Post-vaccine Boomer Behaviour?

[elbows]

OK one last attempt for now.

The chart I posted earlier is NOT the same as the charts we looked at in the past, which provided a vaguer sense of what people had been doing prior to infection. They are all part of the same attempts to survey the situation, but there are important differences.

Here are examples of the other sorts of charts from November, behind a spoiler tag to stop this post being too long, which are of the variety we argued about in the past.

Spoiler

In regards the chart I did post earlier, and my complaint about their failure to describe it properly, I have found more useful descriptions of what is shown from an earlier November version, probably the same one that lead to those press reports. Hopefully something in these words will make clearer what this data actually is. But please note that they have tightened the definitions for which cases can be included in this data since then, and that is somewhat explained in the blurb under the most recent version of the graph I posted earlier today. Also note that the number of cases involved in the chart I posted earlier were low, especially compared to the numbers in the November version of that data.

Of the 128808 cases reported for contact tracing between 09 November to 15 November 2020, 34,328 (26.7%) had a common exposure with at least 1 other case. 9789 common locations/settings were reported in total (of which the table calculates % of the most frequent). Supermarkets (visiting and working) were the most frequent common exposure setting followed by attending secondary school.

Common Exposure Reports use NHS Test and Trace enhanced contact tracing data to identify locations or activities reported by 2 or more cases. Once a case enters the NHS Test and Trace system, enhanced contact tracing information is collected on household, workplace, education and activities in the 7-2 day period before symptom onset (or date of test if onset date is not provided). Data collected for this period is primarily used to identify where someone may have caught their infection.

Data presented are for common exposures within the enhanced contact tracing data with a known postcode only. Activities, household and workplace events reported by cases are grouped based on a shared postcode. Any event with >=2 cases associated with it (>=2 persons declaring the same postcode with onsets (or date tested if unavailable) the last 7 days) is defined as a common exposure and is included in this report.

Locations with more visitors are more likely to be identified as common exposures. No adjustment has been made for how commonly a location is visited. The exposure category selected is the most commonly identified among all individuals with an event at that postcode. The exposure category can change retrospectivity therefore, changing the most common exposure as reported here.

Common exposures identified in this way are not always indicative of epidemiological linkage between the cases and require further investigation. Some will be coincidental rather than relating to potential/actual transmission events.

All are from this file from November https://assets.publishing.service.g...-19_and_Influenza_Surveillance_Graphs_w47.pdf

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I'm still a bit confused as to what exactly that data tells us in the absence of control figures to compare it to. It says this itself:

Common exposures identified in this way are not always indicative of epidemiological linkage between the cases and require further investigation. Some will be coincidental rather than relating to potential/actual transmission events.

And it also doesn't distinguish between visiting a supermarket and working in one, which is a rather important distinction.

The most commonly visited place with other people in it during covid is the supermarket. That's all it really tells us, and it's hardly surprising. During actual lockdown, that figure will be a lot higher than that, I would think, given that it is the only place with other people in it that many of us are visiting at all. That fact in and of itself still doesn't tell us what level of transmission is happening there.

 

[Pickman's model]

OK one last attempt for now.

The chart I posted earlier is NOT the same as the charts we looked at in the past, which provided a vaguer sense of what people had been doing prior to infection. They are all part of the same attempts to survey the situation, but there are important differences.

Here are examples of the other sorts of charts from November, behind a spoiler tag to stop this post being too long, which are of the variety we argued about in the past.

Spoiler

View attachment 252496
View attachment 252497

In regards the chart I did post earlier, and my complaint about their failure to describe it properly, I have found more useful descriptions of what is shown from an earlier November version, probably the same one that lead to those press reports. Hopefully something in these words will make clearer what this data actually is. But please note that they have tightened the definitions for which cases can be included in this data since then, and that is somewhat explained in the blurb under the most recent version of the graph I posted earlier today. Also note that the number of cases involved in the chart I posted earlier were low, especially compared to the numbers in the November version of that data.





View attachment 252498
All are from this file from November https://assets.publishing.service.g...-19_and_Influenza_Surveillance_Graphs_w47.pdf

yeh but there are none so blind as those who will not see

 

[kabbes]

Well, it does tell us something. If a supermarket is literally the only place a household is visiting and they then get COVID, chances are that’s where they caught the virus.

 

[strung out]

Well, it does tell us something. If a supermarket is literally the only place a household is visiting and they then get COVID, chances are that’s where they caught the virus.

You don't need the chart to tell you that.

 

[kabbes]

You don't need the chart to tell you that.

Yes, but combine that fact with the chart and you do get some kind of meaning poking its hand out for a quick wave

 

[emanymton]

Well, it does tell us something. If a supermarket is literally the only place a household is visiting and they then get COVID, chances are that’s where they caught the virus.

I find it hard to believe there are many households whose only contact with other people is at the supermarket.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Well, it does tell us something. If a supermarket is literally the only place a household is visiting and they then get COVID, chances are that’s where they caught the virus.

Does that chart tell you what the whole household has been doing?

 

[Pickman's model]

I find it hard to believe there are many households whose only contact with other people is at the supermarket.

i don't

 

[cyril_smear]

(for want of a better title)

Talking to my parents the other day they seem to be under the impression that once they've had the vaccine they will be able go off gallivanting around because they deserve it after "following the rules whilst young people spread Covid at their raves".

Wouldn't surprise me in the least if we see similar attitudes in other Tory voting, Mail reading types who wander around the country in the coming months spreading the virus to the poor unvaccinated young people serving them their Costa lattes and so on.

nice to see that people still have the utmost respect for their parents.

 

[chilango]

nice to see that people still have the utmost respect for their parents.

is that what's important?

 

[teuchter]

I'm still a bit confused as to what exactly that data tells us in the absence of control figures to compare it to.

Same here.

 

[planetgeli]

I find it hard to believe there are many households whose only contact with other people is at the supermarket.

Raises hand

Pretty sure there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Raises hand

Pretty sure there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

Perhaps. Not sure how many there will be with children, though. And then there are all the households with at least one person having to go out to work. And various kinds of shared houses where people simply won't know exactly what their housemates are up to.

We know that a good half of all infections are being caught at home, hence the disparity in infection rates depending on the size of households. Other major suspects are hospitals and certain kinds of workplaces - and, when those figures were collated, schools. Supermarkets may well also be major offenders, but I still don't see how those figures signal that.

 

[emanymton]

Raises hand

Pretty sure there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions.

I don't believe there are millions of household with not one person going to work or school or traveling on public transport or ever seeing a single friend or family member. Never mind a 100 of other posible places they could come in contact with people.

 

[bimble]

We know that a good half of all infections are being caught at home, hence the disparity in infection rates depending on the size of households.

I didn’t know that. Obvious when you think about it that living with other people is the best way to catch it from them but hadn’t heard anything like it before.
I can’t do maths but does that mean that people who live alone are about 1/8th as likely to catch or spread the covid ?

 

[Pickman's model]

I didn’t know that. Obvious when you think about it that living with other people is the best way to catch it from them but hadn’t heard anything like it before.
I can’t do maths but does that mean that people who live alone are about 1/8th as likely to catch or spread the covid ?

About an eighth as likely as... As what?

 

[bimble]

About an eighth as likely as... As what?

As a family of 4.4 people.
Eta oh, average household size in Uk is apparently about 2.4 people. So not at all right, my maths.

 

[Pickman's model]

As a family of 4.4 people.

4.4? From whence do you derive this?

 

[bimble]

4.4? From whence do you derive this?

From my flailing brain.

 

[Pickman's model]

From my flailing brain.

The average household size in the region of 2.4.

 

[bimble]

The average household size in the region of 2.4.

Yes, I learnt that 4 minutes ago.

 

[Pickman's model]

Yes, I learnt that 4 minutes ago.

4.4 mins ago?

 

[klang]

4.4 mins ago?

2.4mins

 

[wemakeyousoundb]

I find it hard to believe there are many households whose only contact with other people is at the supermarket.

you need to get out stay in more

 

[emanymton]

you need to get out stay in more

I'll let my employers know.

 

[kabbes]

I’d say that most of the households I personally know only have people meeting others at the supermarket. They’re all office workers WFH, the kids are schooled at home and they’re taking the instructions not to meet others seriously. It’s by no means all, but I’d say it is most.

 

[cyril_smear]

is that what's important?

Mine aren’t perfect, but I wouldn’t go belittling them to strangers. IDK.

 

[chilango]

Mine aren’t perfect, but I wouldn’t go belittling them to strangers. IDK.

Fair enough

 

[Supine]

I’d say that most of the households I personally know only have people meeting others at the supermarket. They’re all office workers WFH, the kids are schooled at home and they’re taking the instructions not to meet others seriously. It’s by no means all, but I’d say it is most.

From your perspective maybe true but for others - many others - supermarkets are only one of many places people have contact with others. Food shops will always score high on surveys because its a common need that everyone has.

A big thing thats lacking for me is backwards tracing of contacts (the stuff that is too complicated for serco phone operators). Where are the super spreading events happening? Without knowing where we cant know how to address them. We need t&t moved into the public sector.