Covid 19 - Lift all restrictions?

I don't know about whether Prof Pagel has an agenda but I read her response to the 60% thing and I don't agree with it. No, I'm not an epidemiologist but then neither is Prof Pagel.

She is part of Independent Sage who have not exactly been triumphant in their forecasts so far; the January lockdown won't be enough to stem infections (it was). Opening the schools in March will cause a spike (it didn't). We should not go to a 12-week gap for vaccination (we did, it worked.)

Lots of use of the words "could", "likely", "scary" in her tweets.

Alegrias1

Alegrias1

Why 60% is good. For those prepared to read it.

twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1396015144233222144

Quoting myself, sorry.

Why 60% isn't a bad thing.

(Unless you are Christina Pagel of course, who thinks we are doomed and might as well give up now.)

So that would be Professor Christina Pagel the German mathematician and professor of operational research at University College London, who holds a different opinion to you Alegrias1.

She flags up the need for two doses in order to have any reasonable protection from B.1.617.2. which, as she points out has rapidly spread in various parts of the country.

I imagine that it is because of this information that the government has shortened the gap between jabs. And it seems the councils in these areas are also aware of the issues with these vaccines and B.1.617.2. and are getting ahead of the government.

www.ft.com/content/a70d423a-7d7c-4736-8828-0a485d7c3a8e

JaneJudge

I did try and read it but I just don't understand it

Dr John includes things like that in his blogs and he isn’t too concerned (at least about that: he is concerned about other things)I just found the difference between 60% and 88% a bit alarming. It’s a pity the AZ vaccine wasn’t allowed to go with the half dose strategy which seemed to give a much better result immune wise.

Growstuff I understand that Professor Pagel may have an agenda regarding SAGE and the current Government.

Alegrias1

Alegrias1

Why 60% is good. For those prepared to read it.

twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1396015144233222144

Quoting myself, sorry.

Why 60% isn't a bad thing.

(Unless you are Christina Pagel of course, who thinks we are doomed and might as well give up now.)

I don't think that's fair Alegrias. I've been following Professor Pagel on Twitter and in her IndieSage briefings for months. She doesn't think we're all "doomed". She has provided loads and loads of accurate data week after week. She has been frustrated by the cover ups.

I did try and read it but I just don't understand it

Alegrias1

Why 60% is good. For those prepared to read it.

twitter.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1396015144233222144

Quoting myself, sorry.

Why 60% isn't a bad thing.

(Unless you are Christina Pagel of course, who thinks we are doomed and might as well give up now.)

I don't understand the 60% thing
I don't understand whether a larger mixed group of people would skew statistics either. I thought it would, my husband disagrees with me but that isn't unusual

Oxford Vaccine Group’s Professor Andrew Pollard has said that next few weeks are crucial in looking at data, and if vaccines do stop people being hospitalised than the pandemic is over because we can live with the virus @BBCr4today.

rosie1959

I stand corrected Franburn I apologise PippaZ for that remark
But cannot understand how the vaccine would disguise how bad things really are

The vaccine continues to bring down the numbers of cases but disguise the poor attempts to protect our entry to the country from elsewhere and our appalling Test, Track, Trace and Isolate system.

Also, in answer to others points on here, if 60% is so great why was this news put out on a Saturday evening. Is the Eurovision Contest another example of a Tory "good time for burying bad news"?

After cancelling our 2nd vaccinations for June, we (me and husband) have just been for our second vaccines, they are REALLY ramping up the vaccination program here We had to queue both in cars and peoples to get in and we passed the original vaccination centre which was absolutely rammed as well but with an obvious younger cohort.

Thank you all for your comments on lateral flow tests.

Plus the fact that the Astra Zeneca vaccine is only 60% effective against it. Something that is worrying me greatly at the moment.

I posted a link upthread MayBee70 that explains why this is no cause for alarm.

Helsinki have been using them in airports for months I believe.

I just heard on the news that they have trained dogs to sniff active COVID, and they are about 95% accurate. They are thinking of using them in airports, they could do 300 people in half an hour, which seems like a good scheme.

I have had AZ Maybee it has I believe been explained why the percentage is less But to all accounts it is as good at preventing serious illness or death
I am not personally worried I trust the vaccine to do its job and stop me pushing up daisies

rosie1959

I stand corrected Franburn I apologise PippaZ for that remark
But cannot understand how the vaccine would disguise how bad things really are

Just my opinion ( although DH said the same yesterday) but they’re really ramping up the vaccination programme, probably to negate the effect of allowing the India variant to take over the Kent one. Plus the fact that the Astra Zeneca vaccine is only 60% effective against it. Something that is worrying me greatly at the moment.

Thanks for those figures Alegrias. Useful to know.

I stand corrected Franburn I apologise PippaZ for that remark
But cannot understand how the vaccine would disguise how bad things really are

My view on lateral flow tests:

The chance of a false positive is about 1 in 1,000

The chance of a false negative is about 1 in 4.

So if you think you have Covid, get a PCR test.

If you have no symptoms but are testing yourself regularly, the test will catch about 3 out of 4 people who might be asymptomatic and would otherwise slip through the net. If it says you are positive, you are almost certainly positive. If it says you are negative you are probably negative. But its not guaranteed.

www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n238

The test with water, oh my goodness, that’s very worrying.

Thank you Maizie.

maddyone

Conan
The lateral flow tests are unreliable. My son in law, a doctor, contracted Covid through his work. He was certain from the symptoms that he had Covid, and tested at home using lateral flow tests. Twice he tested negative. Only on the third test did it come back positive. Luckily he was not too ill, but he passed it to his wife and his daughter. I wouldn’t rely on a lateral flow test if I were you.

I would second that.

My scientist ex SiL tried priming a lateral flow test with plain water; it indicated that it was a viable sample. I'm very wary of them.

GrannyGravy13

MayBee70 I have friends and relatives who work in the NHS, as I said they are only human and humans can make errors whatever their profession.

Lack of adequate PPE, as cited by MayBee in connection with the doctor who died is down to massive failure by the government; it's not a 'take it on the chin' event. Or an error by the person who contracted covid or even died of it.

And, BTW, I have no confidence in Jenny Harris who, when Asian countries with prior experience of eliminating SARS and MERS, respiratory diseases, were all masking up (and who controlled their covid outbreaks) , told us that masks were unnecessary and was consequently proved to be wrong.

Conan
The lateral flow tests are unreliable. My son in law, a doctor, contracted Covid through his work. He was certain from the symptoms that he had Covid, and tested at home using lateral flow tests. Twice he tested negative. Only on the third test did it come back positive. Luckily he was not too ill, but he passed it to his wife and his daughter. I wouldn’t rely on a lateral flow test if I were you.