Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus in the UK - news, lockdown and discussion

The whole reason that even the UK government got nervous about Omicron was that it further eroded the amount we could expect from the current vaccines in terms of protection from catching Covid as well as on paper possibilities leading to nerves about how much it would erode protection against hospitalisation and death too.
Depends how you define "catching" - certainly in the context of unreasonable expectations that our immune system can be so "boosted" that our immune system is constantly poised ready to stamp on any random "spore" that breezes in and does at least some replication and transmission ...
 
Depends how you define "catching" - certainly in the context of unreasonable expectations that our immune system can be so "boosted" that our immune system is constantly poised ready to stamp on any random "spore" that breezes in and does at least some replication and transmission ...
Well in terms of what sort of analysis they get our health institutions to perform, the term would be 'vaccine effectiveness against symptomatic disease'.

eg this recent analysis in regards older people:

VE against symptomatic disease for cases aged 65 years or older is shown in Figure 1 for those who received a primary course of the ChAdOx1-S (AstraZeneca) (Figure 1a) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer) (Figure 1b) vaccine. In all periods, effectiveness was lower for Omicron compared to Delta. There was minimal or no effect against mild disease with the Omicron variant from 20 weeks after the second dose of either a ChAdOx1-S or BNT162b2 primary course. Among those who had received 2 doses of ChAdOx1-S, at 2 to 4 weeks after a booster dose (either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 (Moderna)), VE ranged from around 62% to 65%, dropping to 48% and 56% at 5-9 weeks for the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 booster, respectively. For the BNT162b2 booster, VE dropped further to 32% at 10+ weeks. Among those who had received 2 doses of BNT162b2 followed by a BNT162b2 booster, VE was 65% at 2 to 4 weeks post the booster, dropping to 49% at 5 to 9 weeks and 31% at 10+ weeks. For those who had received 2 doses of BNT162b2 followed by a mRNA-1273 booster, VE was 70% at 2 to 4 weeks post the booster, dropping to 57% at 5 to 9 weeks.

Thats from https://khub.net/documents/13593956...lder.pdf/ab8f3558-1e16-465c-4b92-56334b6a832a

Obviously they pay even greater attention to protection against hospitalisation and death, which that document also covers.
 
So the vaccine only reduces transmission of Delta for 8 weeks. And for Omicron it's probably less. This is news to me. This nugget is within one of today's Covid news stories, a debate between Sajid Javid and an unvaccinated NHS consultant at Kings Unvaccinated NHS doctor challenges Sajid Javid over compulsory Covid jabs. I can't find it anywhere on urban. The short version of the story is:



Wham. Suddenly I'm a bit of a vaccine sceptic. Rug pulled from under me. (FWIW I'm triple jabbed, hardly go out, always wear a mask when I do.)
What a shocking lack of grasp on the function of the vaccine in the context of the present pandemic and hes a fucking consultant FFS
 
Oof :(

Its also become a bit harder to interpret daily positive case numbers of the sort mentioned in that article. Because Scotland made the change to remove some requirements to get a PCR confirmation of a lateral flow test, but unlike England they dont include Lateral Flow positives in their daily case numbers.
 
I keep half an eye on the data from my local NHS trust, partly because it's my local one and partly because it's in the area of London that started seeing the first effects of Omicron in the UK. One thing I've noticed is that mechanical ventilation numbers for London as a whole don't really show much happening:

View attachment 305088

But there has been something of a rise in my local trust (King's).

View attachment 305089

Coincidentally Kings is the home turf of the doc who fronted Javid about the vax..... he stated the people most at risk are obese with multiple co-morbidities, greater Lambeth is notably vax resistant iirc, there was a piece in national media (The Guardian and also quoted on these boards ) by a senior nurse at Kings who made a clear connection IRL between vax resistance and bad outcomes....
 
Last edited:
Its also become a bit harder to interpret daily positive case numbers of the sort mentioned in that article. Because Scotland made the change to remove some requirements to get a PCR confirmation of a lateral flow test, but unlike England they dont include Lateral Flow positives in their daily case numbers.
I didn't know that. Does that mean some of the English case number counts have the same person's positive test twice?
 
I didn't know that. Does that mean some of the English case number counts have the same person's positive test twice?
The entire thing's fucked, to use a technical term, as the criterion for deaths is anything within 28 days of a positive result - so lots of people who lasted longer then succumbed missed out while people who died eg falling down stairs a week later included. Then there's this bit you highlight, plus the way backlogs of data aren't put on the day they refer to but a later day :confused: if I collected library stats the way the government collects covid stats I'd be out of a job and rightly so
 
I didn't know that. Does that mean some of the English case number counts have the same person's positive test twice?
Only if mistakes were made with processing the data - the way it worked in England is that you show up the published figures if you report a LFT positive, but they then remove that figure from the data later if you subsequently tested negative on the confirmatory PCR. And obviously people that dont report a lateral flow positive in the first place, just a PCR, are counted.
 
The entire thing's fucked, to use a technical term, as the criterion for deaths is anything within 28 days of a positive result - so lots of people who lasted longer then succumbed missed out while people who died eg falling down stairs a week later included. Then there's this bit you highlight, plus the way backlogs of data aren't put on the day they refer to but a later day :confused: if I collected library stats the way the government collects covid stats I'd be out of a job and rightly so
Some of the issues are surmounted by focussing on data by date of death, date of test specimen rather than publication date.

I always moan about issues witht he death stats but at least we do have multiple versions with which to try to build am impression. For example deaths within 60 days of a positive test are still availabe for England, and we have deaths where covid was mentioned on the death certificate (which is also far from a perfect system), as well as excess deaths and deaths from all causes that we can use to sopt any really massive undercounting, such as that which happened in the first wave especially.

Oh and the death figures for Wales that make it to the UK dashboard have some further limitations, check out these details which I am copy & pasting from the dashboard explanation of those figures. If you dont die in hospital or in a care home, you dont get counted in those figures for Wales!

Data for Wales include reports to Public Health Wales of deaths of hospitalised patients in Welsh Hospitals or care home residents where COVID-19 has been confirmed with a positive laboratory test and the clinician suspects this was a causative factor in the death. The figures do not include:
  • people who may have died from COVID-19 but COVID-19 was not confirmed by laboratory testing
  • people who died outside of hospital or care home settings
  • Welsh residents who died outside of Wales
Deaths reported each day cover the 24 hours up to 5pm on the previous day. The majority of deaths included occur within 28 days of a positive test result.
 
I keep half an eye on the data from my local NHS trust, partly because it's my local one and partly because it's in the area of London that started seeing the first effects of Omicron in the UK. One thing I've noticed is that mechanical ventilation numbers for London as a whole don't really show much happening:

But there has been something of a rise in my local trust (King's).
Thanks for the info. I've now been through the dashboard graphs for every single trust in England.

The patients in mechanical ventilation beds data can be especially challenging to interpret, due to the fact that many trusts dont end up with numbers that are large enough to cancel out the sort of 'noise' we can get in data due to individual cases, outbreaks etc.

Kings is one of the trusts where there have been sufficient numbers in the past to overcome that more comprehensively, and its one of only a few that are showing the trend you have spotted at the moment. Its far from the only one where this new large wave has brought levels back up to where they were earlier on in the previous Delta wave, as the numbers in that wave had been very slowly declining for some time in plenty of places. But its one of only a few where the levels have now exceeded the maximum height they reached in the Delta wave, and are now back to something more like levels last seen in March during a steep descent from much higher levels that were reached about a year ago. Croydon and Frimley are two other examples, but with smaller figures involved and slightly different timing.

When looking far beyond London, these mechanical ventilation figures remind me why I moaned so much about the government response to the Delta wave. There are all manner of places where, relative to the pre-vaccine era peaks, the long Delta wave really sucked when viewed via this measurement. A consequence of using many of the gains of vaccination to enable there to be less rules, combined with the limits of vaccines and the number of people who were still not vaccinated. Unlike most of the data pictures I see from London trusts, there were quite a few trusts where it is possible to claim that number of people in mechanical ventilation beds was only roughly halved compared to last winters peak levels. Or worse in some cases, but not consistently over the entire Delta period. Omicron impact hasnt shown up in some of those places yet. And in others things are a big mess where there may be other stories going on too, such as changes to which hospitals the most seriously ill covid patients are being directed to.

Here is a list of some of the trusts that stuck out to me in various different ways when it came looking at dashboard graphs of that particular mechanical ventilation data. But some of them are small and the stories wont always be straightforward at all. And only some of them are telling fairly clear stories about the Omicron waves impact, I didnt compile this list with one particular picture or trend in mind, different ones stuck out or posed questions in various different ways. And some of them only involve small numbers.

Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals NHS Trust
Croydon Health Services NHS Trust
Frimley Health NHS Foundation Trust
Birmingham Women's and Children's NHS Foundation Trust
Northampton General Hospital NHS Trust
Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust
North Bristol NHS Trust
United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust
University Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust
University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust
Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
Northern Care Alliance NHS Ft
Northern Lincolnshire and Goole NHS Foundation Trust
Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust
 
Ah yes I was going to draw attention to that critical care report since they recently included info about boosters in it.

I usually post the raw numbers in addition to the rates per 100,000, otherwise some people get the wrong impression about what share of the burden on health services the unvaccinated end up being in practice.

Also note that this latest report uses data that goes up to mid December, so we'll need to keep an eye on subsequent reports to get much more of the Omicron picture.

Screenshot 2022-01-08 at 20.56.jpg

From the latest report at ICNARC – Reports
 
Proposal to end free lateral flow tests


That is one of the least surprising things to expect from the UK in 2022.

I suppose I'll wait for the official announcement with more details before I go on about it too much. Those details, the timing and what levels of infection persist after the Omicron peak is a way behind us will influence my opinion. But frankly I consider it pretty much inevitable that scaling back on mass testing will be part of the governments choice of approach for dealing with covid in the medium term, they cant get the return to normalcy agenda past a certain point, or reduce non-healthcare disruption down to very low levels, without doing this sort of thing.

Another reason I might not rant so much is that I'm still sore from seeing the sort of attitudes that started getting expressed more strongly on this thread a little over a month ago. Loads of people want to move on to a greater extent than it is strictly speaking wise to from a purely public health perspective. And I will likely have to go on my own version of that journey this year, though the timing and detail will diverge from many other peoples.
 
More living with covid


Ah yes, Dix. I did draw attention to his ill-advised comments in May, although it seems I wasnt anything like as rude about them as I sometimes am in this pandemic. #37,282

I wouldnt call him a totally reliable guide as to how far the government will be confident to go, and as we can see his track record in regards variants changing the picture is rather poor. He is after all someone the likes of the Telegraph make use of to underline their shitty pandemic stance, and even Johnsons stupid government have not in the past tended to go as far as the Telegraph would like.

The stance of Dix broadly reflect where a big chunk of the establishment in this country was coming from before the pandemic and up until mid March 2020 when plans changed, and is a somewhat fair reflection of where they would like to get back to. I'm not sure they will completely get their way in terms of quite how far back to the old normal the government tries to go at first, or how quickly. But if the government becomes highly confident than that is the sort of destination we might expect.
 
Even the BBCs graphic illustating cumulative deaths within 28 days of a positive test draws attention to the undercounting in the first wave.

However the article also includes the following and I consider the description of the 2nd wave rise in the autumn/winter to be highly inaccurate.

It's almost a year since the UK recorded 100,000 deaths. Most of those came in two waves - a sharp sudden surge in the spring followed by a slow, sustained rise in the autumn and winter of 2020 into 2021, largely before vaccines were available.

The November 2020 lockdown (but with schools still open) combined with the timing of the rise of the Alpha (Kent) variant meant that the rise in daily death figures came in two stages that time, but they were still sharp, especially the second part (Alpha) one.


Screenshot 2022-01-08 at 21.53.jpg
 
Ah yes, Dix. I did draw attention to his ill-advised comments in May, although it seems I wasnt anything like as rude about them as I sometimes am in this pandemic. #37,282

I wouldnt call him a totally reliable guide as to how far the government will be confident to go, and as we can see his track record in regards variants changing the picture is rather poor. He is after all someone the likes of the Telegraph make use of to underline their shitty pandemic stance, and even Johnsons stupid government have not in the past tended to go as far as the Telegraph would like.

The stance of Dix broadly reflect where a big chunk of the establishment in this country was coming from before the pandemic and up until mid March 2020 when plans changed, and is a somewhat fair reflection of where they would like to get back to. I'm not sure they will completely get their way in terms of quite how far back to the old normal the government tries to go at first, or how quickly. But if the government becomes highly confident than that is the sort of destination we might expect.
Easy for me - not altogether keen on the great british public and happy to isolate and get deliveries and stuff.

Not so for people my age living in multiple age households and with kids mixing at work and grandkids who are mixing in schools. looks like it will be a fuck them :mad:
 
have you misunderstood? Seemed sensible posts

ooops me that misunderstood :( yes very strange

Its nothing to do with being anti-vax, Dix used to be head of the vaccine taskforce in this pandemic.

What he was saying is in regards further booster doses in future It is inevitable that there will be debate about how much vaccination will be required in future, how often it should happen and what proportion of the public it should involve. Given that the focus is really about protecting those most at risk, and that the original few versions of herd immunity that used to be mentioned are a red herring since we are not achieving a picture which would stop most transmission, this is understandable.

The main complications with the way the Guardian (actually the Observer I think) have kicked off their version of this debate is that Dix is a bit of a dickhead when it comes to how hard he pushes the complete 'return to normality' agenda, and this affects the way he makes remarks about the future of vaccines too. Another complication is that Omicron was a bit of a setback in terms of some concerns about protection from severe disease, and the current booster campaign seems to have made a real difference in helping to restore the balance. But there will still be questions about the longer-lasting forms of protection, and the extent to which further boosters need to be repeated in future, how often, and for whom. Modified versions of the vaccine that target newer variants directly are also a consideration.

Even Dix did not say anything close to 'no more vaccines for anyone in future'. And in terms of public perceptions in regards the need for them to get vaccinated again at some future point, opinion on that will probably wobble around in response to events and increased scientific understanding of risks in future. If a future variant causes a new scale of problem that requires another big campaign, then attitudes will shift in response. As will government dictats if they get something wrong in the coming months and have to change the plan again later.
 
Easy for me - not altogether keen on the great british public and happy to isolate and get deliveries and stuff.

Not so for people my age living in multiple age households and with kids mixing at work and grandkids who are mixing in schools. looks like it will be a fuck them :mad:
That has already happened to quite an extent with both the Delta and Omicron waves. This will just be the next few steps along that path, which is not me excusing it, and I've moaned plenty about the 2021 approach. But I'm also aware of how attitudes are shifting more broadly than they did in the past, there are lots of people here on this forum who are ready to move on more and in my opinion this caused some to take a stance in December that depressed me. But it is also a somewhat understandable stance, and I have long known that I would eventually have to come to terms with it, it was always coming, it was just a question of when. For it to be less inevitable would have required a different attitude, one that did not sneer or react with horror to concepts like zero covid or at least a more mixed approach, somewhere between zero covid and the approach people actually went along with in this country so far. There are in my opinion better ways to think about this stuff and to adapt in reasonable ways, but there was not so much appetite for that, and some dull and mildly inconvenient longer term changes to behaviour found little favour, especially as far as establishment and press attitudes go. A better balance would have been possible without moving the largest goal-posts or having to come to terms with unpalatable things for the long term, but this is also a cruel, half-arsed country where little emphasis is placed on doing some things properly for the long haul.
 
Back
Top Bottom