|
Dren posted:I tried to dig the news sources out of this tweet thread and link those but my googling failed me. That’s pretty much what the NSW Health dept and Health minister Brad Hazzard are saying about the outbreak here. It was Brad Hazzard who called it a ‘near and present danger’ in a presser a few days ago. That tweet is accurate as to what’s being said and how the contact tracers are thinking it’s spread between the infected people we know about. Check Australian sources like ABC news, Guardian Australia, SBS news, Sydney Morning Herald etc. https://www.sbs.com.au/news/a-near-and-present-danger-concern-over-delta-coronavirus-variant-as-nsw-records-two-new-infections https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jun/19/new-south-wales-records-three-new-covid-cases-as-mandatory-masks-introduced e2: if you want the actual source you can watch the 19th June press conference about it from this page here https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infectious/covid-19/Pages/press-conferences.aspx Helith fucked around with this message at 06:34 on Jun 21, 2021 |
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 05:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
Dren posted:
Ligma balls lol
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 06:16
|
|
|
freebooter posted:I have a bad cold now and it's the first time I've been sick all pandemic and I forgot how much it loving sucks to spend a week hacking up phlegm My springtime allergies were especially bad this year, and I felt really self-conscious being out in public coughing even though I've been diligent about mask-wearing. I felt like I should apologize and assure everyone it was just allergies, even on the phone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 06:17
|
|
|
CaptainSarcastic posted:My springtime allergies were especially bad this year, and I felt really self-conscious being out in public coughing even though I've been diligent about mask-wearing. I felt like I should apologize and assure everyone it was just allergies, even on the phone. You should have joined respirator crew. P100 easily blocks pollen. But no, you didn't want to look like a maniac.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 06:33
|
|
|
N95/KN95/KF94/FFP2 also readily block pollen. Pollen grains are friggin’ huge compared to coronaviruses.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 07:06
|
|
|
Good news! You can’t get covid if you have a cold.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 07:06
|
|
|
Ⓧ Doubt
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 07:17
|
|
|
ante posted:Ligma balls
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 09:45
|
|
|
So one detail that seems to be going unnoticed is (at least in England) the advice on what constitutes covid symptoms seems to have changed over the last few months. My source for this is I've been killing time doing volunteer stewarding shifts at vaccination sites, and of course one of the things that you have to do is screen people coming in because you really don't want the waiting room becoming a superspreader site. Since April we've gone from temp check and asking if they have a cough/change of smell or taste, to just asking whether they currently have a fever or just generally "feel unwell", and being told to turn away anyone reporting *any* vague symptoms of infection (fever, headache, runny/stuffy nose, body aches) on top of cough/loss of smell. I'm not sure if this is a recognition that the screening on well-known symptoms is now a bit pointless because at this point anybody who doesn't know what a loss of smell and taste is probably won't even know they're supposed to be getting a vaccine, or if the new variants are causing more generalised malaise, or maybe even that the new variants (and the lower viral loads that continued masking/distancing and now vaccination are causing) are just generally not producing serious enough illness to be picked up by the older screening questions, but it is definitely interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 10:53
|
|
|
smoobles posted:Sunday is always a dip because nobody gets tested on the Lord's Day. Is BNO new to the pandemic? There have been other Sundays between March 2020 and yesterday. So, even though Sunday always has the lowest numbers, this last Sunday has been the lowest so far. The 14-day average, which is pretty good at smoothing out the fluctuations through the week, is at 11,138. That's down 18% and well lower than it has been since testing became widely available. At this rate the average will be below 10,000 cases by July 2nd.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 12:26
|
|
|
Is much of that down to a lot of states not doing much testing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 12:27
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:Is much of that down to a lot of states not doing much testing? That's tremendously unlikely. The number of tests done has remained consistent since the beginning of June, but the number of cases is still falling.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 12:31
|
|
|
gay picnic defence posted:Is much of that down to a lot of states not doing much testing? It depends on the area of the country you're in.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 12:54
|
|
|
This ties in with goddamntwisto’s post a bit but the symptoms from delta appear to be more consistent with classic cold and flu symptoms. Headache, sore throat, runny nose, and fever. I tend to think this shift in symptoms would result in more positive people getting tested, not less, since they would be more likely to recognize that they are sick. We saw seasonality drive rates down last summer, my guess is we’re seeing it again coupled with the downward pressure of vaccinations. Maybe one of you knows this answer. When they say 2 dose vaccine effectiveness against delta is 81% how can I understand that number? Do I have a 1 in 5 chance of getting covid every time I’m exposed to it or is it that 4 out of 5 vaccinated people are unlikely to get it no matter how many times they are exposed, or does the data not really tell us this answer?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 14:03
|
|
|
Dren posted:Maybe one of you knows this answer. When they say 2 dose vaccine effectiveness against delta is 81% how can I understand that number? Do I have a 1 in 5 chance of getting covid every time I’m exposed to it or is it that 4 out of 5 vaccinated people are unlikely to get it no matter how many times they are exposed, or does the data not really tell us this answer? It means neither really. It means that when you compare equal sized populations of vaccinated and unvaccinated people only 19% as many people in the vaccinated group will catch covid as in the unvaccinated group. So yeah, the data doesn't tell us the answer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 14:19
|
|
|
Thr last number I saw for pfizer/moderna was 88%, though I suppose we don't have it nailed down yet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 14:24
|
|
|
Scarodactyl posted:Thr last number I saw for pfizer/moderna was 88%, though I suppose we don't have it nailed down yet. Yeah, that was the last one I'd seen. Though 81% might be a realistic number if you averaged the mRNA vaccines out with the others in a given country? I can't see that FT article so I have no idea what their numbers are from. Unrelated but I really wish we could nail down just how much natural immunity protects from regular covid and the variants. I keep seeing that it's less, but I haven't come across any real numbers or data. You'd think you could work it out the same way you do efficacy, monitor a population of people who have had previous infections but do not plan to get vaccinated and monitor a population with no previous infection that do plan to get vaccinated. Maybe it's an ethical concern because you'd sorta be encouraging people to not get vaccinated in the study?
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 14:37
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:It means neither really. It means that when you compare equal sized populations of vaccinated and unvaccinated people only 19% as many people in the vaccinated group will catch covid as in the unvaccinated group. I’m guessing the breakthrough numbers skew heavily toward elderly people, too, but I guess I don’t know because nobody really brings it up
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 14:41
|
|
|
Dren posted:Maybe one of you knows this answer. When they say 2 dose vaccine effectiveness against delta is 81% how can I understand that number? Do I have a 1 in 5 chance of getting covid every time I’m exposed to it or is it that 4 out of 5 vaccinated people are unlikely to get it no matter how many times they are exposed, or does the data not really tell us this answer? You don’t have a one‐in‐five chance per encounter. You have one‐fifth the chance of getting COVID that an unvaccinated person would have over the entire study period. There are two extremes here: “all‐or‐nothing” or “leaky vaccine”. In the all‐or‐nothing scenario, your unique body and its interactions with the vaccine either leave you protected or not. You don’t know which. Under this model, you could go empty bedpans in the COVID ward with no PPE and there’s a four out of five chance you’d be fine. In the leaky vaccine scenario, no encounter with the virus is without risk, it’s just that the per‐interaction risk is much lower for vaccinated persons such that, over the period of study, it works out to eighty percent protection. The all‐or‐nothing scenario is ultimately better for everyone, and it’s probably closer to the truth. As uncomfortable that the thought that you may be in the unprotected one‐fifth is, it’s better than a world where the virus is endemic and you’re rolling dice every day for the rest of your life. If efficacy was one‐fifth in the study period and the leaky vaccine model was entirely correct, the breakthroughs would get much worse when those months stretched to years and decades. of a few months. The reality is likely somewhere between the two extreme models. The vaccine provides great protection to some, little to others, and some people have responses in between, where the vaccine will protect them from many but not all exposure events. Platystemon fucked around with this message at 15:37 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:03
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:Yeah, that was the last one I'd seen. Though 81% might be a realistic number if you averaged the mRNA vaccines out with the others in a given country? I can't see that FT article so I have no idea what their numbers are from. (as previously posted) Sensitivity of B.1.617.2 to sera from convalescent individuals at 6 and 12 months post-infection posted:Between 76% and 92% of the individuals neutralized the four strains at M6. The fraction of neutralizers was lower in the second cohort at M12, a phenomenon which was particularly marked for B.1.617.2., 89% of individuals neutralized B.1.1.7 and only 48% neutralized B.1.617.2 (Note that this was a lab/sera test not on individuals) Eric Topol is very non-doomposty but this seems germane: https://twitter.com/EricTopol/status/1405960603991113732 There are only a few countries that have counted on their "naturally gained immunity" as part of their national strategy - India and Brazil both boasted of this in the past. Everyone needs to get vaccinated. Blitter fucked around with this message at 15:21 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:11
|
|
|
I think the only source for this information right now is Public Health England. You can read the results yourself but the basics are that a single dose is much less effective against delta than Alpha but two doses brings it up to better but still not as good results. Basically from 12 April to 4 June amongst those who had two doses of Pfizer there were only 12% of the number of symptomatic cases identified as amongst the unvaccinated cohort. Astrazeneca only managed 67% protection after two doses but this does not properly take into account the age of those who received AZ being much older and due to the tiny number of actual cases there isnt enough data to adjust and run a meaningful comparison between vaccines. https://khub.net/web/phe-national/public-library/-/document_library/v2WsRK3ZlEig/view/479607266 Drilling down deeper than that is just not possible on an individual level.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:22
|
|
|
Blitter posted:(as previously posted) Thank you for that! That's the closest I've seen to the kind of data I want. I just was wishing we had real world data since I want to compare them to vaccine efficacy. I can't quite square real world efficacy numbers with lab tests in my head. I completely agree that natural immunity is a terrible strategy. It's more just me wanting to quantify just how bad it is. Kind of like if I was getting shot at, I'd want to have like tank armor between me and the bullets, but I'm stuck behind some dead trees and wondering how many bullets are gonna get through.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:24
|
|
|
The natural immunity thing seems like such a bizarre trend lately, too. So you want to catch a virus that will gently caress you up, either temporarily or permanently, and that's preferable to you than a vaccine that might give you some nasty side effects for a few days? I'm seeing it a lot lately, usually coupled with "GOD GAVE US A BEAUTIFUL GIFT CALLED AN IMMUNE SYSTEM!"
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:30
|
|
|
Keep checking out https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ and NHS England very soon we should see actual breakdowns of the age groups who are getting it, if they have been vaccinated or not, if they go into hospital or not and length of stay in hospital. I wouldn’t be surprised to see it all come out on the 2nd of July because that’s when they are reviewing lockdown again.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:31
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:Thank you for that! That's the closest I've seen to the kind of data I want. I just was wishing we had real world data since I want to compare them to vaccine efficacy. I can't quite square real world efficacy numbers with lab tests in my head. No problem! That same study includes vaccines assessed using the same lab approach so might be worth checking out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:33
|
|
|
“Natural immunity” is a strategy that a four‐year‐old could see is a loser. “What if instead of doing anything to prepare for a possible military invasion, we just let it happen? Imagine what a tip‐top fighting shape our military will be in after all the experience.” 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:40
|
|
|
A Fancy Hat posted:The natural immunity thing seems like such a bizarre trend lately, too. The thing I'm seeing more is people who have either had it or think they had it and figure they don't need the vaccine because of that. I know a handful of people who claim that's the the reason they won't get the shot. It's dumb, but harder to push back on since in their mind they're already immune. Platystemon posted:“Natural immunity” is a strategy that a four‐year‐old could see is a loser. But think of how many hardened veteran soldiers we'd have from the fighting retreat all the way to our capitol!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 15:49
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:“Natural immunity” is a strategy that a four‐year‐old could see is a loser. And yet we somehow ended up with braingeniuses like this specimen. "I'm not going to take meds for a leg that isn't broken"  Snowglobe of Doom posted:I don't wish covid on anyone but this guy has a massive public platform to spout his anti-vax bullshit and the only time I've seen people like this change their minds is if they or a close family member got a bad case. Of course there's also lots of examples where someone got covid and still kept denying it was real even as the nurses were feeding the vent tube down their throats so maybe not even then.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 16:08
|
|
|
People believing that natural immunity is bulletproof and long‐lasting is partly the fault of the individual, but it’s largely a societal problem. It’s one of many comforting lies that people shared, including people of authority who should have known better. There was the whole mask efficacy debacle, and the six‐foot rule, and “children don’t get it”, and coronaviruses evolve slowly, and when pathogens evolve, they evolve to be less harmful. We just went through “even if there’s a vaccine breakthrough, you’ll just get the sniffles! You definitely won’t get sick or die!” Sometimes you just need to break some bad news and manage expectations. Platystemon fucked around with this message at 16:35 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 16:33
|
|
|
ante posted:Ligma balls
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 16:43
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:coronaviruses evolve slowly This is still true, it evolves slower than influenza and other RNA viruses due to the proofreading mechanism it has. The mistake was some people mistook this to mean it was going to not be evolving at all and/or variants would take forever to pop up. wilderthanmild fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Jun 21, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 16:45
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:This is still true, it evolves slower than influenza and other RNA viruses due to the proofreading mechanism it has. The mistake was some people mistook this to mean it was going to not be evolving at all and that variants would take forever to pop up. It’s arguably worse than a quickly‐evolving pathogen, because a quickly‐evolving pathogen can settle into a stable equilibrium faster. Of course, if there’s no equilibrium and the pathogen can play rock‐paper‐scissors indefinitely, well then that’s a problem.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 16:54
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:This is still true, it evolves slower than influenza and other RNA viruses due to the proofreading mechanism it has. The mistake was some people mistook this to mean it was going to not be evolving at all and/or variants would take forever to pop up. Several cases have been studied where an immuno-compromised person has been infected with nCoV and their immune system incubates the infection for months, during which multiple mutations take place. Boston, UK, and South Africa are a few of the known cases of this type of multiple mutation incubation. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.06.03.21258228v1.full https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/12/uk-variant-puts-spotlight-immunocompromised-patients-role-covid-19-pandemic
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 22:50
|
|
|
wilderthanmild posted:This is still true, it evolves slower than influenza and other RNA viruses due to the proofreading mechanism it has. The mistake was some people mistook this to mean it was going to not be evolving at all and/or variants would take forever to pop up. also it evolves much faster when people let it spread everyfuckingwhere 
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/me...sedgdhp&pc=U531 "pick off" is such special wording.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 00:01
|
|
|
Computer Serf posted:Several cases have been studied where an immuno-compromised person has been infected with nCoV and their immune system incubates the infection for months, during which multiple mutations take place. Boston, UK, and South Africa are a few of the known cases of this type of multiple mutation incubation. As an immunocompromised person, I find the official line on vaccine effectiveness relatively meaningless to me and I'm expecting my immune response to the covid vaccine to be less robust, just as it is to other vaccines. The idea that I could incubate novel mutations is horrifying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
Lolie posted:The idea that I could incubate novel mutations is horrifying.  Plague Mother Lolie.E: I get the feeling, though, and hopefully you won't be.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 00:05
|
|
|
Cuba coming in hot! https://twitter.com/bnodesk/status/1407118969258098694?s=21
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
MarcusSA posted:Cuba coming in hot! loving 
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 00:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 08:11 |
|
|
Spazzle posted:loving Dunno if that's a skeptical LOL or not but Cuba does one thing very well: literacy and public health. Two things. Literacy, public health and cucurucho de coco. Three thi...Well there's probably more. But Cuba's vaccine efforts are worth a read about at any rate. When you are embargoed by the world's most powerful state 80 miles from your border, you have to learn to do this kind of thing yourself I guess. They have five different vaccines in development, all using a novel pipeline technique they pioneered two or three years ago with their lung cancer vaccine - remember that? The one that has a bunch of dying Americans flying via Mexico to obtain in Cuba? Two of the five are intranasal, needle-free vaccines. Abdala is one of two that are wrapping up Phase III trials. They're also developing a "Pan-corona" vaccine aimed particularly at novel variants by targeting parts of the virus that are least prone to variation. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/latamcaribbean/2021/03/31/cubas-five-covid-19-vaccines-the-full-story-on-soberana-01-02-plus-abdala-and-mambisa/ This is just a blog but summarizes and has some links for more. Basically, Cuba bet big on biotech in the early 80s and make the most of a very limited economic situation in order to shame the gently caress out of the rest of us medically. Deep Glove Bruno fucked around with this message at 01:15 on Jun 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 01:10
|
|
