covid-19

The models coming out of SAGE today are hilarious, hysterical bullshit.

Supposedly we're going to go from 3 deaths rapidly to hundreds per day. 40,000 this 'wave' despite nowhere in the world even with vaccines a fraction of our rollout having seen anywhere like that.

A hundred thousand cases a day by next week. A quarter a million cases per day within 3 weeks from now.

Despite 80% of adults being vaccinated and as of a couple of weeks ago when the serology tests were last taken 80% having antibodies.

No explanation as to which JCVI groups these magical 40,000 deaths are going to come up.

Somebody needs to rapidly challenge these bullshit assumptions and say we've had enough of these experts.

I wonder if anyone here actually believes this bullshit?

Jeez these models are even more fantastical and farcical than I thought.

Daily deaths of 500 is with the postponement: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/covid-lock...170645684.html

Daily deaths of 700 is if we hadn't postponed.

Remember the daily death today is 3 and 99% of the risk of death originally was in JCVI groups 1-9 who are double-doses with a 98% effective (vs death) vaccine already.

What farcical unscientific bullshit. These models are pure piss. Putting it out there, I will eat my hat if we have 500 daily deaths by this time next month.

If deaths are not 500 per day you can all feel free to acknowledge that I'm smarter at reading the data than these "scientists", unless you want to agree that these models are complete and utter bullshit now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gogobongopop

He's doing his best :up:

(In response to that video).

---

He's having a hard time right now, but at least he has the support of *checks notes*... leader of the opposition, Keir Starmer.

Agreed! *Facepalm*

So fantastically successful that the Leader of the Opposition is going to . . . vote with the government to continue lockdown. *Facepalm*

Just read an article about the economic effects on the Dutch economy of covid-19. Short version is that it will turn out to have had a minor negative impact which will easily be recovered from. That's kind of a surprise to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Just read an article about the economic effects on the Dutch economy of covid-19. Short version is that it will turn out to have had a minor negative impact which will easily be recovered from. That's kind of a surprise to me.

---

A lot of big sectors were never really affected badly - I work in engineering, and aside from the working from home and a brief 2 month hiring freeze, it's business as usual (and some businesses even got in the covid business). Production sites were affected a little more but mostly also just continued. It's just that sectors which were hit harder like horeca and retail are much more visible, and even there a lot of business there merely shifted and will bounce back (e.g. shift to buying online and ordering home delivery).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Just read an article about the economic effects on the Dutch economy of covid-19. Short version is that it will turn out to have had a minor negative impact which will easily be recovered from. That's kind of a surprise to me.

---

That's interesting, do you have a link to a source?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

A lot of big sectors were never really affected badly - I work in engineering, and aside from the working from home and a brief 2 month hiring freeze, it's business as usual (and some businesses even got in the covid business). Production sites were affected a little more but mostly also just continued. It's just that sectors which were hit harder like horeca and retail are much more visible, and even there a lot of business there merely shifted and will bounce back (e.g. shift to buying online and ordering home delivery).

---

I think it's a bit nuanced. Most industrial efforts I'm privy to kept going at a reasonable pace (often with a couple week interruption when lockdowns started), with major effects limited to service industries and the like. But I've seen substantial disruption to supply chains for things that should not in principle have been affected (eg certain specialty chemicals or materials, certain consumables, etc). I also know of a lot of hiring freezes (despite real needs for employees) and companies that went under bc of bad timing - hell, pretty much the entire non-emergent surgery market was frozen for half a year, which really screwed up clinical trials for small companies.

I suspect all of these are pretty muted compared to the carnage in hospitality/restaurant/tourism/retail/etc space. I'm not sure how the Dutch are defining 'minor' though, the 8.5% contraction in 2020Q2 has not been recouped, and growth appears to be zero or slightly negative since the Q3 bounce back.

I am curious of the true extent on the tourism and hospitality industry. We just spent a week in the Smokys and you couldn't tell that covid was ever a thing. I figured that place would have been hit pretty hard. Fires 5 years ago, hurricane force storms 4 years ago, and now covid. But Ive never seen the place busier and nothing was shuttered. Our usual putt-putt place for example had a line going down the street blocking the next property every time we drove past it.

Most of the places on the way up and back had their dinning rooms closed due to lack of staff (or appropriate pay) and the restaurants up there all had hour+ waits.

Thread summarizing the SPI-M-O report forming the basis of the UK govt's decision to postpone the lifting of restrictions:

Twitter Link

Report can be found here:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...map_step_4.pdf

Report from Imperial:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...map_Step_4.pdf

And Warwick:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...Map_Step_4.pdf

And LSHTM:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...map_Step_4.pdf

with accompanying thread:

Twitter Link

The models use relatively conservative (= somewhat pessimistic) parameters and arrive at sometimes dramatically different and very uncertain results—with predictions of peak daily deaths ranging from a couple of hundred to just over a thousand, towards the end of the summer—but all three models are very sensitive to even a modest delay to the lifting of restrictions, and are consistent wrt predicting a substantial mortality benefit over the rest of the year—or up to next summer—from delaying the lifting of restrictions by a few weeks. The models are also very sensitive to estimates of likelihood of immune escape. Notably, the LSHTM group seems to have modeled scenarios as if immune escape = equally severe illness incl. risk of death, whereas it's believed/hoped that, even if a vaccinated individual is infected with the delta variant, they won't be quite as severely ill as if they'd been unvaccinated. The Warwick model paints the most optimistic picture overall, across a wide range of parameters, with peak daily deaths of a few hundred later this summer under optimistic and central assumptions. By the time the extension is set to end, there should be more useful data on relevant characteristics of the delta variant, allowing for better modeling.

Yep agreed Aimless, they're 100% bullshit pessimistic assumptions.

So pessimistic they don't match up with official PHE data on efficacy of vaccines. *facepalm*

Should have been thrown in the bin every one of them.

From that thread, these "central" predictions are preposterous bullshit.

Twitter Link

59% counted first shots in the adult population in The Netherlands 29% counted fully vaccinated. Because of the peculiarities of our system we won't know what the actual numbers are until GP's start reporting their numbers. But once they do the figures will rise dramatically.

Funnily enough that counted number is almost entirely Pfizer. The unreported group is almost entirely AZN.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

59% counted first shots in the adult population in The Netherlands 29% counted fully vaccinated. Because of the peculiarities of our system we won't know what the actual numbers are until GP's start reporting their numbers. But once they do the figures will rise dramatically.

---

Nice :up: think we're a week behind you, but it's difficult to say because of some reporting issues.

Quote:

---

Funnily enough that counted number is almost entirely Pfizer. The unreported group is almost entirely AZN.

---

Latter deployed primarily among people who are institutionalized for various reasons?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wiggin

I think it's a bit nuanced. Most industrial efforts I'm privy to kept going at a reasonable pace (often with a couple week interruption when lockdowns started), with major effects limited to service industries and the like. But I've seen substantial disruption to supply chains for things that should not in principle have been affected (eg certain specialty chemicals or materials, certain consumables, etc). I also know of a lot of hiring freezes (despite real needs for employees) and companies that went under bc of bad timing - hell, pretty much the entire non-emergent surgery market was frozen for half a year, which really screwed up clinical trials for small companies.

I suspect all of these are pretty muted compared to the carnage in hospitality/restaurant/tourism/retail/etc space. I'm not sure how the Dutch are defining 'minor' though, the 8.5% contraction in 2020Q2 has not been recouped, and growth appears to be zero or slightly negative since the Q3 bounce back.

---

Sure, and what I said was very generalized, obviously. And international supply chains were indeed quite badly affected. Hiring freezes in high tech sector here were only until june-ish last year, after that it was back to normal (I did not have a hard time finding a new job, and from my former employer plenty of people left for better jobs around the same time.

I also did not see the numbers though, so I don't know what counts as minor. But I do feel that a lot of companies who were hit badly were indeed startups and small companies, the cultural sector, etc, who, crudely put, don't matter so much for GDP on the short term. And horeca was hit very hard, but it's reasonable to expect it will bounce back relatively quickly. Either way I think macroeconomic figures mask how unevenly this pandemic hit.

IIRC unemployment didn't rise insanely high here - from anecdotal evidence, my friends who lost jobs in this period all found new ones pretty easily. Not always as nice as their previous ones, but they could pay the rent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Nice :up: think we're a week behind you, but it's difficult to say because of some reporting issues.



Latter deployed primarily among people who are institutionalized for various reasons?

---

Not necessarily; that group is present in both counted and uncounted numbers depending who did their vaccination (GP or Municipal Health Service). A better definition of the AZN group is people (predominantly over 60) who are eligible for a free flu shot. Most people in that group were invited to be vaccinated before AZN was taken out. AZN at the moment is second vaccination only.

If you forget Moderna you could say people get Pfizer unless they opt for the one shot Janssen vaccination. If you don't choose it's pretty much Pfizer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

That's interesting, do you have a link to a source?

---

I could probably find it but it was in Dutch.

https://fd.nl/economie-politiek/1387...e-uof1aadLVyQM

Flixy. Unemployment stands at 3.7%. That pretty much means that if you are somewhat employable you can find a job.

Anecdotal: the only thing that I felt financially of this crisis was that I estimated it would be sensible to cut the rent on a lease that expired at the beginning of the pandemic. So that meant a little less additional income. Not enough of a cut to feel I needed to economize.

Charts to for the farcical Warwick predictions to SAGE versus what's happening. Early days but already not lining up with their predictions.

Twitter Link

Worth also looking back at the predictions back in February that led to the original lifting of lockdown timescale. Central prediction then was 54,000 more deaths to come as lockdown was lifted, to date there's been 2,297.

OMG what a catastrophic failure. Two days after restrictions were extended on false pretences, because of fallacious and bullshit "models" that don't even use real world data in their inputs, Warwick University have adjusted their data to be closer to the real PHE data. They're still ridiculously cautious, but a big chunk of the supposed third wave has vanished overnight. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/s...aded-kbkwkmvjz

For Warwick University's models, that would mean their death estimates could fall from 72,400 to 17,100. While the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said there could be 33,200 deaths in an optimistic scenario.

On Wednesday, MPs on the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee grilled Dr Susan Hopkins about using out of date data in their modelling.

On Wednesday, MPs on the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee grilled Dr Susan Hopkins about using out of date data in their modelling.
Committee chair Greg Clark, a former Tory science minister, said: 'Wouldn't it have been possible given the relatively new real world data, to say actually, in the light of this data, we need a few more days to assess it, before we decide what is going to be the right implications of public policy?'

He added that the UK's Covid crisis had been 'beset by uncertainties and difficulties with modelling evidence informing government policy decisions'.

Mr Clark called for the models to be redone as soon as possible 'so that, as the Prime Minister promised, a reappraisal can be made and a change made if it's justified'.

Dr Hopkins said she was in 'no doubt' that SAGE would plug the new figures into heir models.

But Tory MP Aaron Bell suggested it was too late and that the new data may have altered 'the case for the continuation of restrictions'.

He added: 'The models that we seem to be relying on to justify the extension of restrictions don't appear to be using [the PHE] numbers.

'This is really important because the number of deaths that those numbers ultimately forecast, are for people who have had both doses, so if they have been using numbers that are now superseded, doesn't that alter the case for the continuation of restrictions?'

'We are voting in the House of Commons on the basis of those models. And it's obviously very good news. These numbers are coming out so far ahead of even the optimistic scenarios that have been modelled.'

Boris must urgently admit he cocked this up and reverse ferret and lift lockdown next week. This preposterous bullshit has to stop. Why is it that I was smart enough to tell that these numbers didn't match the real data and were impossible bullshit, but nobody in government could? Continuously producing garbage data leading to enormous economic damage, through pure incompetence is a scandal and lessons need to be learnt. They should at least be plugging PHE data into the models.

When has he ever admitted he cocked up? And he has had plenty of opportunities for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

When has he ever admitted he cocked up? And he has had plenty of opportunities for it.

---

He doesn't really have to admit any such thing—he can always pin the blame on his advisors. The problem is that his advisors are keenly aware that the key UK data needed to model the impact of the Delta variant in the UK over the coming months... only really reflect lockdown conditions with very low likelihood of exposure to that variant. Over the coming 2-3 weeks, they'll have a better idea of the likelihood of immune escape and developing moderate-to-severe covid among vaccinated individuals exposed to the new variant, based on incoming data from the new local outbreaks. Johnson is in a bind because he's well aware his own incompetence and foolishness led to tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths, both through the delayed imposition and premature lifting of restrictions as well as through the failure to deal with the testing problems. I can sympathize.

The delay is probably more of a case of Johnson trying to protect himself when the independent enquiry comes. There's so much evidence to show that he treated this whole thing so callously, he needed an example of him being super cautious.

And it'll work. Well played Johnson. Well played.

From tomorrow in the Netherlands everyone over 17 who wants to get vaccinated can make an appointment for either the first shot or alternatively a Janssen vaccination.

From today anyone in England over 18 can officially now get a Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.

In practice that's been the case in my area at least for a few weeks already. Getting texts almost every day informing me that Pfizer is available at a nearby walk-in venue for anyone over 18, no appointment necessary.

Over 80% of adults are already vaccinated now so pretty much down to trying to get the laggards in to get jabbed.

Lot of updates on epidemiological & clinical aspects of the delta variant, including prel. data on vaccine efficacy under lockdown conditions:

https://assets.publishing.service.go...riefing_15.pdf

https://khub.net/documents/135939561...=1623689315431

Gist of it is that there is some indication that full vaccination is very important for protecting against symptomatic disease including hospitalization. Data currently v. much in Pfizer's favour, but teasing out the impact of several different sources of bias in this data is not straightforward. Data underscores the critical importance of getting local outbreaks under control.


Interesting thread and paper re. some relevant epidemiological considerations (based on data from last year):

Twitter Link

The EU has lost its court case in Brussels against AstraZeneca.

Saw that coming. It was only ever face-saving lies by European politicians who'd screwed up their procurement, all that talk that because Brussels is in Europe the courts would side with the EU . . . turns out the rule of law still applies there and no that's not the case! Shame on anyone who fell for those lies or talked up this pathetic court case, though I expect it will be roundly ignored now.

The funny thing is now that Britain has stopped using this vaccine as we're finished with it, there's plenty of supply available now for you to play catch up with, but that was always going to be the case.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/astrazeneca-says-eu-loses-legal-bid-more-vaccine-supplies-by-end-june-2021-06-18/

Whoa, court just ruled that AZN seriously violated its contract with the EU. Thread here:

Twitter Link

Twitter Link

Twitter Link

AZN is trying to spin the least important part of the ruling, English style, but it's pretty bad when a court finds that you deliberately violated the terms of your contract. Disgraceful.

Comical spin there. Even Reuters which is a neutral source not a hack are headlining that the EU lost the case. The court ruled that AstraZeneca were correct that the EU did not have priority and have not ordered a single extra dose to be supplied.

But yes the zealots who adore the EU would rather see legal bills run up against a company producing vaccines not for profit than be grateful that vaccines were supplied that were safe, efficacious, saved thousands of lives and were provided at cost.

Disgraceful.

With the details of the judgement coming out now in full, it’s striking that they didn’t give the EU a single thing they asked for. Only a penalty clause that looks pretty well meaningless if the facts are as stated. They did not find AZ in breach of contract, deferring that decision (as Reuters say). They have not ordered AZ to provide 120 million doses by the end of the month, as requested. They did not impose a daily fine for failure to comply, but a sum per vaccine in a timeframe that will make it totally meaningless.

That’s ultimately a fairly major defeat for the EU. It has got some nice words, but it’s not getting the vaccines it demanded, or the money. Not, of course, that it was in a court’s power to increase the number of doses available, that depending on the pace of production.

Von der Leyen is spinning this as a major win for the EU because she is a fluent and shameless liar, not for any other reason.

Any apologists for the EU spinning this as a victory are simply shameless charlatans.

EDIT: And unless I'm misunderstanding the translation it seems the "costs" are €4000. Pathetic. Nothing asked for given, nothing awarded, no escalation of doses and no costs; but speaking of simply shameless charlatans if you want a laugh check out the latest from Comedy Dave Keating. :haha:

That's seems like quite a serious loss for AZN. Granted, the punishment isn't as bad as it could have been, but the ruling defines 'best efforts' in a way entirely not compatible with the current practices.

In making azn liable for 30% of the court fees, the court clearly does not give any kind of win to azn. The commission gets a slap on the wrist for being sloppy making this deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Whoa, court just ruled that AZN seriously violated its contract with the EU. Thread here:

Twitter Link

Twitter Link

Twitter Link

AZN is trying to spin the least important part of the ruling, English style, but it's pretty bad when a court finds that you deliberately violated the terms of your contract. Disgraceful.

---

The Dutch vaccination program has opened up to all people older than 17 just now. That originally was planned for tomorrow.

Tomorrow afternoon I'll get my second shot.