Thread: Corona Virus

Originally Posted by 101RRS

The point that Evo is making is that the Covid Vaccine (at the moment) does not provide immunity where many other vaccines for other diseases provide immunity - a not so subtle difference.

Meaning if the population is immune to say a heard immunity level of 75%, the chance of an infected person who is not immune passing on the disease is very low as the bugs cannot find anyone where they can live. With the current Covid vaccine, a person can catch and pass on the bug, albiet as John has said, maybe not to as many people but it still does. Even if we have 100% vaccine coverage with Covid a person infected will pass it on - yes the impact of the health of the minmised, where if we had a 100% immune population the disease will not continue.

Yes Covid Vaccination is very very important as it will almost stop the chance of dying but it does not stop transmission but may reduce it - hence the aim of achieving Herd Immunity is irrelevant if the vaccination is not immune.

I think the aim to have 100% vaccinated is great so that a vaccinated person can just treat a dose of Covid is just like a cold - a day to day in bed and off you go.

But heard immunity is not relevant when vaccinations do not provide immunity.

No, you are still not following how it works. From a public health perspective, vaccination of an individual does not have to 100% prevent a patient from being infected and passing on the infection. There are two public health results from vaccination.

The first is that it reduces both the probability of infection and reduces the severity of the illness if infected. This both reduces the load on the health system directly because they probably will not need hospital treatment and reduces the probability of the infected vaccinated patient infecting others because the vaccinated patient sheds less virus.

The second result is that if, as is documented by data, the vaccination reduces the probability of infection by 80% (to take a typical figure for covid vaccines - actually 60-95%), this means that of the average 5 people infected by each patient, if the contact is vaccinated, only one of those five will be infected.

It does not need 100% immunity from a vaccine to kill the pandemic. As long as the vaccine has a sufficiently high effectiveness and a sufficient proportion of the population is vaccinated, it will work. The higher the R0 is, the higher these needs to be.

And the same applies to all vaccines - some are so effective that they are assumed to provide total immunity, but I am not aware of any where this can be shown to be the case.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

only one of those five will be infected.

exactly. it still spreads. meaning new cases and continued lockdown inline with current policy.
the alternative is to do what the rest of the world has done and live with it.

Originally Posted by Arapiles

Are you talking about the spread that lead to the big lockdown? Because there were no issues with compliance - other than with a couple of nutcases - during lockdown 2.0.

I was thinking about the time Victoria was locking down entire public housing blocks due to a fear of non compliance, at the same time there was an ongoing inability to control spread in some suburbs that may have been culturally influenced.

Victoria has had so many lockdowns I forget which is which.


Regards,
Tote

Originally Posted by Tote

I was thinking about the time Victoria was locking down entire public housing blocks due to a fear of non compliance, at the same time there was an ongoing inability to control spread in some suburbs that may have been culturally influenced.

Victoria has had so many lockdowns I forget which is which.


Regards,
Tote

One in 10 covid cases are now in hospital, 11 in ICU, 3 ventilated. Can we get away from the State bashing and just admit NSW made a mistake, and now get on and fix it.

One in 10 COVID patients in hospital as system plans for surge (msn.com)

Breaking news from the N.Y. Times.

The delta variant of the coronavirus can evade antibodies that target certain parts of the virus. The findings explain the diminished effectiveness of vaccines used against delta, as compared to other variants. Delta is considered 60% more infectious than Alpha, and twice as contagious than the original coronavirus,[ that's in one year, imagine the variants in 12 months time if we don't get " herd immunity" by then.] The delta variant is now driving outbreaks among unvaccinated populations in Malaysia, Portugal , Indonesia , and ....Australia.

Here's the kicker. Blood samples from just 10% of people immunized with one dose of AstraZeneca & Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines were able to neutralise the Delta and Beta variants in laboratory experiments.
But a second dose boosted that number to 95%. There was no major difference in the levels of antibodies elicited by the two vaccines.


Study Details How Delta Variant Dodges Immune System - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

Originally Posted by bob10

One in 10 covid cases are now in hospital, 11 in ICU, 3 ventilated. Can we get away from the State bashing and just admit NSW made a mistake, and now get on and fix it.

One in 10 COVID patients in hospital as system plans for surge (msn.com)

I wasn't state bashing, I was called out for clarification on when Victoria had non compliance issues and I would surmise that that would be when they locked down the housing towers. I am interested in debating why it is that Sydney can successfully control a Delta outbreak in the Eastern suburbs yet when it moves west it is seemingly getting out of control. It certainly isn't because they locked down too late because the western suburbs outbreaks didn't exist two weeks ago.
It could conceivably be because retail is more open than some would like but the Premier has stated that transmission is being caused by family members visiting one another when they are supposed to be staying home.

So do you have a solution other than the measures that have alrady been taken i.e. 100 more police enforcing lockdowns? Your link is correct, if the population is unvaccinated, there will be a rise in hospitalisation this is because we refuse to use a vaccine that is perfectly acceptable in the UK because of a 1 in a million chance of getting fatal blood clots. Maybe if people are faced with death as a consequence of not accepting a vaccination they will go and get it?

Regards,
Tote

Originally Posted by Tote

I wasn't state bashing, I was called out for clarification on when Victoria had non compliance issues and I would surmise that that would be when they locked down the housing towers. I am interested in debating why it is that Sydney can successfully control a Delta outbreak in the Eastern suburbs yet when it moves west it is seemingly getting out of control. It certainly isn't because they locked down too late because the western suburbs outbreaks didn't exist two weeks ago.
It could conceivably be because retail is more open than some would like but the Premier has stated that transmission is being caused by family members visiting one another when they are supposed to be staying home.

So do you have a solution other than the measures that have ady been taken i.e. 100 more police enforcing lockdowns? Your link is correct, if the population is unvaccinated, there will be a rise in hospitalisation this is because we refuse to use a vaccine that is perfectly acceptable in the UK because of a 1 in a million chance of getting fatal blood clots. Maybe if people are faced with death as a consequence of not accepting a vaccination they will go and get it?

Regards,
Tote

If NSW had locked down hard and fast, like QLD did, it's a very good chance the virus would have been contained in the Eastern suburbs. That's a real lock down, not a claytons one. How many times must it be said the primary reason for low vaccination numbers is lack of vaccines. I'm in the 1b cohort , and only just yesterday was able to have my 2nd jab, the reason? The vaccination centre { a medical centre] was only getting enough AZ for about 100 per week. When supply could not be guaranteed, the decision was made for some AZ be held back for essential workers and 2nd jabs. There was no movement in vaccination supply until the QLD Premier and CMO stood up and made themselves a target , calling out the supply fiasco. I'll leave it at that. Let's just get on and fix NSW, leave the politics to the politicians. And for goodness sake, stop blaming aged care workers and now I see, NDIS carers for the low vaccination rates . I must say one more thing. How do you think this virus works? And , only because you asked, the reason the western suburbs are just now showing infections is

1 The failure to lock down the initial outbreak properly, and allowing the Sydney residents to wander all over Sydney spreading infection.

2 the gestation [ if that is the right word] period for the virus, from point of contact to infection symptoms.

If I lived in regional centres close to Sydney, I would be very concerned right now, if the stories about groups of Sydneysiders being allowed to travel to the regions, while supposed to be in lock down, are true.

Going back to dot point 1, all you have to do is read this;

COVID NSW: Sydneysiders are like a pack of teens taking advantage of Glad’s ‘cool mum’ parenting (smh.com.au)

Originally Posted by Tote

So here’s an interesting choice - increased policing which is apparently racist and unhelpful to keep people locked in their homes Covid crackdown in Sydney’s southwest labelled racist amid major police operation

Or follow the current proposal being discussed and focus on vaccination

Both are pretty ordinary choices but the sections of the media who have been saying that the nsw lockdown isn’t hard enough appear to have got their wish
Regards
Tote

Why is it that people play the "Race Card" as a defence when they are found to be behaving badly, EVERY ethnicity has its fair share of dickheads and screaming "Racisim" won't change that.