BBO Discussion Forums: Coronavirus - BBO Discussion Forums

hrothgar, on 2021-May-07, 14:37, said:

I still have issues with masks, I get a panic attack after about 15-20 minutes in one so I have an exemption certificate I almost never use (I try to wear one and get outside before I need to take it off). It took me 3 or 4 types of mask before I found one that I could even wear for that long before my breathing and heart rate went haywire.

If you want to look at the numbers without Cyberyeti's typically silly commentary, it's a report from the Office of National Statistics. https://www.ons.gov....alregistrations
There previous release (linked from the report) had a bit more discussion about the possible reasons, but obviously a balanced, sensible and cautious one. "The researchers" certainly didn't make Cyberyeti's jumps to conclusions.

It's the year 2027. A new covid-27 variant B.5.23.10055.22 has emerged in sub-Sahara Africa, devastating even rural communities there. Developed nations have doubled their mRNA vaccine production yet again, are still hoarding the supplies for themselves, injecting every of its citizen with minimally dosed 3-monthly booster shots regularly updated to keep out new variants that emerged in the developing world.
Meanwhile, Cyberyeti is still posting misguided anti-lockdown and anti-mask takes in the BBF watercooler, though a new anti-ventilation variant has emerged.

cherdano, on 2021-May-07, 18:34, said:

Thanks for posting the study

It appears as if most of the deaths actually involve chronic conditions like cirrhosis of the liver which take a long time to develop.

Can't help but wonder whether the increase in deaths is more related to strains being placed on the health care system...

cherdano, on 2021-May-07, 18:34, said:

Thanks for posting the study

It appears as if most of the deaths actually involve chronic conditions like cirrhosis of the liver which take a long time to develop.

Can't help but wonder whether the increase in deaths is more related to strains being placed on the health care system...

cherdano, on 2021-May-07, 18:34, said:

The commentary I got was from one of the scientists involved on BBC radio and he said fairly precisely what I quoted (and section 5 indicates an increase in alcohol consumption causing this).

Also I am not "anti-lockdown" or "anti-mask", both have clearly been necessary. But there has been massive hindsight used and airbrushing of a period at the start of the pandemic where the science didn't necessarily indicate this (and indeed there were regular appearances from virologists and politicians quoting their advice on the media indicating the opposite).

You seem to want to mischaracterise me completely based on your own prejudices if I disagree with you. You do this on Brexit and Covid. I support the wearing of masks, I just have major issues doing so myself, so I wear one whenever I can. I think I've been anywhere I should wear a mask without one once or twice in the whole pandemic period, but have run out of the supermarket abandoning my trolley several times to go outside, get my mask off sit on a bench with my head between my legs for 10-15 mins then go back in and go through the checkout to avoid a panic attack.

I feel it is getting to the time to question whether ongoing lockdown is doing more damage than Covid would. Pretty much all the people at greatest risk have had one jab and many have had both. I'm in the 55-64 group with an underlying condition and should get my second at the end of this month. London is well ahead of this schedule, friends my age without underlying conditions are getting their second one now.

Just a little perspective here:
Covid19 is a disease that affects organs with a high concentration of protein that is related to the Renin-Angiotensin System.
One of the biggest organs is the Blood vessels.
And the heart, lungs, brain and kidney.
The observant amongst you will have noticed that people that get COVID19 often have problems related to the virus attacking these target organs.
The graph in the link below says it all.
incidence of this type of clotting = 0.4 per million.
with the pfizer/moderna or AZ vaccine it's ~4 per million.
If you get COVID19 it's 39/million.

https://www1.racgp.o...mmon-with-covid

Quote

The CDC acknowledged Friday that airborne spread of COVID-19 among people more than 6 feet apart "has been repeatedly documented."

hrothgar, on 2021-May-02, 00:15, said:

To put it more simply:

Suppose half the population received 2 doses, and the other half received nothing. The chart would say 100%.

jillybean, on 2021-May-07, 12:43, said:

An important use of studies like this is to help with planning for future pandemics.

The lockdowns have clearly been necessary, because we had no other effective way to slow down transmission. Which means that we should try to find better ways to slow a pandemic before it gets severe enough to require lockdowns, which results in all these other side effects (excess drinking, relationship problems, poorer education of children, etc.).

Acknowledging the mistakes that were made in 2020, and understanding their impacts, should make us better prepared in the future. Unless, of course, we happen to have a totally incompetent administration in place again.

Cyberyeti, on 2021-May-08, 03:52, said:

So for those not familiar with current UK rules, here is what Cyberyeti considers "ongoing lockdown":

Since March 8: Schools/childcare services open.

Since March 29: outdoor sports and similar

Since April 12: Retail opens, hair salons/spas/other "personal care". Restaurants/pubs/cafe open outdoors, gyms etc. for individual exercise, self-catering holiday accommodation, outdoor attractions, community centers/libraries

Meanwhile, it is expected that on May 17, restaurants/pubs/cafes will open indoors, as well as cinemas, theatres, concert halls, museums, indoor play areas, etc. etc.

Quite the time to complain about the "ongoing lockdown".

Cyberyeti, on 2021-May-08, 03:52, said:

Well, if you are not a Brexit supporter, then you are indeed the worst forum poster ever, in the sense that you are conveying a completely different view than the one you actually hold.

If I make a post where I "just point out" that because of seatbelt laws, I have to spent thousands of extra pounds when buying a car, then readers will come to the conclusion that I am critical of seatbelt laws. If all my posts about seatbelt laws exaggerate the costs that come with them, then other forum members will conclude I am anti-seatbelt laws. Just like "just pointing out" that more immigrants means more strain on the "already stretched" infrastructure/less space in the park to run around would lead others to conclude that the poster is anti-immigrant.

In a sense I don't care what Cyberyeti the person thinks - I don't know him, and have no way of finding out about his views. What I do know is that Cyberyeti the forum poster is quite supportive of Brexit, complains about the (perceived) high costs of masks, was always critical of lockdowns, etc.

If you really think the views of Cyberyeti the forum poster do not reflect the views of Cyberyeti the person, then maybe you should write fewer posts "just pointing out" things, and more posts where you actually say what you think. (Of course, another possibility is that those views are much more in line with your own thoughts than you are able to admit yourself...)

There are two types blood clot. Both are potentially lethal.
The commonest type is "deep vein thrombosis" where a clot forms in the vain in your leg. If this clot grows in size it can break off and lodge in the lungs.
In the worst case, after breaking off and blocking the blood flow to the lungs no blood can return to heart and death occurs immediately.
This type of clot is the one that is more common if you are lying in a hospital bed for too long without moving your legs. It is also associated with air travel - the so-called "economy class syndrome".
(As an aside, when the surgeons tried to save Lady Diana after the car crash, it was found that she had a torn vena cava. It was impossible to prevent a fatal haemorrhage from this massive vein which is the largest in the body.)
The rarer type is "cerebral venous thrombosis" (CVT). Veins in the brain are very thin walled and blood moves rather slowly. If they are cut during surgery it is very hard to stop them bleeding.

According to a 2017 review in Nature Reviews Neurology (Cerebral venous thrombosis; Suzanne M. Silvis, Diana Aguiar de Sousa, José M. Ferro & Jonathan M Coutinho; Nature Reviews Neurology volume 13, pages555–565),
CVT is rare but not unheard of.

Quote

...data from population-based studies conducted in the past few years in the Netherlands and Australia have shown that the current incidence among adults is about tenfold higher than this estimate (1.3–1.6 per 100,000), and the incidence is probably even higher in Asia and the Middle East, as the rates of pregnancy and infection-related cases are higher in these countries. Although the increase in incidence might partly be explained by a shift in risk factors, improvements in imaging techniques — which result in the identification of less-severe cases — is probably the most important contributing factor.
AND
Risk factors and associated conditions. Most adults with CVT are aged 20–50 years and <10% of these individuals are older than 65 years. Among young and middle-aged adults, CVT is threefold more common in women than in men. This heavily skewed sex ratio is the result of the sex-specific risk factors of oral contraceptives, pregnancy and puerperium. The risk of CVT in women who use oral contraceptives is increased approximately sixfold, and this risk is increased further still in women with obesity who use oral contraceptives. A large number of other risk factors — both transient and permanent — have been associated with CVT

Much of this paper is directly rewritten from a previous review by the last author JM Coutinho in 2015 in J Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

A review of Norwegian data was published in September 2020 covering a 7 year period up to 2017 (Incidence and Mortality of Cerebral Venous Thrombosis in a Norwegian Population; Espen Saxhaug Kristoffersen, Charlotte Elena Harper, Kjersti Grøtta Vetvik, Svetozar Zarnovicky, Jakob Møller Hansen, Kashif Waqar Faiz; Stroke. 2020;51:3023–3029) - you can download this one from the internet.

Quote

Results:
Sixty-two patients aged 0 to 80 years were identified and included. The median age was 46 years and 53% were females. The overall incidence of CVT was 1.75 (95% CI, 1.36–2.23) per 100 000/y with no significant sex differences. The incidence for children and adolescents (<18 years, n=9) was lower than for adults (≥18 years, n=53); 1.08 (0.52–1.97) versus 1.96 (1.49–2.55) per 100 000/y per year, with the highest incidence for those >50 years with 2.10 (1.38–3.07)/100 000/y. Headache was the most prevalent symptom, reported in 83%, followed by nausea, motor deficits, and seizures observed in 45%, 32%, and 32% of the patients. Transverse sinuses and the jugular vein were the most frequent sites of thrombosis. In most patients (61%), thrombosis occurred in multiple sinuses/veins. Risk factors were found in 73% of the patients, and most of the patients had a combination of 2 or more risk factors. The 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 3% and 6%.

I am not sure why these data are now being reported as ten times smaller in current health advice.
If this is correct then it seems that an incidence of 4-5 per million in vaccine recipients is equivalent to the average pre-COVID19.
So far as I can tell, the data suggest that the vaccine does not have a particular effect on this unusual clotting disorder. On the other hand getting COVID19 dramatically increases your chances of getting it.

Other things to remember are that when people get vaccines (new ones especially) or novel diseases, doctors are particularly alert to spotting problems.
This means that the diagnosis of anything rare will increase (they start looking for it).
One thing is certain. your chances of getting this rare disorder are increased if you get COVID19 - so are your chances of getting deep vein thrombosis if you become bed-ridden with it.
I don't know what the increased risk of getting CVT is in those people that get infected (mildly or asymptomatically) is AND then get the vaccine. This problem will likely confound the data.

Another thing we do know is that pandemics are a common phenomenon ('Flu, polio, TB, malaria and more), but they don't fit into the election cycle so politicians persist in eviscerating the systems that are there to prevent them.
And then when you get Jim (freedom to do anything I want anytime I want to) Jordan teling (actually telling!) Dr Fauci that he shouldn't have to do things to prevent the spread of disease because blather blather blather.
It feels exactly the same as explaining to a toddler why they can't have the candy at a checkout.

I don't have the time to reply fully now, but just want to say that pillowsky's last post is wrong in several key points. E.g. he is comparing the annual background incidence with the incidence after vaccinations, which occur in a 1-2 week window. Also, they come with a very specific and rare combination of symptoms and lab results. Read Kai Kupferschmidt and Gretchen Vogel at sciencemag, not pillowsky @BBF if you want to be informed.

cherdano, on 2021-May-09, 04:23, said:

While you are not having the time to reply to what you think are the key points, please address what I believe are the points that are critical:
1. You are far more likely to get the CVT if you have COVID19 than if you don't.
2. You correctly point out that the background incidence estimate is a problem. What I am asking (of the statisticians) is are you more likely to get CVT if you have had COVID19 - but didn't know it - and then had the vaccine.


Also, provide the specific reference from "Sciencemag" so we can review it.

pilowsky, on 2021-May-09, 04:45, said:

Sure: https://www.google.c...mobile&ie=UTF-8

Matthew Yglesias said:

It says something that in order to protect themselves and others America is "gamifying" the vaccine.
Soon there will be a vaccine leaderboard, Vacpoints and Gold stars for people that get their vaccine on time.


In no time at all people will be getting multiple shots of vaccine with different usernames to enhance their chances of winning.


Good to know that the free market operates with altruism in the USA.

Who said that getting vaccinated was a political talking point???

Just 45% of House Republicans say they've been vaccinated while 100% of congressional Democrats say they've gotten the shot

Quote

Quote

In case anybody had any doubt, Steube is a twice impeached one term Manchurian President Repug. Many Repugs refused to answer the question because they would lose street cred for being hypocrites if they were vaccinated while catering to the anti-vaxxer wing and most of the fuselage of the GOP.

Of course, even the Grifter in Chief was secretly vaccinated even though he had a well publicized bout with Covid.

johnu, on 2021-May-14, 12:47, said:

When I was in high school I could often out on my "Nobody tells me what to do" face. I grew up. There really is not much more to say.