The Lemon Fool

Hallucigenia wrote:

dealtn wrote:Well it maybe pretty clear to you, but I can assure you it's not pretty clear to those in the industry, and evidence over the last couple of years doesn't it make it "obvious" at all it is "high risk".

To be fair it was "higher" risk.

To be accurate it wasn't. The specific post I quoted and replied to was "high risk".

Thank you for the rest of the comprehensive post. Much of it's content is precisely the things the industry is looking at and discussing. As is pointed out much of the risks aren't specifically the match, but the travel to and from it, and the indoor and hospitality aspects of the game.

MrFoolish wrote:Covid may have been the final straw in some very sick people. But they may have had very limited prospects anyway. Don't be expecting Quincy, ME to come along, looking under every stone.

At the same time you can get some idea from looking up age tables of when you would have expected someone of that age to die. In the first year of the pandemic, you would have expected someone dying with Covid in the UK to have lived for another 10.2 years (and 16 years worldwide). Obviously they were probably sicker than the average but not all of them - 83.4% of the first ~20k cases in Portugal had no precondition, and they still contributed 42.2% of deaths.

But that's changed now that there are high levels of vaccination in the elderly but younger groups are not so reliably jabbed. Given that you're about 10x more likely to die if you get Covid without a jab than if you're double-jabbed, more of the people who are dying are younger people who have chosen not to get jabbed - people like John Eyers,42, who could have expected to live another 40+ years, or Leslie Lawrenson, 58 who should have been good for at least another 20+ years :

"He was the fittest, healthiest person I know. He was climbing Welsh mountains and wild camping four weeks before his death. The only pre-existing health condition he had was the belief in his own immortality. He thought if he contracted Covid-19 he would be OK. He thought he would have a mild illness. He didn't want to put a vaccine on his body."
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-n ... t-21227018

The Cambridge-educated solicitor was apparently ‘brainwashed by the stuff he was seeing on YouTube and social media’ and told his family more people would die from the vaccine than Covid-19, his stepdaughter Carla Hodges said. Mr Lawrenson recorded a video at around 11pm on June 23, when he had a high temperature and was suffering with aches, pains and shivers. Stopping to cough several times, he said: ‘I’ll gladly take [coronavirus]. Get the antibodies in my blood and also experience that it’s nothing to be afraid of. ‘No more than a normal cold. So I hope I’ve got it. I hope it is Covid. Because I’d rather have the antibodies in my blood than take the jabs. ‘If my test proves positive with Covid, I’m going to let my immune system ride it out.
https://metro.co.uk/2021/08/05/anti-vax ... -15043153/

My firm just had a 2 day conference at the end of last week where there were 290 of us in one very large room
and a good proportion of us were in close proximity in the bar for several hours in the evening
Some of us, includinng me were dubbing it the "Superspreader event" and winding the bosses up saying we would all be having 10 days off soon
Ok it's only Monday, but no reported yet (fingers crossed)
PS we did have to prove we had been double jabbed

"He was the fittest, healthiest person I know. He was climbing Welsh mountains and wild camping four weeks before his death. The only pre-existing health condition he had was the belief in his own immortality. He thought if he contracted Covid-19 he would be OK. He thought he would have a mild illness. He didn't want to put a vaccine on his body."
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-n ... t-21227018


This chap was a bodybuilder and looked like he had been taking anabolic steroids, known to massively increase risk of death with Covid

wydffa wrote:"He was the fittest, healthiest person I know. He was climbing Welsh mountains and wild camping four weeks before his death. The only pre-existing health condition he had was the belief in his own immortality. He thought if he contracted Covid-19 he would be OK. He thought he would have a mild illness. He didn't want to put a vaccine on his body."
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/uk-n ... t-21227018


This chap was a bodybuilder and looked like he had been taking anabolic steroids, known to massively increase risk of death with Covid

I would have left off the words "with Covid"
PS the link doesn't work

I'd be rather cautious of these highlighted stories. You can find examples of pretty much anything if you go looking for them. It doesn't necessarily follow that they are statistically significant.

I'd also ask how many people have not received early diagnosis of cancer (for example) as the world concentrated on covid.

It's a balancing act. Perhaps we got it right, perhaps we got it wrong. I don't think you can automatically label someone anti-science because their focus was less on covid, and more on those other things we stopped doing.

MrFoolish wrote:I'd be rather cautious of these highlighted stories. You can find examples of pretty much anything if you go looking for them. It doesn't necessarily follow that they are statistically significant.

I wasn't claiming those stories were significant in themselves, I was merely using them as "colour" to illustrate what the statistics are telling us. There's been several weeks over the summer when there have been more Covid deaths in the under 65's than in the over 85's - for instance the week ending 6 August saw 150 deaths under 65 and 133 over 85.

Compare that with w/e 12 February when the over 85's saw 3x the deaths versus the <65's, and in June 2020 it was >150x as many.

So the average age of deaths is coming down, and that in turn means the argument about "Covid was just finishing off people who were at death's door anyway" has far less force. Hence the examples I picked out.

MrFoolish wrote:I'd also ask how many people have not received early diagnosis of cancer (for example) as the world concentrated on covid.

The general feeling seems to be that in general, that kind of stuff ended up being far less affected than it could have been (notwithstanding a lot of disruption in certain areas). But not without an awful lot of hard work and some squeaky bums at the worst times. Overall cancer (LC02) mortality was flat in 2020 over 2019 in England & Wales, and eg 12% (45k) fewer started cancer treatment in the UK in the first year of the pandemic compared to the previous year, but eg in England the numbers starting treatment in June 2021 were 14% up on June 2019.

Figueroa et al report that in NHS Lothian, numbers of referals of patients with breast cancer symptoms got back to normal within 6 weeks, whereas screening took 6 months to recover, and estimated that 6.3% and 22.3% additional deaths were predicted for 3 and 6-month disruptions respectively.

As mentioned above it seems to be mainly kids and then passing to their parents.

Also we do vastly more testing here than other countries. very evident if look at worldometer covid by country tests per 1m pop. Their numbers are understated, particularly developing countries.

Mass events, drunken yobs etc etc so not a surprise still bad really.

I noticed mask wearing and social distancing on gradual decline, even now some older people stopped wearing masks in shops, cafes etc. Complacency is a factor too.

Trafford 10-14's are exponential right now, although 3.4% confirmed by PCR is a long way from what it was in Kettering a few weeks ago; not surprisingly it's now spilling over in the 40-somethings (h/t Colin Davis) :




Compare that with San Francisco, which has seen kids bringing Covid to school, but only 7 cases of transmission within schools in the 2020-21 school year. But then masks are mandatory at schools there for children aged two and over.

It seems clear to me that we are going for natural herd immunity by default, let's just hope there is not too much collateral damage.

John

Hallucigenia wrote: But then masks are mandatory at schools there for children aged two and over.

And vaccination rates in the 12-17 age category exceed 90%.

dealtn wrote:

Hallucigenia wrote: But then masks are mandatory at schools there for children aged two and over.

And vaccination rates in the 12-17 age category exceed 90%.

Do you have a reference for this?

John

redsturgeon wrote:

dealtn wrote:

Hallucigenia wrote: But then masks are mandatory at schools there for children aged two and over.

And vaccination rates in the 12-17 age category exceed 90%.

Do you have a reference for this?

John

Yes, it's from the link on Hallucigenia's post.

https://sf.gov/information/updated-data ... nd-schools

dealtn wrote:

redsturgeon wrote:

dealtn wrote:
And vaccination rates in the 12-17 age category exceed 90%.

Do you have a reference for this?

John

Yes, it's from the link on Hallucigenia's post.

https://sf.gov/information/updated-data ... nd-schools

Thank you

John

dealtn wrote:And vaccination rates in the 12-17 age category exceed 90%.

Although they only started jabbing 12+ on 13 May 2021, so it won't have had much effect on total school transmission for the 2020-2021 school year, almost none of them will have been double-jabbed before the end of the summer term. (or none at all, I don't know what interval they have been using)

Hallucigenia wrote:they only started jabbing 12+ on 13 May 2021

Heh - although that was the date I found in the media it looks like they had been jabbing kids before then (trials? Vulnerable?). Looking at their slightly clunky raw data :

https://data.sfgov.org/COVID-19/COVID-1 ... -h442/data

they broke 1000 first jabs for 12-17 on 26 March, 10k on 13 May, 1000 2nd jabs on 18 April and 10k on 4 June (so 3-4 week interval), and they're now levelling out at around 35k on first jabs.

Still not particularly relevant to the overall story, nobody was jabbed for most of the school year.

Hallucigenia wrote:

Hallucigenia wrote:they only started jabbing 12+ on 13 May 2021

Heh - although that was the date I found in the media it looks like they had been jabbing kids before then (trials? Vulnerable?). Looking at their slightly clunky raw data :

https://data.sfgov.org/COVID-19/COVID-1 ... -h442/data

they broke 1000 first jabs for 12-17 on 26 March, 10k on 13 May, 1000 2nd jabs on 18 April and 10k on 4 June (so 3-4 week interval), and they're now levelling out at around 35k on first jabs.

Still not particularly relevant to the overall story, nobody was jabbed for most of the school year.

It's relevance is to now though, and whether it is a contributing factor to the current low spread, rather than just due to masks being mandatory.

I suspect a community that delivers a 90% vaccination rate (compared to others where it is much lower) is a good general indicator of one that accepts protocols on restricting spread, and maybe needs less mandatory rules anyway.

dealtn wrote:It's relevance is to now though, and whether it is a contributing factor to the current low spread, rather than just due to masks being mandatory.

Occam's razor suggests that if they managed low spread for a year without vaccines, then vaccines probably aren't critical to low spread, at least before delta. Obviously the more layers of protection you have the better, especially now that delta is everywhere.

There was a case in Marin County (the bit just north of the Golden Gate) in May where an unmasked teacher with delta appears to have infected the entire front row of his class but fewer as you go towards the back of the room.
The teacher reported becoming symptomatic on May 19, but continued to work for 2 days before receiving a test on May 21...The school required teachers and students to mask while indoors; interviews with parents of infected students suggested that students’ adherence to masking and distancing guidelines in line with CDC recommendations (3) was high in class. However, the teacher was reportedly unmasked on occasions when reading aloud in class.