seem reasonable but we have to accept some anomalies will occur.

zico
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2194
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 551 times
Been thanked: 566 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360419

Postby zico » November 26th, 2020, 6:51 pm

sg31 wrote:
The district council covering the area where i live has a moderate infection rate, The parish were I live has a very low infection rate but there are 3 parishes nearby where the infection rate is very high.

How granular do we expect the tiers to be? Counties seem reasonable but we have to accept some anomalies will occur.


If you look closely at the England map of new Tier 1,2 and 3 you'll see a tiny splotch of red just to the west of Greater London. That's Slough which has been placed in Tier 3. The rest of Berkshire is in Tier 2, including Eton (almost one whole mile away from Slough) and Windsor (3 miles away). This must be OK because presumably people from Slough never leave the town and nobody from nearby towns would ever dream of going there.

Meanwhile, up in the North, Stockport is in the opposite position as it has a much lower infection rate than the rest of Greater Manchester, but obviously can't be in a different tier because it's in the North.
Likewise, Alnwick in Northumberland has a very low infection rate, but it can't be in a lower tier because it's in the same county as Hexham which has a high infection rate, and is just a mere hour's drive away. And of course, it's also in the North.

Mike4
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2042
Joined: November 24th, 2016, 3:29 am
Has thanked: 347 times
Been thanked: 828 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360425

Postby Mike4 » November 26th, 2020, 7:04 pm

XFool wrote:It seems likely to put the date back for this vaccine. I would still take it if the trials all go well.


I would prefer it too, as it is the only vaccine so far whose trial results measured infection by SARS-CoV2 as opposed to symptoms of COVID-19, AIUI.

Nimrod103
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3533
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:10 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 155 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360433

Postby Nimrod103 » November 26th, 2020, 7:51 pm

zico wrote:
sg31 wrote:
The district council covering the area where i live has a moderate infection rate, The parish were I live has a very low infection rate but there are 3 parishes nearby where the infection rate is very high.

How granular do we expect the tiers to be? Counties seem reasonable but we have to accept some anomalies will occur.


If you look closely at the England map of new Tier 1,2 and 3 you'll see a tiny splotch of red just to the west of Greater London. That's Slough which has been placed in Tier 3. The rest of Berkshire is in Tier 2, including Eton (almost one whole mile away from Slough) and Windsor (3 miles away). This must be OK because presumably people from Slough never leave the town and nobody from nearby towns would ever dream of going there.

Meanwhile, up in the North, Stockport is in the opposite position as it has a much lower infection rate than the rest of Greater Manchester, but obviously can't be in a different tier because it's in the North.
Likewise, Alnwick in Northumberland has a very low infection rate, but it can't be in a lower tier because it's in the same county as Hexham which has a high infection rate, and is just a mere hour's drive away. And of course, it's also in the North.


Kent was in the south last time I looked. Far south actually. But all hell is breaking loose about all of the county being put in Tier 3, when the infection hotspots are only Swale and Thanet. Where all the chavs live.

Bouleversee
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3303
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:01 pm
Has thanked: 782 times
Been thanked: 577 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360438

Postby Bouleversee » November 26th, 2020, 8:01 pm

XFool wrote:
Lootman wrote:The article omits to mention that nobody over age 55 was in the "half dose" group for which 90% success was claimed. Such a group would be at less risk anyway.

You are saying those NOT over 55 are in the "at less risk" group - just to be clear!

Lootman wrote:If AZN have to perform a do-over to get to the numbers the regulators want, at least outside the UK, then this hands a disadvantage to AZN.

And if there is any chance the US regulator will not approve it, then that will really be a slap in the face. I would want a different vaccine in that case.

It seems likely to put the date back for this vaccine. I would still take it if the trials all go well.


I understood Lootman to be saying that the half-dose group of under 55s would be in the "at less risk group", which is obviously correct. Hopefully, when they do further trials including the elderly and possibly those with underlying disease, it will be found to be equally successful but since the plan was to give the elderly first dibs, it does seem somewhat remiss not to have included any of them. However, perhaps they were putting caution and protection before speed and maybe it makes sense to do it in stages. Is there any reason why approval could not be staged according to categories as well?

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2742
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 760 times
Been thanked: 748 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360495

Postby GoSeigen » November 27th, 2020, 6:39 am

XFool wrote:AstraZeneca now announced a further global trial.

[


A Global trial. Whoo! Impressive...


GS
[P.S. Probably means they will use "expendables" as guinea pigs...]

GoSeigen
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2742
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 11:14 pm
Has thanked: 760 times
Been thanked: 748 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360497

Postby GoSeigen » November 27th, 2020, 6:56 am

XFool wrote:
GoSeigen wrote:Poor article which doesn't debunk anything, let alone what was originally being said (e.g. Pillar 2 is not mentioned at all in the article).

If anyone can discover why the article should be expected to even mention "Pillar 2", perhaps they can let us know.



If Mike claims 90% of London buses are red and someone else debunks this in a Huff Post article "Its a Myth that 90% of Buses are Red" by pointing out that obviously there are far more yellow buses in the US than any other colour and the US is has by far the most buses in the world -- then that would look a bit like the earlier quoted article. And some people would think the article makes perfect sense because they refuse to read Mike's writings.

GS

johnhemming
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4691
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 541 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360499

Postby johnhemming » November 27th, 2020, 7:19 am

XFool wrote:
GoSeigen wrote:Poor article which doesn't debunk anything, let alone what was originally being said (e.g. Pillar 2 is not mentioned at all in the article).

If anyone can discover why the article should be expected to even mention "Pillar 2", perhaps they can let us know.

Anyone who has tried to study the details of how the testing regime operates would know this. On the other hand if you simply wish to be a cheer leader for the government chosen version of Truth then no studying is required.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... ology-note

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2544
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 648 times
Been thanked: 653 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360501

Postby servodude » November 27th, 2020, 7:22 am

GoSeigen wrote:Probably means they will use "expendables" as guinea pigs


Great idea!
Once it meets Van Damme he will sort it out; if only Belgium had called him earlier! ;)

-sd

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 5467
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 473 times
Been thanked: 2191 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360545

Postby tjh290633 » November 27th, 2020, 11:10 am

dealtn wrote:I suspect "County" or similar is used for simplicity, not because of a notional argument about marginal travel. We have already seen many instances of how "complicated" doesn't work. So, some will feel they are in the wrong tier, and have a grievance about it. I suspect if you want perfection you will be waiting a very long time.

(I suspect the IOW considers itself part of the South of England, possibly Cornwall too, but even if not I don't agree that parts can't be tier 1, with others higher. Kent being tier 3 suggest otherwise unless you think going the other way is different somehow.)

The anomaly is that Slough being in Tier 3 has not put the whole of Berkshire, or should it be Buckinghamshire, into Tier 3.
Why can they do that and not limit Tier 3 in Kent to Swale, Sittingbourne and Thanet?

TJH

redsturgeon
Lemon Half
Posts: 6717
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 9:06 am
Has thanked: 658 times
Been thanked: 1463 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360548

Postby redsturgeon » November 27th, 2020, 11:14 am

tjh290633 wrote:
dealtn wrote:I suspect "County" or similar is used for simplicity, not because of a notional argument about marginal travel. We have already seen many instances of how "complicated" doesn't work. So, some will feel they are in the wrong tier, and have a grievance about it. I suspect if you want perfection you will be waiting a very long time.

(I suspect the IOW considers itself part of the South of England, possibly Cornwall too, but even if not I don't agree that parts can't be tier 1, with others higher. Kent being tier 3 suggest otherwise unless you think going the other way is different somehow.)

The anomaly is that Slough being in Tier 3 has not put the whole of Berkshire, or should it be Buckinghamshire, into Tier 3.
Why can they do that and not limit Tier 3 in Kent to Swale, Sittingbourne and Thanet?

TJH


Lots of "important" people live around that part of Berks and Bucks.

Not so many in the Kent countryside.

John

dealtn
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2694
Joined: November 21st, 2016, 4:26 pm
Has thanked: 68 times
Been thanked: 902 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360555

Postby dealtn » November 27th, 2020, 11:27 am

tjh290633 wrote:
dealtn wrote:I suspect "County" or similar is used for simplicity, not because of a notional argument about marginal travel. We have already seen many instances of how "complicated" doesn't work. So, some will feel they are in the wrong tier, and have a grievance about it. I suspect if you want perfection you will be waiting a very long time.

(I suspect the IOW considers itself part of the South of England, possibly Cornwall too, but even if not I don't agree that parts can't be tier 1, with others higher. Kent being tier 3 suggest otherwise unless you think going the other way is different somehow.)

The anomaly is that Slough being in Tier 3 has not put the whole of Berkshire, or should it be Buckinghamshire, into Tier 3.
Why can they do that and not limit Tier 3 in Kent to Swale, Sittingbourne and Thanet?

TJH


I agree that's odd.

tjh290633
Lemon Half
Posts: 5467
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:20 am
Has thanked: 473 times
Been thanked: 2191 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360560

Postby tjh290633 » November 27th, 2020, 11:33 am

dealtn wrote:
tjh290633 wrote:
dealtn wrote:I suspect "County" or similar is used for simplicity, not because of a notional argument about marginal travel. We have already seen many instances of how "complicated" doesn't work. So, some will feel they are in the wrong tier, and have a grievance about it. I suspect if you want perfection you will be waiting a very long time.

(I suspect the IOW considers itself part of the South of England, possibly Cornwall too, but even if not I don't agree that parts can't be tier 1, with others higher. Kent being tier 3 suggest otherwise unless you think going the other way is different somehow.)

The anomaly is that Slough being in Tier 3 has not put the whole of Berkshire, or should it be Buckinghamshire, into Tier 3.
Why can they do that and not limit Tier 3 in Kent to Swale, Sittingbourne and Thanet?

TJH


I agree that's odd.

I suspect that Slough is a Unitary authority. But there are probably others elsewhere which have been swept up in a bigger authority.

TJH

77ss
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1016
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:42 am
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 238 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360572

Postby 77ss » November 27th, 2020, 11:52 am

tjh290633 wrote:......
The anomaly is that Slough being in Tier 3 has not put the whole of Berkshire, or should it be Buckinghamshire, into Tier 3.
Why can they do that and not limit Tier 3 in Kent to Swale, Sittingbourne and Thanet?

TJH


Government by whim! As it as been all along.

swill453
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4710
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 6:11 pm
Has thanked: 405 times
Been thanked: 1614 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360581

Postby swill453 » November 27th, 2020, 12:04 pm

tjh290633 wrote:The anomaly is that Slough being in Tier 3 has not put the whole of Berkshire, or should it be Buckinghamshire, into Tier 3.
Why can they do that and not limit Tier 3 in Kent to Swale, Sittingbourne and Thanet?

They do have a page where they set out their reasons https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/ ... d-approach
e.g.
Kent & Medway
Very high (tier 3)
Case rates are high and continuing to rise with large increases in case rates in almost all areas in the last 7 days. Some of the highest case rates in the country are currently seen in Kent. Rising case rates in people aged over 60 are a particular concern. Positivity is also increasing in 10 of the 13 lower tier local authorities. Kent And Medway STP are reporting hospital admissions are increasing and mutual aid necessary across the county.

Scott.

XFool
Lemon Half
Posts: 5626
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:21 pm
Been thanked: 577 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360591

Postby XFool » November 27th, 2020, 12:22 pm

GoSeigen wrote:
XFool wrote:
GoSeigen wrote:Poor article which doesn't debunk anything, let alone what was originally being said (e.g. Pillar 2 is not mentioned at all in the article).

If anyone can discover why the article should be expected to even mention "Pillar 2", perhaps they can let us know.

If Mike claims 90% of London buses are red and someone else debunks this in a Huff Post article "Its a Myth that 90% of Buses are Red" by pointing out that obviously there are far more yellow buses in the US than any other colour and the US is has by far the most buses in the world -- then that would look a bit like the earlier quoted article.

If "Mike" claimed 90% of London buses were red, I'd start to think I ought to go looking for some London buses. ;)

GoSeigen wrote:And some people would think the article makes perfect sense because they refuse to read Mike's writings.

Trouble is, I have read some of Mike's "writings". With "Mike" I tend to use the 'Look out the window test' (metaphorically speaking).

1. There is no pandemic, it was all over by the summer - Look out the window

But this is the whole issue, isn't it?

2. There is "no second wave" - Look out the window

Even as most places are on their second wave and the US at least appears to be on their third wave. Yeah, I know, if it's a "seasonal wave, it isn't a wave etc."

3. Viruses don't do "second waves, it would be in the literature if they did" - Look out the window

See 2 above. Plus why did the 1918 pandemic have at least two and likely three documented waves? And no! Please don't explain why that was, the point is just what was. Plus, if viruses don't do waves, why does the World Health Organization (WHO) influenza pandemic phase descriptions go up to "Possible new wave" before it gets to "Post-pandemic"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic#Stages

https://web.archive.org/web/20200421161230/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK143061/
"During the post-peak period, pandemic disease levels in most countries with adequate surveillance will have dropped below peak observed levels. The post-peak period signifies that pandemic activity appears to be decreasing; however, it is uncertain if additional waves will occur and countries will need to be prepared for a second wave.

Previous pandemics have been characterized by waves of activity spread over months. Once the level of disease activity drops, a critical communications task will be to balance this information with the possibility of another wave. Pandemic waves can be separated by months and an immediate “at-ease” signal may be premature.
"

4. Everyone who recovers from a virus is immune thereafter - Look out the window

He also uses the notion that exposure to any coronovirus confers immunity to other coronoviruses - e.g. cold viruses.
So.... As we've all had colds in the pasts, does this mean nobody can catch COVID-19? And personally, I KNOW I have had more than one cold in my life!

So how seriously are we expected to take "Mike" and his writing?
Just to bang on further with that "no second wave" theme, I leave you with this:

Daily New Cases in Sweden

https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/sweden/

johnhemming
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 4691
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 7:13 pm
Has thanked: 10 times
Been thanked: 541 times

Re: Coronavirus - General Chat - No statistics

#360610

Postby johnhemming » November 27th, 2020, 1:11 pm

XFool wrote:As we've all had colds in the pasts, does this mean nobody can catch COVID-19? And personally, I KNOW I have had more than one cold in my life!

Obviously not. There are a number of coronaviruses that cause colds, but more colds are caused by rhinoviruses than any other type of virus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_cold

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinovirus

Otherwise you are I assume aware that coronaviruses are more virulent in certain seasons.

In a strict senses viruses do Gompertz Curves rather than waves. However, that is a rather subtle argument that is best not made.


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Corvid and 1 guest