Covid Omicron Pattern

[Rick C]

There does seem to be a pattern of the omicron variant of covid rising in infection rates very rapidly, then peaking and falling off. The drop does not seem to be as rapid and several countries have seen it drop some and plateau.

I'm surprised by this as I don't think it can be explained by changes in behavior. I spend time in Virginia and Puerto Rico where the infection is following roughly the same pattern.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/puerto-rico-covid-cases.html

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/virginia-covid-cases.html

(you may find a pay wall, I seem to be able to work around it by starting at the top and clicking through to reach the states)

However, I see Puerto Rico taking the mask thing very much more seriously. They do congregate in mostly open air bars and restaurants (without masks), but otherwise not a lot of exposure.

In Virginia it seems well over half the people in public are ignoring the mask advice and this has not changed as the infection numbers has risen.

So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short time, well before a significant number of people are infected?

I read that the FDA has pulled the emergency approval for some of the antibody treatments since they are not effective against the omicron strain. So that their use should not be a factor.

Any thoughts?

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[legg]

If positive detection rates are >20%, it doesn't take very long
before everyone has it, even those employing serious precautions.

Low case fatality rates ( 0.2 to 0.3%) are unlikely to be achievable
in elderly or immuno-compromised populations, even after vaccination.

It's those numbers that need watching.

Testing figures in countries with high test capacity are more likely
to give accurate test positivity rates.

RL

[Ed Lee]

I won't bore you with the data, since one foul mouth degenerated poster complaints about seeing the real data. He can't handle the real data. Data reported this week indeed show omicron reaching 90% of variants in the USA. This is likely reflecting the situation around 2 weeks ago.

There are many theories regarding omicron. Since Omicron attacks skin surface and upper respiratory track better, people are less likely to have serious illness but still infectious. Vaccination reduces illness, but won't stop infection and spreading. In other words, much more asymptomatic transmissions.

[Rick C]

Sorry, I don't follow where you are going with this. Covid has ramped up in many countries, with the earlier infection ramps reversing and coming down. South Africa where it was first detected has come down to nearly where it was before the omicron infection. The US currently has some states, like New York in a similar decline. Starting with nearly 3 million total infected and presently 4.8 million, it is hard to see how adding less than 2 million infections to a population of nearly 20 million would cause such a rapid reversal of the spread. In South Africa the added infections were about half a million in a population of 60 million, so even less likely to be the result of achieving heard immunity.

In no case is any location anywhere near "everyone" having it.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Martin Brown]

In a vaccinated population you have quite a lot of people asymptomatic.
It has ripped through the UK running for about 5 weeks now with ~5%
infected at the peak now down to around 1% again and steady.

It appeared to rip through school children, university students and
younger population of party animals very quickly with an alarmingly
steep rise to 200k/day and then back off a bit. Some of it may well be
older people staying out of its way.

One very curious statistic out today is that 2/3 of the people who
caught Omicron in the latest wave had previously been infected with an
earlier strain with a recorded PCR+ test in an earlier wave.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096

This is certainly a curious result as it potentially implies that some
people are very much more likely to catch Covid than others. Some of it
could well be occupational risk - front line medics and the like.

Or it could be risky behaviour or genetic vulnerability. The UK is
heavily vaccinated and so far the hospitals have been able to cope.

>>> I read that the FDA has pulled the emergency approval for some of
>>> the antibody treatments since they are not effective against the
>>> omicron strain. So that their use should not be a factor.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts?

>> If positive detection rates are >20%, it doesn't take very long
>> before everyone has it, even those employing serious precautions.

Certainly unless there are survey population tests like the REACT study
I referenced above you won't know the prevalence of asymptomatic
infected individuals which may be much higher now with the vaccine.

If you only test people who come forward because they have symptoms you
will miss all the asymptomatic cases. UK hospitals routinely test
incoming patients and the ratio of in hospital because of Covid to in
hospital (for something else) with Covid is about 2:1.

>> Low case fatality rates ( 0.2 to 0.3%) are unlikely to be
>> achievable in elderly or immuno-compromised populations, even after
>> vaccination.
>>
>> It's those numbers that need watching.
>>
>> Testing figures in countries with high test capacity are more
>> likely to give accurate test positivity rates.

UK is presently culling about 2k of its population per week with Covid
so that the hospitality sector can remain open. The Omicron peak seems
to have passed but exactly why this is remains a mystery.

Various countermeasures stop this week so we will soon see if that
results in a noticeable rise in cases. Today was 102k new cases
(so probably 1% of the population with active Covid right now)

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/cases

It may well plateau at that level for the foreseeable future.

>
> Sorry, I don't follow where you are going with this. Covid has
> ramped up in many countries, with the earlier infection ramps
> reversing and coming down. South Africa where it was first detected
> has come down to nearly where it was before the omicron infection.
> The US currently has some states, like New York in a similar decline.
> Starting with nearly 3 million total infected and presently 4.8
> million, it is hard to see how adding less than 2 million infections
> to a population of nearly 20 million would cause such a rapid
> reversal of the spread. In South Africa the added infections were
> about half a million in a population of 60 million, so even less
> likely to be the result of achieving heard immunity.

We can put bounds on it in the UK. Probably something like 20% of the
whole UK population have had Covid in the past 10 weeks (even higher in
London) and most of those would have been with Omicron.

FT puts it at 7% overall at this time last year:

https://www.ft.com/content/c5d29294-fdaf-465e-adc9-d4d27b9cbfa9

I think that may be very much on the low side now.

> In no case is any location anywhere near "everyone" having it.

Some parts of London certainly are. Some parts were at 60% having had it
over a year ago. Gets a mention in the FT piece above - they paid a very
high price to get there.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[John Larkin]

And huge, distorted positive case counts.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
news:88e98142-8239-45ff...@googlegroups.com:

> I won't bore you with the data, since one foul mouth degenerated
> poster complaints about seeing the real data.

That is not what I complained about, you retarded degenerated mouthy
piece of shit.

[Ed Lee]

Then what are you complaining about the data? Showing that you are primitively degenerated? Why don't you offer some data or opinion?

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Ed Lee <edward.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:88e98142-8239-
45ff-9775-0...@googlegroups.com:

> He can't handle the real data.

Can you handle a fast moving hunk of lead?

How about we go out in the morning for a duel?

I'd put one right beyween your eyes from the hip, you pathetic know
nothing real piece of shit.

"skin surface" transmission is not happening much, if at all.
Airborne transmission is the most common manner.

Most all infection transmissions are via the breath. There are very
few starting from contact with a surface other than an infected
person's spittle, face, nose, and eyes if they are touched by a hand
that has touched an infected surface, like someone else's face or
mouth.

NONE of the vaccines "stopped infection and spreading". ANY
vaccinated person can contract an infection and WHILE the vaccinated
body is staving it off, that person can emit viron laced microdroplets
until the body finishes beating it. THAT IS WHY ONE SHOULD WEAR A MASK
EVEN AFTER BEING VACCINATED.

"there are many theories" Yeah, which is why we do not need to see
or hear yours.

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:00:47 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> Ed Lee <edward.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:88e98142-8239-
> 45ff-9775-0...@googlegroups.com:
> > He can't handle the real data.
> Can you handle a fast moving hunk of lead?

What a maroon!

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ed Lee]

On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 12:00:47 PM UTC-8, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> Ed Lee <edward.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:88e98142-8239-
> 45ff-9775-0...@googlegroups.com:
> > He can't handle the real data.
> Can you handle a fast moving hunk of lead?
>
> How about we go out in the morning for a duel?
>
> I'd put one right beyween your eyes from the hip, you pathetic know
> nothing real piece of shit.

Childish and primitive respond.

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in

news:c297f916-970c-4098...@googlegroups.com:

> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 11:43:20 AM UTC-8,
> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
>> Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:88e98142-8239-45ff...@googlegroups.com:
>> > I won't bore you with the data, since one foul mouth
>> > degenerated poster complaints about seeing the real data.
>> That is not what I complained about, you retarded degenerated
>> mouthy piece of shit.
>
> Then what are you complaining about the data?

I was complaining about your inane posting of it, when a link would
suffice.

> Showing that you
> are primitively degenerated?

Here you are back to being the total fucking retard that you are.

> Why don't you offer some data or
> opinion?

I guess you need remedial reading courses as well.

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Rick C <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:8ea0d83b-50cf-460e...@googlegroups.com:

> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 4:00:47 PM UTC-4,
> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
>> Ed Lee <edward.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:88e98142-8239-
>> 45ff-9775-0...@googlegroups.com:
>> > He can't handle the real data.
>> Can you handle a fast moving hunk of lead?
>
> What a maroon!
>

Jack off at the mouth like that retard and I'd invite you for a
morning duel as well.

Oh and you invoking Bugs Bunny makes you almost as retarded as he is.

What an invitation to tell you to FOAD!

See how that works? He degenerates and gets it right back in his
face. You do the same and you get the same invitation.

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in

news:d940f6da-4f68-431c...@googlegroups.com:

The word is "response".

Go take that remedial English course, putz.

Confused... <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/putz>

You fit the "ineffectual" part just fine.

[Rick C]

Like most people in sed, Ed doesn't take you seriously. You seldom say anything worth listening to. You make silly and superfluous attacks like this stupid example. You call others, "child" and act like one yourself. Why don't you grow up and stop being so silly?

I guess that's just not going to happen. Can you at least play quietly in the corner and stop disturbing the adults?

--

Rick C.

-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Rick C <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:4871eb80-3a73-4b7a...@googlegroups.com:

> On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 5:45:00 PM UTC-4,
> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
>> Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
>> news:d940f6da-4f68-431c...@googlegroups.com:
>> > On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 12:00:47 PM UTC-8,
>> > DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
>> >> Ed Lee <edward.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:88e98142-8239-
>> >> 45ff-9775-0...@googlegroups.com:
>> >> > He can't handle the real data.
>> >> Can you handle a fast moving hunk of lead?
>> >>
>> >> How about we go out in the morning for a duel?
>> >>
>> >> I'd put one right beyween your eyes from the hip, you pathetic
>> >> know nothing real piece of shit.
>> >
>> > Childish and primitive respond.
>> >
>> The word is "response".
>>
>> Go take that remedial English course, putz.
>>
>> Confused... <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/putz>
>>
>> You fit the "ineffectual" part just fine.
>
> Like most people in sed, Ed doesn't take you seriously.

Like I give a fat flying fuck what "Ed" thinks.

> You
> seldom say anything worth listening to.

As if your opinion means anything. And no I do not give a fat
flying fuck what a putz like you says, when you waiver from something
bordering on intelligent conversation to this insulting childish
horseshit, you can stick it up your ass and spin on it, child.

> You make silly and
> superfluous attacks like this stupid example. You call others,
> "child" and act like one yourself. Why don't you grow up and stop
> being so silly?

Stop spouting your inane zero reality psych evals.

>
> I guess that's just not going to happen. Can you at least play
> quietly in the corner and stop disturbing the adults?

And there you go with that childish utter stupidity yet again.

Fuck you, childish punk fuck. You have the mental age of a ten
year old. My fingernail clippings have more on the ball than you do
or ever will.

[Rick C]

Going all Phil on us, huh?

You two actually have a lot in common.

--

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[legg]

Counts are irrelevent. It's ppm that's the indicator.

US fatalities are above 5ppm/day - as bad as the first
wave in 2020, but not as bad as the one that occured
during the presidenrial election, pre-vax.

RL

[Rick C]

The ppm number may be the more relevant number if comparing different population centers, but while comparing the same population at different times the count is sufficient and essentially the same thing. At least until the pandemic starts killing enough people that it reduces the size of the population significantly.

Yeah, it looks like the death rate will be increasing for a bit longer though.

This makes me wonder about the rate of infection from strains other than omicron. Until the rates of infection get large enough to impact the number of available hosts, viral strains do not compete. I would love to see a curve of US infections that excludes the omicron strain or any similar strains allowing view of delta and the earlier strains so the progression of non-omicron strains can be compared.

I think it would provide useful insight to see if there is indeed a human response to the pandemic when a new strain spreads. It may result in more measures to not spread the disease so that the earlier strains have lower infection rates while the new strain proceeds to grow until the measures are effective enough to lower that. I can't think of another reason why the omicron variant would be reversing so quickly. But I have my doubts as I don't see where many restrictions have been enacted where I spend time.

--

Rick C.

++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ed Lee]

Yes, i am watching closely how the two strains are coexisting. During the Delta wave, Xi (D614G) was fairly constant, and almost recovering in Nov, while Delta disappeared. If Omicron can exhaust Xi, by using up all the fuel, perhaps the end is in-sight.

CDC claims Omicron is 99.9%. I am not ready to confirm it yet. According to latest data, Omicron is close to 85%, but Xi is still around 11%.

[Rick C]

Fuel? What are you talking about?

If you mean uninfected people, there's no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It's not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I've seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.

--

Rick C.

--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ed Lee]

Yes, vulnerable people.

> If you mean uninfected people, there's no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It's not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I've seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.

Just like fighting fire with fire, you don't need to exhaust all fuel. As long as you stop the path of motion, it could be stopped.

[Sylvia Else]

On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

> So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
> rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
> time, well before a significant number of people are infected?

It's puzzled me as well. The only idea I've come up with is that there
is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.

However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak,
which doesn't fit with that.

Sylvia.

[bitrex]

Was this u on the beach in Puerto Rico, though:

<https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnewsvideo/comments/sepviw/tensions_rise_in_puerto_rico_as_a_viral_video/>

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
wrote:

Containment creates a "reserve army of the uninfected."

(Apologies to uncle Karl)

[Sylvia Else]

On 29-Jan-22 11:11 am, John Larkin wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:
>>
>>> So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
>>> rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
>>> time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
>> It's puzzled me as well. The only idea I've come up with is that there
>> is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
>> the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.
>>
>> However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak,
>> which doesn't fit with that.
>>
>> Sylvia.
>
> Containment creates a "reserve army of the uninfected."
>
> (Apologies to uncle Karl)
>

I certainly don't think that WA's approach is serving a useful purpose,
at least not unless they can hang on until an Omicron based vaccine can
be distributed there, and that's a few months away at a minimum, even if
the Australian government has ordered it (and I can find no information
on that).

Sylvia.

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:11:50 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
> wrote:
> >On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:
> >
> >> So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
> >> rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
> >> time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
> >It's puzzled me as well. The only idea I've come up with is that there
> >is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
> >the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.

This neglects the point that people's behavior changes when they know that there is a high risk that they will get infected.

> >However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak, which doesn't fit with that.

The West Australian government has made their population very nervous about getting infected - the changes in behavior may kick in earlier and harder there. Apparently hard enough to provide useful protection against even the Omicron strain.

> Containment creates a "reserve army of the uninfected."
>
> (Apologies to uncle Karl)

John Larkin hasn't really got it into his head that you can vaccinate a population before they have been exposed to the infection. With the Omicron strain this doesn't stop them getting infected, but makes them less likely to get infected, and - on average shortens the course of those infections that do happen, and makes it less likely that the vaccinated infected will infect new victims while they are infected.

https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard

At the moment Western Australia has got to 90.1% fully vaccinated.

"There are currently 103 active confirmed cases in WA.

Of these, 42 are in hotel quarantine and 61 are in self-quarantine.

These six new cases bring the State’s total number of COVID-19 cases to 1260, with 1148 people having recovered from the virus.

The update also revealed there had been a surge in first vaccinations in WA in the last 24 hours."

I can't find a number for the total deaths, but 1260-1149 -103 suggest that it s nine, or about 3.4 per million, which is remarkably good.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Rick C]

That term is used to refer not to people who can catch the virus, but to people who will be suffer morbidity or death. In any event, the total infected by omicron in the US is only around 23 million, still far from enough to impact infection rates of other strains.

> > If you mean uninfected people, there's no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It's not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I've seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.
> Just like fighting fire with fire, you don't need to exhaust all fuel. As long as you stop the path of motion, it could be stopped.

Whatever. I'm trying to talk about the virus. The omicron variant has not impacted the population enough to cause it's own spread to be impacted. Even if it had, the slowdown and reversal would not be this quick. There are other issues at play.

--

Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Rick C]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 9:55:52 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:11:50 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
> > On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
> > wrote:
> > >On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:
> > >
> > >> So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
> > >> rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
> > >> time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
> > >It's puzzled me as well. The only idea I've come up with is that there
> > >is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
> > >the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.
> This neglects the point that people's behavior changes when they know that there is a high risk that they will get infected.

I believed this was the active force in prior surges, but you have to make assumptions for that to fit the data. In this case the locations I am familiar with are not showing much difference in results with what would appear to be significantly different reactions. Puerto Rico has been better about mask wearing all along and has taken other measures more recently. There number of new infections is a third of the peak. Virginia has done virtually nothing that I can find and their numbers are approaching a half of the peak. I find nothing Maryland has done and they are at a quarter of the peak.

I'm not seeing much of a correlation. My personal contact with people in all three locations are that in the mainland states many people are tired of masks and not willing to continue the practice while in Puerto Rico you won't find anyone in public without a mask.

> > >However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak, which doesn't fit with that.
> The West Australian government has made their population very nervous about getting infected - the changes in behavior may kick in earlier and harder there. Apparently hard enough to provide useful protection against even the Omicron strain.
> > Containment creates a "reserve army of the uninfected."
> >
> > (Apologies to uncle Karl)
> John Larkin hasn't really got it into his head that you can vaccinate a population before they have been exposed to the infection. With the Omicron strain this doesn't stop them getting infected, but makes them less likely to get infected, and - on average shortens the course of those infections that do happen, and makes it less likely that the vaccinated infected will infect new victims while they are infected.

I'm not too worried about what a well known idiot thinks of this disease. I'd rather find information that shows the truth.

--

Rick C.

-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Martin Brown]

On 29/01/2022 01:55, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:11:50 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>> On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:
>>>
>>>> So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
>>>> rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
>>>> time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
>>> It's puzzled me as well. The only idea I've come up with is that there
>>> is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
>>> the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.
>
> This neglects the point that people's behavior changes when they know that there is a high risk that they will get infected.

I don't think that is the driver until the death toll really starts to
climb as in Brazil or now in the USA - a pandemic of the unvaccinated.

Omicron is slightly less lethal than earlier strains but it is so much
more infectious that without vaccination the body count mounts up. The
new improved BA.2 strain appears to be even more infectious.

Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected by
Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain earlier in
the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1% infected here.
(It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096

Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and clubs
are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The other category
is people who are occupationally exposed like medics and some customer
facing public service and/or essential front line workers.

In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been much
more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The really
strange thing is that it is impossible to see much difference between
the two strategies. It was worse in England but only by as much as you
would expect for it containing more very large cities.

There was no clear benefit from the lockdowns imposed elsewhere. That is
not at all what I expected to see.

>>> However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak, which doesn't fit with that.
>
> The West Australian government has made their population very nervous about getting infected - the changes in behavior may kick in earlier and harder there. Apparently hard enough to provide useful protection against even the Omicron strain.

It might work against them. The march of Omicron is pretty much
inevitable. It is far too infectious to contain outside of a
totalitarian state. The only question in the UK now is when do you catch
it rather than if you catch it. Several friends and neighbours have had
it in the past couple of months. My mate who had it in the initial salvo
March 2019 caught it again at a family Xmas lunch.

Basically it is a rerun of last winter but with very much higher peak
infection levels and case IFR down by more than an order of magnitude.

>
>> Containment creates a "reserve army of the uninfected."
>>
>> (Apologies to uncle Karl)
>
> John Larkin hasn't really got it into his head that you can vaccinate a population before they have been exposed to the infection. With the Omicron strain this doesn't stop them getting infected, but makes them less likely to get infected, and - on average shortens the course of those infections that do happen, and makes it less likely that the vaccinated infected will infect new victims while they are infected.

To be anything like effective against Omicron requires triple
vaccination preferably with AZ,AZ,Pfizer or AZ,AZ,Moderna. I know plenty
of people who caught Omicron whilst double vaccinated and one serious
case. Two doses offer almost no protection against catching it.

UK data suggests that there is very little difference between vaccinated
and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The unvaccinated are
more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst many vaccinated people
end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic carriers.

This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people every
week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of asymptomatic
cases that would be totally missed by the test on symptoms regime.

>
> https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard
>
> At the moment Western Australia has got to 90.1% fully vaccinated.

So according to ANU there is nothing to worry about! "Herd" immunity has
been reached. I think you will find that is not the case in practice!

>
> "There are currently 103 active confirmed cases in WA.
>
> Of these, 42 are in hotel quarantine and 61 are in self-quarantine.

Lock 'em up! Though in the case of dodgy vaccine denying tennis star I
think they should have never let him into the country in the first
place. Looks like he faked his Covid tests according to BBC researchers:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/59999541

It is easy when you have 100 live cases but much harder when you have
100k new cases or more every day (as is the case in the UK).

>
> These six new cases bring the State’s total number of COVID-19 cases to 1260, with 1148 people having recovered from the virus.
>
> The update also revealed there had been a surge in first vaccinations in WA in the last 24 hours."
>
> I can't find a number for the total deaths, but 1260-1149 -103 suggest that it s nine, or about 3.4 per million, which is remarkably good.

It will only stay that way by keeping the place tightly locked down.
I am a bit surprised that Australians will stand for it.

After triple vaccination the optimum strategy for anyone who is
reasonably fit may well be to catch Covid whilst the immune response
from the vaccine is at maximum effectiveness. That combination of
vaccinated and surviving a Covid infection might just provide enough
long term immunity to make it an endemic disease we can live with.

The vaccine works well to prevent serious illness but the way Omicron is
propagating in the UK's highly vaccinated population suggests that the
only way out of this is to vaccinate and then let it run right through
the nominally protected population. Too bad for those immunosuppressed
individuals for whom the vaccine doesn't work.

The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming "Covid Hoax". They fully
deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid does.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Rick C]

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 7:27:38 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 29/01/2022 01:55, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:11:50 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
> >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
> >>>> rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
> >>>> time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
> >>> It's puzzled me as well. The only idea I've come up with is that there
> >>> is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
> >>> the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.
> >
> > This neglects the point that people's behavior changes when they know that there is a high risk that they will get infected.
> I don't think that is the driver until the death toll really starts to
> climb as in Brazil or now in the USA - a pandemic of the unvaccinated.

Not sure what data you are looking at. The death rate in the US is not climbing in a manner that is garnering any attention. It has reached twice the level it was at prior to this latest ramp. I hear no one talking about the death rate other than it has remained relatively low given the large rise in infections. They talk about how omicron seems to be much less dangerous than other strains and how the very high infection rate makes the 2020-2021 holiday season a warm up. There is some talk of how hospitals are overwhelmed. The two states I spend time in both have enacted recent measures to address exhaustion of medical workers, without doing anything regarding the infection rate itself... such as mandating mask wearing.

> Omicron is slightly less lethal than earlier strains but it is so much
> more infectious that without vaccination the body count mounts up. The
> new improved BA.2 strain appears to be even more infectious.

Again, not sure where you are getting your data. Omicron would seem to be *much* less lethal. It has reached daily infection rates three times higher than the previous record, but the daily death count is only a little over half the maximum rate and probably going to peak very soon. That would imply a death rate of 1/6 of previous strains, although we won't know for sure until the data is properly analyzed.

> Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected by
> Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain earlier in
> the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1% infected here.
> (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096

That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what percentage of the population has been previously infected.

> Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and clubs
> are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The other category
> is people who are occupationally exposed like medics and some customer
> facing public service and/or essential front line workers.
>
> In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been much
> more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The really
> strange thing is that it is impossible to see much difference between
> the two strategies. It was worse in England but only by as much as you
> would expect for it containing more very large cities.

That is what I'm seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don't seem to correlate with the results.

> There was no clear benefit from the lockdowns imposed elsewhere. That is
> not at all what I expected to see.
> >>> However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak, which doesn't fit with that.
> >
> > The West Australian government has made their population very nervous about getting infected - the changes in behavior may kick in earlier and harder there. Apparently hard enough to provide useful protection against even the Omicron strain.
> It might work against them. The march of Omicron is pretty much
> inevitable. It is far too infectious to contain outside of a
> totalitarian state. The only question in the UK now is when do you catch
> it rather than if you catch it. Several friends and neighbours have had
> it in the past couple of months. My mate who had it in the initial salvo
> March 2019 caught it again at a family Xmas lunch.

How does he trace it to an individual event?

> Basically it is a rerun of last winter but with very much higher peak
> infection levels and case IFR down by more than an order of magnitude.

Sorry, I can't find what IFR means. "Interim Final Rule (IFR)" doesn't seem to be it. Certainly not "instrument flight rules".

> >> Containment creates a "reserve army of the uninfected."
> >>
> >> (Apologies to uncle Karl)
> >
> > John Larkin hasn't really got it into his head that you can vaccinate a population before they have been exposed to the infection. With the Omicron strain this doesn't stop them getting infected, but makes them less likely to get infected, and - on average shortens the course of those infections that do happen, and makes it less likely that the vaccinated infected will infect new victims while they are infected.
> To be anything like effective against Omicron requires triple
> vaccination preferably with AZ,AZ,Pfizer or AZ,AZ,Moderna. I know plenty
> of people who caught Omicron whilst double vaccinated and one serious
> case. Two doses offer almost no protection against catching it.

I haven't seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than two. The "booster" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of protection as the vaccine's effects seem to diminish after some months.

> UK data suggests that there is very little difference between vaccinated
> and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The unvaccinated are
> more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst many vaccinated people
> end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic carriers.
>
> This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people every
> week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of asymptomatic
> cases that would be totally missed by the test on symptoms regime.
> >
> > https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard

Not sure what you mean by "onward transmission" unless you are referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave it to you?

Hoax... what is wrong with people?

--

Rick C.

-++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 10:27:38 PM UTC+11, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 29/01/2022 01:55, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:11:50 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
> >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:
> >>> On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

<snip>

> > At the moment Western Australia has got to 90.1% fully vaccinated.
>
> So according to ANU there is nothing to worry about! "Herd" immunity has
> been reached. I think you will find that is not the case in practice!

Getting to 90% vaccination of the whole population might give you herd immunity.

The 90.1% figure was for eligible adults, We started immunising the five-to-eleven year-olds recently. They are about 10% of the population on their own. We won't get to a herd immunity level (if there is one) until we've got most of them vaccinated too.

They rarely get visibly sick when they do get Covid-19, and don't stay sick for long, but they are active and do seem to infect other people.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[whit3rd]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:11:50 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

> Containment creates a "reserve army of the uninfected."

Silly.
It ain't an army if it won't take orders, like, GET VACCINATED.
If it does take orders, it's benign to be uninfected.

And, 'containment' effects a time delay, but does no creation of
any sort. The uninfected were BORN that way, of course.

[Martin Brown]

On 29/01/2022 14:12, Rick C wrote:
> On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 7:27:38 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown
> wrote:
>>
>> Omicron is slightly less lethal than earlier strains but it is so
>> much more infectious that without vaccination the body count mounts
>> up. The new improved BA.2 strain appears to be even more
>> infectious.
>
> Again, not sure where you are getting your data. Omicron would seem
> to be *much* less lethal. It has reached daily infection rates three
> times higher than the previous record, but the daily death count is
> only a little over half the maximum rate and probably going to peak
> very soon. That would imply a death rate of 1/6 of previous strains,
> although we won't know for sure until the data is properly analyzed.

There are two competing effects.

Omicron is going up against a 66% fully triple vaccinated population
with about 75% double vaccinated in the UK and they are well protected.

So the UK numbers are roughly

Doses % Hospitalised with Covid

2 80 3
1 10 10
0 10 84

An additional 1.5% had previously had a natural Covid infection and so
were not included in the stats. Source BMJ - too early for boosters:

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2306

So 84% of hospitalised patients come from the 10% of people who are
unvaccinated in the UK. Whilst just 3% were double vaccinated.

I'm not sure what the numbers are in the US but I would be surprised if
the risk of harm were different. It is just that you have ~40% of
unvaccinated refuseniks who also engage in risky behaviour.

>> Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
>> by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
>> earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
>> infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)
>>
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096
>
> That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
> percentage of the population has been previously infected.

It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.

>> Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
>> clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
>> other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
>> and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
>> workers.
>>
>> In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
>> much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
>> really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
>> difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
>> only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
>> large cities.
>
> That is what I'm seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don't
> seem to correlate with the results.

Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.

>> neighbours have had it in the past couple of months. My mate who
>> had it in the initial salvo March 2019 caught it again at a family
>> Xmas lunch.
>
> How does he trace it to an individual event?

He is fairly cautious (having had it fairly badly once) and there was a
family member who tested LF positive the very next day - the following
day they all tested PCR positive. Only one got away without catching it
on Xmas Day. They spent Boxing Day queuing for Covid PCR tests...

>> Basically it is a rerun of last winter but with very much higher
>> peak infection levels and case IFR down by more than an order of
>> magnitude.
>
> Sorry, I can't find what IFR means. "Interim Final Rule (IFR)"
> doesn't seem to be it. Certainly not "instrument flight rules".

Infection Fatality Ratio - the odds that if you catch it you die.
More than 10x lower if you are fully vaccinated.

> I haven't seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
> two. The "booster" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
> protection as the vaccine's effects seem to diminish after some
> months.

The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.

Also the evidence from Israel is that homogeneous vaccination with
entirely Pfizer is a decidedly suboptimal strategy.

I'm not convinced that boosting the entire population in the first world
is a sensible thing to do but I wasn't going to refuse my dose.

>> UK data suggests that there is very little difference between
>> vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The
>> unvaccinated are more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst
>> many vaccinated people end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic
>> carriers.
>>
>> This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people
>> every week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of
>> asymptomatic cases that would be totally missed by the test on
>> symptoms regime.
>>>
>>> https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard
>
>>>
> Not sure what you mean by "onward transmission" unless you are
> referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the
> disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave
> it to you?

It tells you what fraction of apparently healthy people in that random
representative sample are infected with Covid in the weekly snapshot.

The other testing is all biassed towards suspected cases who are showing
symptoms or being admitted to hospital or employed in a sensitive
position where routine testing is mandated.

>> After triple vaccination the optimum strategy for anyone who is
>> reasonably fit may well be to catch Covid whilst the immune
>> response from the vaccine is at maximum effectiveness. That
>> combination of vaccinated and surviving a Covid infection might
>> just provide enough long term immunity to make it an endemic
>> disease we can live with.
>>
>> The vaccine works well to prevent serious illness but the way
>> Omicron is propagating in the UK's highly vaccinated population
>> suggests that the only way out of this is to vaccinate and then let
>> it run right through the nominally protected population. Too bad
>> for those immunosuppressed individuals for whom the vaccine doesn't
>> work.
>>
>> The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
>> picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming "Covid Hoax". They fully
>> deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid does.
>
> Hoax... what is wrong with people?

It is painted on many of the motorway supports in Newcastle.
They are a very vocal minority that torch 5G masts etc. :(

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Rick C]

None of this addresses the issue of lethality of the omicron strain.

> >> Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
> >> by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
> >> earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
> >> infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)
> >>
> >> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096
> >
> > That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
> > percentage of the population has been previously infected.
> It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
> that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.

??? I think a high reinfection rate with the omicron strain says the prior infections are not very good at preventing this infection.

> >> Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
> >> clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
> >> other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
> >> and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
> >> workers.
> >>
> >> In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
> >> much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
> >> really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
> >> difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
> >> only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
> >> large cities.
> >
> > That is what I'm seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don't
> > seem to correlate with the results.
> Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
> adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
> But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
> with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
> at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.

It's hard to draw any conclusions when other countries are seeing very low (in comparison) new infection rates. South Africa is seeing infection rates around 15% of the peak value and it's too early to say if that is a bottom.

> >> neighbours have had it in the past couple of months. My mate who
> >> had it in the initial salvo March 2019 caught it again at a family
> >> Xmas lunch.
> >
> > How does he trace it to an individual event?
> He is fairly cautious (having had it fairly badly once) and there was a
> family member who tested LF positive the very next day - the following
> day they all tested PCR positive. Only one got away without catching it
> on Xmas Day. They spent Boxing Day queuing for Covid PCR tests...
> >> Basically it is a rerun of last winter but with very much higher
> >> peak infection levels and case IFR down by more than an order of
> >> magnitude.
> >
> > Sorry, I can't find what IFR means. "Interim Final Rule (IFR)"
> > doesn't seem to be it. Certainly not "instrument flight rules".
> Infection Fatality Ratio - the odds that if you catch it you die.
> More than 10x lower if you are fully vaccinated.

Far too many abbreviations. It's ok to say what you mean. No need to obscure your statements by using such shorthand.

> > I haven't seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
> > two. The "booster" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
> > protection as the vaccine's effects seem to diminish after some
> > months.
> The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
> experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
> essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
> that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
> the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
> but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.

The 6 month wane is the reason for the "booster" shot. Without taking into account timing, the data above doesn't say anything about the utility of the booster in preventing an infection from omicron.

> Also the evidence from Israel is that homogeneous vaccination with
> entirely Pfizer is a decidedly suboptimal strategy.
>
> I'm not convinced that boosting the entire population in the first world
> is a sensible thing to do but I wasn't going to refuse my dose.
> >> UK data suggests that there is very little difference between
> >> vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The
> >> unvaccinated are more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst
> >> many vaccinated people end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic
> >> carriers.
> >>
> >> This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people
> >> every week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of
> >> asymptomatic cases that would be totally missed by the test on
> >> symptoms regime.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard
> >
> >>>
> > Not sure what you mean by "onward transmission" unless you are
> > referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the
> > disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave
> > it to you?
> It tells you what fraction of apparently healthy people in that random
> representative sample are infected with Covid in the weekly snapshot.

Sorry, I'm not following. "Onward transmission" means people who have asymptomatic infections?

> The other testing is all biassed towards suspected cases who are showing
> symptoms or being admitted to hospital or employed in a sensitive
> position where routine testing is mandated.
> >> After triple vaccination the optimum strategy for anyone who is
> >> reasonably fit may well be to catch Covid whilst the immune
> >> response from the vaccine is at maximum effectiveness. That
> >> combination of vaccinated and surviving a Covid infection might
> >> just provide enough long term immunity to make it an endemic
> >> disease we can live with.
> >>
> >> The vaccine works well to prevent serious illness but the way
> >> Omicron is propagating in the UK's highly vaccinated population
> >> suggests that the only way out of this is to vaccinate and then let
> >> it run right through the nominally protected population. Too bad
> >> for those immunosuppressed individuals for whom the vaccine doesn't
> >> work.
> >>
> >> The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
> >> picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming "Covid Hoax". They fully
> >> deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid does.
> >
> > Hoax... what is wrong with people?
> It is painted on many of the motorway supports in Newcastle.
> They are a very vocal minority that torch 5G masts etc. :(

The 5G thing is pretty much insane. Whatever.

--

Rick C.

+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Tom Gardner]

On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:
> The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were picketing in
> Newcastle yesterday claiming "Covid Hoax". They fully deserve what they get if
> it kills them. Stupid is as stupid does.

Ditto Bristol :(

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:st5s9m$1vf$1...@dont-email.me:

The problem is that the clouds persists AND WORSE, variants WILL occur.

If we all vax'd up and staved it off from society, we would not have to
worry about the odds of a new variant. There would be no idiots out
there to produce them. But Nooooooo... The cult denies the truth.

The unvaccinated are not just a danger to themselves, they are a
danger to the entire race since all it takes is a single variant that
got the trick down to invading the cell despite a vaccination and
sickens and kills at a higher rate and we'll all die as every bed in
every hospital and E-clinic... everywhere fills up with death.

Y'all Trumpers are stupid fucks.

[Rick C]

That's not completely true. Even with everyone being vaccinated, it is not clear that the virus would be halted. Certainly there would be fewer hospitalizations and deaths, but there are still many infections among the vaccinated, even before omicron.

More than anything else, this pandemic shows the limitations of science and medicine.

--

Rick C.

+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[DecadentLinux...@decadence.org]

Rick C <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:f0051349-2bb5-4a1e...@googlegroups.com:

> Certainly there would be fewer hospitalizations and deaths, but
> there are still many infections among the vaccinated, even
> before omicron.

Which came from unvaccinated unmasked utter idiots.

And the number is not "many".

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:03:18 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 6:48:13 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> > Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> > news:st5s9m$1vf$1...@dont-email.me:
> > > On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:
> > >> The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
> > >> picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming "Covid Hoax". They
> > >> fully deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid
> > >> does.
> > >
> > > Ditto Bristol :(
> > The problem is that the clouds persists AND WORSE, variants WILL occur.
> >
> > If we all vax'd up and staved it off from society, we would not have to
> > worry about the odds of a new variant. There would be no idiots out
> > there to produce them. But Nooooooo... The cult denies the truth.
> >
> > The unvaccinated are not just a danger to themselves, they are a
> > danger to the entire race since all it takes is a single variant that
> > got the trick down to invading the cell despite a vaccination and
> > sickens and kills at a higher rate and we'll all die as every bed in
> > every hospital and E-clinic... everywhere fills up with death.
> >
> > Y'all Trumpers are stupid fucks.
>
> That's not completely true. Even with everyone being vaccinated, it is not clear that the virus would be halted. Certainly there would be fewer hospitalizations and deaths, but there are still many infections among the vaccinated, even before omicron.

But there are quite fewer infections among the vaccinated, and they don't stay infectious for as long. Whether this is going to be enough to cut the re-infection rate below one new infection per infection is uncertain. Even before the Omicron variant, the estimates for getting to herd immunity suggested that we needed more than 90% of the whole population vaccinated, and we've got to vaccinate pretty much everybody older than five to get to that

> More than anything else, this pandemic shows the limitations of science and medicine.

Covid-19 has killed many fewer people than the Spanish Flu epidemic did. The vaccines have helped a lot. The difference in deaths per million between places like Australia (143 deaths per million), South Korea (132 deaths per million) and New Zealand (11 deaths er million), where the politicians took the scientific advice more or less seriously, and the US (2,716 deaths per million) and the UK (2,275 deaths per million) where they didn't, does suggest the limitations are more in getting politicians to listen to the advice.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Rick C]

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:48:17 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:03:18 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 6:48:13 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> > > Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> > > news:st5s9m$1vf$1...@dont-email.me:
> > > > On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:
> > > >> The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
> > > >> picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming "Covid Hoax". They
> > > >> fully deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid
> > > >> does.
> > > >
> > > > Ditto Bristol :(
> > > The problem is that the clouds persists AND WORSE, variants WILL occur.
> > >
> > > If we all vax'd up and staved it off from society, we would not have to
> > > worry about the odds of a new variant. There would be no idiots out
> > > there to produce them. But Nooooooo... The cult denies the truth.
> > >
> > > The unvaccinated are not just a danger to themselves, they are a
> > > danger to the entire race since all it takes is a single variant that
> > > got the trick down to invading the cell despite a vaccination and
> > > sickens and kills at a higher rate and we'll all die as every bed in
> > > every hospital and E-clinic... everywhere fills up with death.
> > >
> > > Y'all Trumpers are stupid fucks.
> >
> > That's not completely true. Even with everyone being vaccinated, it is not clear that the virus would be halted. Certainly there would be fewer hospitalizations and deaths, but there are still many infections among the vaccinated, even before omicron.
> But there are quite fewer infections among the vaccinated, and they don't stay infectious for as long. Whether this is going to be enough to cut the re-infection rate below one new infection per infection is uncertain. Even before the Omicron variant, the estimates for getting to herd immunity suggested that we needed more than 90% of the whole population vaccinated, and we've got to vaccinate pretty much everybody older than five to get to that

Yes, that's what I said, it is not clear that 100% vaccination would stop this virus.

> > More than anything else, this pandemic shows the limitations of science and medicine.
> Covid-19 has killed many fewer people than the Spanish Flu epidemic did. The vaccines have helped a lot. The difference in deaths per million between places like Australia (143 deaths per million), South Korea (132 deaths per million) and New Zealand (11 deaths er million), where the politicians took the scientific advice more or less seriously, and the US (2,716 deaths per million) and the UK (2,275 deaths per million) where they didn't, does suggest the limitations are more in getting politicians to listen to the advice.

It is not useful to compare this pandemic death counts to other diseases as this pandemic is nowhere near over. We don't know what the final count will be. The world wide death rate is 9,000 per day and rising. With new strains continuing to pop up, we could be hit by a much more deadly as well as more infectious strain at any time.

There's also the fact that estimates of the numbers related to the Spanish flu vary widely.

--

Rick C.

++- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
++- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 12:30:46 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:48:17 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:03:18 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 6:48:13 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> > > > Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> > > > news:st5s9m$1vf$1...@dont-email.me:
> > > > > On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:

<snip>

> > > More than anything else, this pandemic shows the limitations of science and medicine.
> >
> > Covid-19 has killed many fewer people than the Spanish Flu epidemic did. The vaccines have helped a lot. The difference in deaths per million between places like Australia (143 deaths per million), South Korea (132 deaths per million) and New Zealand (11 deaths er million), where the politicians took the scientific advice more or less seriously, and the US (2,716 deaths per million) and the UK (2,275 deaths per million) where they didn't, does suggest the limitations are more in getting politicians to listen to the advice.
>
> It is not useful to compare this pandemic death counts to other diseases as this pandemic is nowhere near over.

But we've got vaccines against it, and they do make it much less likely that it will kill you.

> We don't know what the final count will be. The world wide death rate is 9,000 per day and rising. With new strains continuing to pop up, we could be hit by a much more deadly as well as more infectious strain at any time.

Anything is possible, but while there is every reason to expect even more infectious strains - that's what evolution is selecting for - more deadly seems less likely, not least because we've not seen all that much variation in severity so far.

> There's also the fact that estimates of the numbers related to the Spanish flu vary widely.

That's science and medicine again. We are doing better at collecting the numbers, and some countries have done much better than others at turning good information into better performance at slowing down infections. The US isn't one of the better performers.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 8:23:35 AM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 12:30:46 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 8:48:17 PM UTC-5, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:03:18 AM UTC+11, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 6:48:13 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> > > > > Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> > > > > news:st5s9m$1vf$1...@dont-email.me:
> > > > > > On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > More than anything else, this pandemic shows the limitations of science and medicine.
> > >
> > > Covid-19 has killed many fewer people than the Spanish Flu epidemic did. The vaccines have helped a lot. The difference in deaths per million between places like Australia (143 deaths per million), South Korea (132 deaths per million) and New Zealand (11 deaths er million), where the politicians took the scientific advice more or less seriously, and the US (2,716 deaths per million) and the UK (2,275 deaths per million) where they didn't, does suggest the limitations are more in getting politicians to listen to the advice.
> >
> > It is not useful to compare this pandemic death counts to other diseases as this pandemic is nowhere near over.
> But we've got vaccines against it, and they do make it much less likely that it will kill you.

Which is not relevant. The world wide death rate is 9,000 and rising, over half of the peak rate. You can't compare the death rate to other diseases until we have a final count.

> > We don't know what the final count will be. The world wide death rate is 9,000 per day and rising. With new strains continuing to pop up, we could be hit by a much more deadly as well as more infectious strain at any time.
> Anything is possible, but while there is every reason to expect even more infectious strains - that's what evolution is selecting for - more deadly seems less likely, not least because we've not seen all that much variation in severity so far.

The omicron variant is less deadly. My understanding is the delta variant is more deadly. There is zero reason to expect little variation in mortality and morbidity rates as the disease evolves. The mutations are essentially an exploration of a chaotic space.

> > There's also the fact that estimates of the numbers related to the Spanish flu vary widely.
> That's science and medicine again. We are doing better at collecting the numbers, and some countries have done much better than others at turning good information into better performance at slowing down infections. The US isn't one of the better performers.

That is an unrelated matter. You seem to have trouble with making comments that are actually relevant to the issue, but whatever.

--

Rick C.

+++ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+++ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Martin Brown]

However this does and best guesses are that against the unvaccinated the
Omicron strain is about as lethal as the original wild form. eg

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/how-mild-is-omicron-really-69610

It is much less dangerous to the majority vaccinated people.

>>>> Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
>>>> by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
>>>> earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
>>>> infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)
>>>>
>>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096
>>>
>>> That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
>>> percentage of the population has been previously infected.
>> It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
>> that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.
>
> ??? I think a high reinfection rate with the omicron strain says the prior infections are not very good at preventing this infection.

Indeed but it also says that they are in harms way a lot more often.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/232698/omicron-largely-evades-immunity-from-past/

>>>> Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
>>>> clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
>>>> other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
>>>> and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
>>>> workers.
>>>>
>>>> In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
>>>> much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
>>>> really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
>>>> difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
>>>> only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
>>>> large cities.
>>>
>>> That is what I'm seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don't
>>> seem to correlate with the results.
>> Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
>> adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
>> But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
>> with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
>> at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.
>
> It's hard to draw any conclusions when other countries are seeing very low (in comparison) new infection rates. South Africa is seeing infection rates around 15% of the peak value and it's too early to say if that is a bottom.

Although the disease may well have saturated their urban centres by now.
Africa has a much younger demographic so you would expect case IFR to be
lower there than in say Japan, Italy or the UK where the demographics is
weighted more toward the elderly.

>
>
>>> I haven't seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
>>> two. The "booster" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
>>> protection as the vaccine's effects seem to diminish after some
>>> months.
>> The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
>> experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
>> essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
>> that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
>> the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
>> but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.
>
> The 6 month wane is the reason for the "booster" shot. Without taking into account timing, the data above doesn't say anything about the utility of the booster in preventing an infection from omicron.

There were younger people still getting their second dose when Omicron
first arrived.
It didn't appear to stop them from catching Omicron.

After 90 days or so all bets seem to be off for naturally acquired
immunity preventing reinfection by Covid. Vaccines maybe hold out a
little longer but they mainly prevent serious illness.

Imperial study estimates that we will typically catch endemic Covid on
average every 2-3 years for the foreseeable future.

>>>> UK data suggests that there is very little difference between
>>>> vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The
>>>> unvaccinated are more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst
>>>> many vaccinated people end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic
>>>> carriers.
>>>>
>>>> This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people
>>>> every week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of
>>>> asymptomatic cases that would be totally missed by the test on
>>>> symptoms regime.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard
>>>
>>>>>
>>> Not sure what you mean by "onward transmission" unless you are
>>> referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the
>>> disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave
>>> it to you?
>> It tells you what fraction of apparently healthy people in that random
>> representative sample are infected with Covid in the weekly snapshot.
>
> Sorry, I'm not following. "Onward transmission" means people who have asymptomatic infections?

Their testing methodology finds people in the population who are
infected but don't yet know about it. Here is a bit more detail :

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/233381/fall-coronavirus-infections-england-have-stalled/

Onward transmission means what it says. Evidence is that swabs from both
vaccinated and unvaccinated infected individuals have roughly the same
amount of virus in them. The vaccinated are less likely to have symptoms
and be more likely to be out and about, the unvaccinated may stay
infective for longer but are more likely to by poorly and at home.

The two competing factors roughly seem to cancel out. IOW vaccination
cannot prevent onward Omicron transmission in a population all it can do
is limit the damage done to individuals by catching the infection.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Rick C]

Sometimes it seems you just like arguing for the sake of arguing. With 53% fully vaccinated and 61% having at least 1 dose, that would seem to be the relevant group. So the omicron variant is much less dangerous overall.

> >>>> Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
> >>>> by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
> >>>> earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
> >>>> infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096
> >>>
> >>> That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
> >>> percentage of the population has been previously infected.
> >> It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
> >> that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.
> >
> > ??? I think a high reinfection rate with the omicron strain says the prior infections are not very good at preventing this infection.
> Indeed but it also says that they are in harms way a lot more often.

Huh? You seem to like jumps in logic. Whatever.

> https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/232698/omicron-largely-evades-immunity-from-past/
> >>>> Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
> >>>> clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
> >>>> other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
> >>>> and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
> >>>> workers.
> >>>>
> >>>> In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
> >>>> much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
> >>>> really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
> >>>> difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
> >>>> only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
> >>>> large cities.
> >>>
> >>> That is what I'm seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don't
> >>> seem to correlate with the results.
> >> Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
> >> adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
> >> But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
> >> with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
> >> at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.
> >
> > It's hard to draw any conclusions when other countries are seeing very low (in comparison) new infection rates. South Africa is seeing infection rates around 15% of the peak value and it's too early to say if that is a bottom.
> Although the disease may well have saturated their urban centres by now.
> Africa has a much younger demographic so you would expect case IFR to be
> lower there than in say Japan, Italy or the UK where the demographics is
> weighted more toward the elderly.

Again, not actually relevant to what I said. Rates in South Africa are well down from their peak. This has nothing to do with IFR.

> >>> I haven't seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
> >>> two. The "booster" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
> >>> protection as the vaccine's effects seem to diminish after some
> >>> months.
> >> The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
> >> experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
> >> essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
> >> that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
> >> the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
> >> but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.
> >
> > The 6 month wane is the reason for the "booster" shot. Without taking into account timing, the data above doesn't say anything about the utility of the booster in preventing an infection from omicron.
> There were younger people still getting their second dose when Omicron
> first arrived.
> It didn't appear to stop them from catching Omicron.

Do you have any real data on that? Or just your personal observations?

So please tell me what "onward transmission" means in simple English. None of this is of value until you define that term.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ed Lee]

It's slowing down in dense population area. The peak was around 85% Omicron, but Xi is coming back at 25%. I believe Xi is doing most of the killings.

Week:
1: (30893) | 7% 92% 1%
2: (13434) | 3% 76% 16%
3: (15960) | 4% 52% 38%
4: ( 7619) | 2% 32% 59%
5: ( 6773) | 12% 19% 60%
6: ( 8068) | 3% 8% 85%
7: ( 7273) | 6% 19% 68%

Column:
1: Samples
2: Xi Class B
3: Xi Class C
4: Omicron

No evidence of Xi Class A (Alpha/Wuhan) or Delta.

[Rick C]

When you work with percentages, it tells you a lot less than working with absolute numbers. But the data you have is strange and you can't explain to anyone else how you come up with it, so...

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ed Lee]

OK, quick pull of some rough estimates:

01: [30893] | 07%(00045501) 92%(00614241) 01%(00004077) (00670000)
02: [13434] | 03%(00021676) 76%(00637099) 16%(00132164) (00832000)
03: [15960] | 04%(00037127) 52%(00444495) 38%(00330206) (00860000)
04: [07619] | 02%(00035285) 32%(00457022) 59%(00848353) (01430000)
05: [06773] | 12%(00339820) 19%(00523786) 60%(01675535) (02800000)
06: [08068] | 03%(00066001) 08%(00204822) 85%(02134978) (02500000)
07: [10431] | 06%(00111590) 17%(00335155) 71%(01417314) (02000000)

Column:
1: [sample size] 2:Xi/B ratio(cases) 3:Xi/C ratio(cases) 4: Omicron ratio(cases) 5:(weekly cases)

[Rick C]

Any scientist worth his/her salt would question this data and look for a flaw in the analysis. The Xi/B ratio is all over the place. It is in the 20-40k range for a few weeks, then rises to 340k, then back down to 66k and back up to 112k. That is highly unlikely. With numbers that large it is almost impossible to be random variation in the population. There is no reason to believe in any force on reproduction rates on a single strain that vary so wildly.

So, where in this data does the delta variant show up? What dates are these weeks?

--

Rick C.

--+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

[Ed Lee]

On Saturday, February 5, 2022 at 4:09:42 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...
Update:
[Samples/New Cases]_|_Xi_Class_B__Xi_Class_C__Omicron
01: [30893/0670000] | 07%(045501) 92%(614241) 01%(0004077)
02: [13434/0832000] | 03%(021676) 76%(637099) 16%(0132164)
03: [15960/0860000] | 04%(037127) 52%(444495) 38%(0330206)
04: [07619/1430000] | 02%(035285) 32%(457022) 59%(0848353)
05: [06773/2800000] | 12%(339820) 19%(523786) 60%(1675535)
06: [08068/5300000] | 03%(139923) 08%(434222) 85%(4526153)
07: [10431/4132000] | 06%(230546) 17%(692430) 71%(2928170)

> Any scientist worth his/her salt would question this data and look for a flaw in the analysis. The Xi/B ratio is all over the place. It is in the 20-40k range for a few weeks, then rises to 340k, then back down to 66k and back up to 112k. That is highly unlikely. With numbers that large it is almost impossible to be random variation in the population. There is no reason to believe in any force on reproduction rates on a single strain that vary so wildly.

There are sampling errors (1 sample in 500 at the peak) and timing errors (some reporting dates are off by 2 to 3 weeks). Furthermore, the total new cases are from other sources (worldometer, etc). But the average trend is clear. At least proving that Xi is not going away.

> So, where in this data does the delta variant show up?

I explicitly check for the delta pattern (T478K, L452R and P681R). They do not exist since Nov 2021.
Omicron has P681R only, without T478K, L452R or D614G.
There are clearly two distinct groups of pattern in the dataset: Xi and Delta from Jun 2021 to Oct 2021, and Xi and Omicron from Dec 2021 to present.

> What dates are these weeks?

From Dec 2021, plus or minus two weeks.

[Sylvia Else]

On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

> There does seem to be a pattern of the omicron variant of covid rising in infection rates very rapidly, then peaking and falling off. The drop does not seem to be as rapid and several countries have seen it drop some and plateau.
>
> I'm surprised by this as I don't think it can be explained by changes in behavior. I spend time in Virginia and Puerto Rico where the infection is following roughly the same pattern.
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/puerto-rico-covid-cases.html
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/virginia-covid-cases.html
>
> (you may find a pay wall, I seem to be able to work around it by starting at the top and clicking through to reach the states)
>
> However, I see Puerto Rico taking the mask thing very much more seriously. They do congregate in mostly open air bars and restaurants (without masks), but otherwise not a lot of exposure.
>
> In Virginia it seems well over half the people in public are ignoring the mask advice and this has not changed as the infection numbers has risen.

>
> So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
>

> I read that the FDA has pulled the emergency approval for some of the antibody treatments since they are not effective against the omicron strain. So that their use should not be a factor.
>
> Any thoughts?
>
This is interesting, and possibly related:

<https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-04/qld-coronavirus-covid-pcr-tests-queensland-health-symptoms/100771540>

Sylvia.