Maps, science, data & statistics tracking of COVID-19

[Space Lynx]

Oddly, as I mentioned in an earlier post, our 2nd/3rd (whichever it was I suppose) that peaked in January saw a definite increase in under 60's all the way down to 40's getting hospitalised than in the first outbreak, most of it was talked about with interviews on our news channels, the only factual thing in terms of stats I saw was that under 60 year year olds hospitalised increased by 42% across the UK in comparison to the first wave, the thing I don't know for sure is 42% more than how many.

This is a news article around a statement made on a government briefing on 11th January basically saying that as of then, running up to our peak 25% of all our hospital admissions were under the age of 55 and at that time there were 35,000 in hospital .....................

25% of Covid-19 admissions to hospital are under the age of 55, MPs told | Express & Star (expressandstar.com)

all people 50+ are vaccinated in UK now though right? that means rate of death should be near 0 almost. so what is the rate of death for UK in last week?

 

[Tatty_Two]

all people 50+ are vaccinated in UK now though right? that means rate of death should be near 0 almost. so what is the rate of death for UK in last week?

Almost all over 50's, but you are maybe forgetting that the people who died yesterday were possibly infected 4 weeks ago or more? The 7 day average daily fatality rate as of yesterday is 85, compare that with the 11th January when that Government briefing took place regarding the 25% of all those hospitalised were under 55 which was around 1000 - 1400 per day average. It would be interesting to see the ages of those 85 per day average though.

 

[kapone32]

That would probably be a catastrophe even bigger than what this virus did in a whole year.

We have to face the reality that it's never going to go away, even getting the entire population vaccinated, which is absurd, wont exterminate the virus. It's time we try and slowly go back to normal despite all of this, we have no other choice.

As abusrd as you think it is it will become more and more of a reality. Do you understand that the "virus" has already mutated (plural) to more dangerous levels. I just had a friend of the family recover from Covid 19. They went from 168 to 90 lbs in 7 days so you can't tell me this isn't real. Actually the biggest catastrophe in this (and support for your argument) is that teachers are not considered essential for vaccine application. No other point in our society has a better nexus for transmission. We cannot even attempt to go back to normal and if you worked in Healthcare that would definitely not be your sentiment. We need to face the fact about Covid 19. It is one of man's biggest fears; a killer form of the common cold (in transmission). Early in the virus a senior's home in my neck of the woods had an outbreak. The 1st case was confirmed on a Friday, by Sunday 48 of the 51 residents had died. Take a look at some Xrays of lungs effected by Covid and ask yourself if you would like that to be the lungs of you or your loved ones. A Worldwide lock down was required but the Greed co-efficient would not allow for that. Do you really think that Coca Cola would just allow the loss of 95% of their revenue?

 

[Space Lynx]

As abusrd as you think it is it will become more and more of a reality. Do you understand that the "virus" has already mutated (plural) to more dangerous levels. I just had a friend of the family recover from Covid 19. They went from 168 to 90 lbs in 7 days so you can't tell me this isn't real. Actually the biggest catastrophe in this (and support for your argument) is that teachers are not considered essential for vaccine application. No other point in our society has a better nexus for transmission. We cannot even attempt to go back to normal and if you worked in Healthcare that would definitely not be your sentiment. We need to face the fact about Covid 19. It is one of man's biggest fears; a killer form of the common cold (in transmission). Early in the virus a senior's home in my neck of the woods had an outbreak. The 1st case was confirmed on a Friday, by Sunday 48 of the 51 residents had died. Take a look at some Xrays of lungs effected by Covid and ask yourself if you would like that to be the lungs of you or your loved ones. A Worldwide lock down was required but the Greed co-efficient would not allow for that. Do you really think that Coca Cola would just allow the loss of 95% of their revenue?

My state is allowing anyone 16 an older can get the vaccine. Things are moving really fast in Republican states it seems, not sure why that is. I guess not as many people want the vaccine in Republican states, so it's easier to get?

I have had Covid twice (once officially) and yes I never want it again... so I will be getting vaccine very soon.

 

[kapone32]

My state is allowing anyone 16 an older can get the vaccine. Things are moving really fast in Republican states it seems, not sure why that is. I guess not as many people want the vaccine in Republican states, so it's easier to get?

I have had Covid twice (once officially) and yes I never want it again... so I will be getting vaccine very soon.

Here in Canada even though the lockdown protocols have been good the vaccine implementation has been meh. It behooves me that as one of the G7 countries we do not have our our facilities to manufacture our own vaccine.

 

[Space Lynx]

Here in Canada even though the lockdown protocols have been good the vaccine implementation has been meh. It behooves me that as one of the G7 countries we do not have our our facilities to manufacture our own vaccine.

perhaps that is one of the downsides of universal healthcare? i don't know just asking

 

[dragontamer5788]

perhaps that is one of the downsides of universal healthcare? i don't know just asking

In the USA, the Vaccine is (temporary) universal healthcare... for better or worse. Its a free shot with no citizenship check (but tightly regulated in terms of age / health conditions / occupation) for who is allowed / not allowed to get it. While the individual states set and enforce the rules, all states are beholden to the Federal Government for actual shipments.

EDIT: It should be noted that Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are relatively expensive: nearly $20 (USD). USA put big bets on them and it paid off. Other vaccines are $2 to $5, and maybe Canada bet on those vaccines instead. UK bought tons and tons of AZ vaccine (and luckily, AZ was also one of the fastest approved vaccines, 3rd place after Pfizer and Moderna). And since AZ is cheaper to produce and cheaper to distribute, the UK clearly benefited from that bet.

Speaking of UK: the UK is rolling out their (mostly AZ-based) vaccine faster than the USA. And UK has universal healthcare too. So I'm pretty sure the health-care style doesn't really matter on this mass scale (ironically). What really mattered was the decisions the countries made last year: whether they bet on the right vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna, AZ, or J&J). Or even Sinopharm (Hungary is faster than other EU countries, since they were willing to take China's vaccine).

 

[R-T-B]

I know, statistically this is nearly irrelevant, but I just thought I'd drop this here.

I, a resident of Washington state, got my first Moderna dose today. No real side effects.

 

[Space Lynx]

I know, statistically this is nearly irrelevant, but I just thought I'd drop this here.

I, a resident of Washington state, got my first Moderna dose today. No real side effects.

Every 16 an up can get the vaccine in my state now. I honestly don't know how they moved the vaccines so fast. crazy fast. I'm very very impressed. I am going to get the Moderna one or Pfizer probably early April. I currently have immunity though from already having it naturally. So I am considering waiting until early May. No rush really.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Every 16 an up can get the vaccine in my state now. I honestly don't know how they moved the vaccines so fast. crazy fast. I'm very very impressed. I am going to get the Moderna one or Pfizer probably early April. I currently have immunity though from already having it naturally. So I am considering waiting until early May. No rush really.

If you don't mind me making a suggestion ................... don't wait unless you have no choice, with these different variants stating to find their way into some communities there is evidence that natural immunity will be either much weaker or non existent, from what I have read that seems to apply to the South African and Brazilian variants although you should be OK against the UK one.

 

[Vya Domus]

Do you understand that the "virus" has already mutated (plural) to more dangerous levels. I just had a friend of the family recover from Covid 19. They went from 168 to 90 lbs in 7 days so you can't tell me this isn't real.

Exactly and because of that vaccination is not the end be all. It's a probability thing, you get vaccinated you become X % less likely to become infected, this will always leave a pool of people that continue to get sick and spread the virus. The point is these scenarios are never going to go away.

On the other hand the economical implications of completely locking everything down for months are unfathomable. We're already pushing our luck, national reserves around the world already dumped a lot of capital into banks buying up various stocks and assets to keep markets up and hide the inflation. Crashes have happened before, however, by literally halting the operation of major industries we are playing with fire in way we have never done before.

 

[dragontamer5788]

Exactly and because of that vaccination is not the end be all.

The vaccine is the end-all be-all of the original COVID19 strain, B.1.1.7 (UK Strain), P.1 (Brazil Strain: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102017).

Studies on B.1.351 (South Africa strain) are ongoing. But the vaccines could very well be the end-all-be-all for that strain as well, but maybe we'll need a booster shot. In the mean time, we can enjoy a near 100% reduction in deaths and hospitalizations, even against B.1.351 (you might get sick, but you don't die from it).

The virus needs to mutate a fair bit more before our current crop of vaccines are rendered useless. The vaccines seem "stronger" and more flexible than natural immunity: offering greater protections against COVID19 (and its many variants) than natural immunity offers.

-----------

Sure, there's a new New York strain (B.1.526), but chances are, I would bet that its also covered by the vaccines. After all, the P.1 strain was a pretty large mutation by most measures... and yet we're still good with the vaccine (but not good with natural immunity).

It's a probability thing, you get vaccinated you become X % less likely to become infected, this will always leave a pool of people that continue to get sick and spread the virus.

The virus only spreads by probability. Before the lockdowns, we've measured the virus spreading at a R0 of 3. That is: every 1 person infected creates 3-more infected a generation later.

This means that a 66% effective vaccine applied to 100% of the population (or a 100% effective vaccine applied to 66% of the population) will wipe out the virus. Why? Because at >66% herd immunity: 1-person infected will create less than one infected person a generation later (the virus "naturally" tried to spread to 3 people, but 2+ of those people were immune, and thus the virus starts to die out). When we reach 70%, 80%, or greater levels of vaccination, we will wipe out the virus.

EDIT: Note: Measles has an R0 of 15, requiring vaccination rates of 94%+ to wipe out. And guess what? We've mostly wiped Measles out. An R0=3 virus is going to be cake compared to Measles once people start trusting the vaccine.

 

[Space Lynx]

The vaccine is the end-all be-all of the original COVID19 strain, B.1.1.7 (UK Strain), P.1 (Brazil Strain: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102017).

Studies on B.1.351 (South Africa strain) are ongoing. But the vaccines could very well be the end-all-be-all for that strain as well, but maybe we'll need a booster shot. In the mean time, we can enjoy a near 100% reduction in deaths and hospitalizations, even against B.1.351 (you might get sick, but you don't die from it).

The virus needs to mutate a fair bit more before our current crop of vaccines are rendered useless. The vaccines seem "stronger" and more flexible than natural immunity: offering greater protections against COVID19 (and its many variants) than natural immunity offers.

I'm still trying to understand the numbers a bit better.

Pfizer = 30 micrograms, in 7 days fully inoculated after second shot, and 100% prevention of hospitalizations and 100% prevention of deaths.
Moderna = 100 micrograms, in 14 days fully inoculated after second shot, and 89% prevention of hospitalizations and 100% prevention of deaths.

I don't know, less material has to enter my body and I get better protection with Pfizer, I kind of want a Pfizer vaccine personally.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Exactly and because of that vaccination is not the end be all. It's a probability thing, you get vaccinated you become X % less likely to become infected, this will always leave a pool of people that continue to get sick and spread the virus. The point is these scenarios are never going to go away.

On the other hand the economical implications of completely locking everything down for months are unfathomable. We're already pushing our luck, national reserves around the world already dumped a lot of capital into banks buying up various stocks and assets to keep markets up and hide the inflation. Crashes have happened before, however, by literally halting the operation of major industries we are playing with fire in way we have never done before.

So far research in the UK shows a minimum of 66% don't transmit, the thing is though, the other 33% so far who might infect people are not getting hospitalised (so mild symptoms, that includes the elderly and people with chronic underlying conditions).

Once the population has been vaccinated even if they are one of the 5 - 10% that the efficacy does not reach they are likely to only get mild symptoms and even if they did get more severe symptoms that quantity of people would not strain our medical infrastructure, leaving us (hopefully) in the situation that if it does not kill you or make you severely ill then that's a win because it's pretty much the same as some of the influenza strains, don't get me wrong though, I am not suggesting it's a smooth road to get there at all.

 

[dragontamer5788]

I'm still trying to understand the numbers a bit better.

Pfizer = 30 micrograms, in 7 days fully inoculated after second shot, and 100% prevention of hospitalizations and 100% prevention of deaths.
Moderna = 100 micrograms, in 14 days fully inoculated after second shot, and 89% prevention of hospitalizations and 100% prevention of deaths.

I don't know, less material has to enter my body and I get better protection with Pfizer, I kind of want a Pfizer vaccine personally.

We don't have enough vaccines to be choosy. As long as the vaccine is above the estimated R0 values (66% for an R0 of 3), then we wipe out the virus and win with enough vaccinations.

This means that even a 70% effective vaccine (with enough people taking it) is enough to win. Seeing these 90% or 95% effective vaccines is outstanding.

So far research in the UK shows a minimum of 66% don't transmit, the thing is though, the other 33% so far who might infect people are not getting hospitalised (so mild symptoms, that includes the elderly and people with chronic underlying conditions).

IIRC, the main UK vaccine is AZ, which mainly has advantages in storage / distribution but a bit less efficacy than the mRNA vaccines. I was seeing some initial studies suggesting 80%+ lack of transmission with the mRNA vaccines.

66% lack of transmission is just a bit too low to stop the spread of the virus. But a widespread distribution of that vaccine means you wipe out most hospitalizations and most deaths due to the virus. So that's still a win in my book. Besides: it will still grossly stop most transmissions (66% prevention of transmissions compounds per generation. 10 infected normally becomes 30 infected, then 90 infected. But with a 60% herd immunity (say: 90% distributed x 66% effective), 10 infected becomes 12 and then becomes 14 infected, or a 90% reduction over two generations.

So even if we are unable to reach "wipe out the virus" levels of herd immunity (due to either too few people taking the vaccine, or vaccines that lose efficacy), seeing numbers like 60% or 70% compounded reduction in transmission is outstanding. It really hampers the ability for the virus to spread.

 

[Vya Domus]

This means that a 66% effective vaccine applied to 100% of the population (or a 100% effective vaccine applied to 66% of the population) will wipe out the virus. Why? Because at >66% herd immunity: 1-person infected will create less than one infected person a generation later (the virus "naturally" tried to spread to 3 people, but 2+ of those people were immune, and thus the virus starts to die out). When we reach 70%, 80%, or greater levels of vaccination, we will wipe out the virus.

The science of “herd immunity” is highly inaccurate and should not be taken for granted.

And it’s not all about the probability of infection, Ebola for instance has a minuscule infection rate due to it requiring direct contact with bodily fluids yet there are still outbreaks from time to time and guess what, still not eradicated because of that. It’s ill advised and foolish to think that all of these COVID strands will just disappear due to a lower probability of infection.

Anyway, complete lockdowns are just not a good idea for economical reasons, ignoring everything else.

 

[dragontamer5788]

Ebola for instance has a minuscule infection rate

Wikipedia suggests Ebola is somewhere between 1.5 to 2.5, which is larger than H1N1.

Hardly "miniscule".

The science of “herd immunity” is highly inaccurate and should not be taken for granted.

Its a model. If you have a better model, feel free to contribute. Newtonian physics is highly inaccurate as it ignores relativistic effects and the speed of light, but its still good enough to calculate 99% of outer-space issues.

Similarly, the idea of "1 infection causes 3 more infections" (R0 = 3) is simple, and allows us to do napkin-level math for whether or not our vaccines will be effective. Guess what? 80%+ effective vaccines against an R0 = 3. COVID19 isn't even the worst disease from an R0 perspective: Measles is R0 = 15, far far more infectious and prone to outbreaks than COVID (94% needed to prevent a Measles outbreak). Highly-effective vaccines are a wonderful thing: they'll get us to the point where we can win.

COVID19 is far less infectious than Measles. Our vaccines are a spattering of efficacy around the world: so it gets complicated, but 70%, 80%, or even 90% vaccine efficacy seems to be in line with current measurements (depending on various factors: age, comorbidities, transmission vs hospitalization vs death, etc. etc.). And I don't want to oversimplify anything... but... there's nothing here about COVID19 that seems like its unbeatable. The only issue is the wtf 30%+ anti-vax rate going on right now in the USA according to various opinion polls.

------------

Given the numbers gathered so far, the opinion of anti-vax is the greatest barrier. Our vaccine efficacy is outstanding. R0 is high but reasonable (COVID's R0 of 3 is higher than most viruses, but less than Measles or other viruses we HAVE beaten before). Vaccine production and distribution is slower than I'd like, but the USA and UK are looking like production won't be an issue as soon as June-ish. The only variable left in our control is vaccination rates. If we can push to 80% or 90% vaccination, this probably will be all over. Even after factoring in the current crop of variants.

 

[Vya Domus]

Wikipedia suggests Ebola is somewhere between 1.5 to 2.5, which is larger than H1N1.

Incidentally H1N1 strands still pop up from time to time, the point is you can’t judge whether a virus will be eradicated just because the probability of infection drops.

 

[dragontamer5788]

Incidentally H1N1 strands still pop up from time to time, the point is you can’t judge whether a virus will be eradicated just because the probability of infection drops.

Flu vaccines only give you immunity for 6 months.

COVID19 vaccines have been tested and proven to last longer than that already. Now we don't know if its a one-and-done deal like Measles (well... I guess Measles has a booster. But after the booster we're done), or if we'll have to renew our COVID19 shots every year or 2, or 5, or 10. We'll figure that out when we get there.

But for now, we know that COVID19 immunity from vaccines lasts longer than ~9 months of testing so far. So things will be easier than the flu / H1N1 in that regards.

 

[HTC]

The science of “herd immunity” is highly inaccurate and should not be taken for granted.

And it’s not all about the probability of infection, Ebola for instance has a minuscule infection rate due to it requiring direct contact with bodily fluids yet there are still outbreaks from time to time and guess what, still not eradicated because of that. It’s ill advised and foolish to think that all of these COVID strands will just disappear due to a lower probability of infection.

Anyway, complete lockdowns are just not a good idea for economical reasons, ignoring everything else.

They are THE only method currently available that effectively blocks ALREADY rampaging numbers: HOWEVER, the economic cost is MOST DIRE, which is why countries only opt for this method as a last resort.

Unfortunately, most of the countries that opted for this method, did so FAR TOO LATE, when the numbers were already "sky high", meaning the LENGTH of the lockdown is A LOT LONGER than it would have been had the lockdown been enforced 1 to 2 weeks (or more) earlier.

The only country i'm aware of that had a VERY HARD lockdown VERY EARLY was New Zealand, because they enforced it before even having 100 daily cases, Nation wide: this ended up with the lockdown not lasting a month IIRC. Compare that to Portugal's 2nd lockdown for example, which is nearing 2.5 months already, and we have WAY HIGHER numbers than they had when they started to reopen.

 

[Space Lynx]

We don't have enough vaccines to be choosy. As long as the vaccine is above the estimated R0 values (66% for an R0 of 3), then we wipe out the virus and win with enough vaccinations.

This means that even a 70% effective vaccine (with enough people taking it) is enough to win. Seeing these 90% or 95% effective vaccines is outstanding.



IIRC, the main UK vaccine is AZ, which mainly has advantages in storage / distribution but a bit less efficacy than the mRNA vaccines. I was seeing some initial studies suggesting 80%+ lack of transmission with the mRNA vaccines.

66% lack of transmission is just a bit too low to stop the spread of the virus. But a widespread distribution of that vaccine means you wipe out most hospitalizations and most deaths due to the virus. So that's still a win in my book. Besides: it will still grossly stop most transmissions (66% prevention of transmissions compounds per generation. 10 infected normally becomes 30 infected, then 90 infected. But with a 60% herd immunity (say: 90% distributed x 66% effective), 10 infected becomes 12 and then becomes 14 infected, or a 90% reduction over two generations.

So even if we are unable to reach "wipe out the virus" levels of herd immunity (due to either too few people taking the vaccine, or vaccines that lose efficacy), seeing numbers like 60% or 70% compounded reduction in transmission is outstanding. It really hampers the ability for the virus to spread.

my small town has 3 vaccines to choose from and you can choose which location you go to and they tell you before you choose which one you will get it. so I do have the option for Pfizer, moderna, or J&J, so going to choose Pfizer, it just seems like the overall best. most people i know got moderna though so i don't know. bleh. i did have one family member get pfizer and she had no symptoms. the ones who got moderna were sick for 1-2 days. i prob will get sick for 1-2 days either way. meh

also still a little afraid of mrna tech still... considering the J&J a lot as the time gets closer actually...

 

[R-T-B]

Exactly and because of that vaccination is not the end be all. It's a probability thing, you get vaccinated you become X % less likely to become infected, this will always leave a pool of people that continue to get sick and spread the virus. The point is these scenarios are never going to go away.

So we issue booster shots. The way the mrna vaccines are constructued actually make this quite easy.

This isn't insurmountable.

 

[Tatty_Two]

Eradication has never been a requirement, in general we live with many things that once killed lots of us but through immunity whether natural or science based has resulted in little significant social economic effect, that is the objective we face today.

 

[dragontamer5788]

Eradication has never been a requirement, in general we live with many things that once killed lots of us but through immunity whether natural or science based has resulted in little significant social economic effect, that is the objective we face today.

Agreed. But it seems like eradication is possible. It will require vaccinating the world, which has issues. Most of the world probably will take the vaccine willingly, but who is going to go out to say... Afghanistan... and vaccinate the Taliban?

Eradication is not necessary. But since seems feasible, we might as well aim for it. The whole "aim for the stars, and you might land on the moon" sort of thing. Even if we fail at eradication, the steps we take in that direction will make life far safer and more normalized afterwards.

 

[Space Lynx]

Pfizer = 30 micrograms, in 7 days fully inoculated after second shot, and 100% prevention of hospitalizations and 100% prevention of deaths.
Moderna = 100 micrograms, in 14 days fully inoculated after second shot, and 89% prevention of hospitalizations and 100% prevention of deaths.

any scientists here that can explain why there is a magnitude of over 60% discrepancy in the amount of material (70 microgram difference) needed for moderna vs pfizer, even though essentially they are very similar.