Yes, because most died before they could even be admitted.
Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
251–260 of 361 posts
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#252I may get downvoted for this, but genuinely curious if there's vaccine tourism (not that I'm in a position to get on a jet to get a shot). Eg, if the wait time is long for my group in the US/UK/Wherever, can I book a flight to UAE or Cuba to get a vaccine at the airport?
Yes! I am from the Indian Subcontinent, I know people who went back to the country to get the Oxford vaccine, because the rollout is great and it is "open season" over there already. Converse is also true- rich people who were doubtful about a vaccine manufactured in India booked came to US to get both Moderna and Pfizer shots.
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#253Since we're on the topic, shouldn't this (hospital admissions) be the almost singular criterion to influence public policy / restrictive measures? The line I've heard repeatedly is we're waiting for "total" herd immunity, as in ensuring almost all of a population is potentially protected from the virus. Frequently quoting fall / end of 2021, potentially into 2022. Shouldn't the only benchmark be those with medium-to-…
I agree completely. The only reason they used for shutting everything down at first was so hospitals don't get overrun. That's clearly not happening right now in most places. Also, it's not uncommon for the flu to cause hospitals to exceed capacity and we don't shut down for that.
This is what I found bizarre about NZ's approach. Their goals was 0 _cases_ in the entire country. It's a great accomplishment but perhaps unnecessary.
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, but once vaccinations are widespread and we are confident that severe illness will be very rare, it would be hard to take drastic measures based only on the rate of new cases. There could be a huge surge of cases but we would expect a low hospitalization rate, so we would likely want to wait.
Once vaccinations are widespread, yes. Until then, getting out in front of a spike remains necessary.
Immunity through vaccination + natural immunity is getting closer to 'widespread' now (in the US). We are likely near 30%, and of that 30%, a growing proportion is the most vulnerable sections of the population. A spike in cases now would be increasing less connected to a future rise in hospitalizations. I think its fair to say, that if we do not see a spike within the next 3-4 weeks, we are in the clear for future spikes. By April 1st, we should be nearing 40%, with the difference primarily being now vaccinated old and immune compromised people.
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#255Since we're on the topic, shouldn't this (hospital admissions) be the almost singular criterion to influence public policy / restrictive measures? The line I've heard repeatedly is we're waiting for "total" herd immunity, as in ensuring almost all of a population is potentially protected from the virus. Frequently quoting fall / end of 2021, potentially into 2022. Shouldn't the only benchmark be those with medium-to-…
I don't know about all states as they have different rules, but in Washington they track:
1. Trend in 14-day rate of new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population, shown as Trend in case rate;
2. Trend in 14-day rate of new COVID-19 hospital admissions per 100,000 population, shown as Trend in hospital admission rate;
3. Average 7-day percent occupancy of ICU staffed beds, shown as Percent ICU occupancy;
4. 7-day percent positive of COVID-19 tests, shown as Percent positivity.
And there are phased reopening plans, where restrictions are slowly lifted based on different tresholds for the above. So if the above 4 metrics meet some treshold we might go into phase 2 where now indoor dining at half capacity is permitted for example. If the numbers than stay under the treshold and eventually keep going down, we'd go to phase 3, etc. If the numbers get worse after moving to phase 2 we'd go back to phase 1 with more restrictions.
Seems pretty reasonable to me. They're always kind of revising the tresholds to some extent as well, so it's not set in stone. But it makes sense for me to take a staged approach to reopening and just make sure we're truly over Covid before going all back to normal (so it doesn't come back).
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone can empathise with wanting life to get back to normal. However the problem with folk wanting to take the individual risk is that the “low” percentage of people needing medical help can still overburden health care systems. This potentially means that people with other illness / disease can’t / don’t see a doctor in time, and others in a society take the brunt. Yes, let’s open up; but let’s not throw caution…
> can still overburden health care systems But they haven’t. The prevailing opinion I’m seeing on HN recently is that the US didn’t do a “real” lockdown which is why there are still so many cases. They opine that Americans largely didn’t “comply” with the government orders rendering any potential positive effects from lockdowns moot. If you take that at face value, then shouldn’t we have had an overwhelmed medical sy…
This is a worldwide pandemic, not restricted to the borders of the US. People in countries around the world complied with quarantine, but their healthcare systems were still under real pressure. If they were not overwhelmed, it was a close run thing only prevented by social distancing.
Hospitals cancelled and delayed medical procedures around the world due to this: Italy, Spain, the UK, etc.
While the worst case scenarios of healthcare systems on their knees have not panned out, it’s disingenuous to suggest that the impact is imaginary or FUD.
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#257"By the fourth week after receiving the initial dose, the Pfizer and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines were shown to reduce the risk of hospitalisation from Covid-19 by up to 85 per cent and 94 per cent, respectively. Among those aged 80 years and over - one of the highest risk groups - vaccination was associated with an 81 per cent reduction in hospitalisation risk in the fourth week, when the results for both vaccines we…
I think the figures from Israel show you are at increased risk of infection for the first week after the vaccine is administered. Presumably because people are already starting to change their behaviour.
Is it possible the immune response initially from the virus causes strain on the body and temporarily and paradoxically makes it more susceptible ?
The immune system can be weakened from a bunch of things, including lack of sleep and stress and other infections.
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
The #1 group in the USA was not "at-risk" population, but doctors, nurses, and other front-line staff. The idea is that these groups are seeing many, many COVID19 patients and therefore have a big risk at spreading the virus around. Once this "Priority 1A" group was vaccinated, then age 75+ individuals were vaccinated in Priority 1B. Even then, Postal Office employees and Grocery Store workers (other "high impact" wo…
Group 1C is pretty much "everyone". To take directly from the CDC [0], "Other essential workers, such as people who work in transportation and logistics, food service, housing construction and finance, information technology, communications, energy, law, media, public safety, and public health." Doesn't that cover pretty much everyone on HN ? [0] - https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommend... -----…
> Second, shouldn't the focus be #1 - stop deaths; #2 - stop hospitalizations; #3 Stop the disease (which is what "spreading" actually is)
Because stopping the disease implicitly stops the deaths and hospitalizations, its not very clear that a focus on deaths-only or hospitalizations-only is optimal.
Especially when you consider that the disease will continue to mutate as it exists (possibly making our vaccines less effective or even obsolete). So stopping the disease first-and-foremost might be the most effective way to stop deaths/hospitalizations (especially when mutations are considered).
--------
Turning the R-value from 1.5 to 1.3 means a 14% decline COMPOUNDED PER GENERATION. After one generation, its 14% fewer cases (and 14% fewer hospitalizations and 14% fewer deaths). After two generations, that's 25% fewer cases (and 25% fewer hospitalizations and 25% fewer deaths). After three generations, its 35% fewer cases (and 35% fewer hospitalizations and 35% fewer deaths). Etc. etc.
As such, "stopping the spread" has a benefit that grows exponentially every week or two (the generational period of this virus). Exponentially growing its results and efficacy.
Keeping our eye on the bigger picture, it seems like stopping the spread is the best way forward to stop deaths and hospitalizations. I realize this is a bit "splitting hairs" (compared to people who would rather "save lives" and focus on hospitalizations and/or deaths). But... it seems like the superior strategy in my opinion.
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#259Since we're on the topic, shouldn't this (hospital admissions) be the almost singular criterion to influence public policy / restrictive measures? The line I've heard repeatedly is we're waiting for "total" herd immunity, as in ensuring almost all of a population is potentially protected from the virus. Frequently quoting fall / end of 2021, potentially into 2022. Shouldn't the only benchmark be those with medium-to-…
In US State Ohio recently, the benchmark for restrictions was changed to the number of people hospitalized for COVID in the state. When it fell below a threshold, bars and restaurants were allowed to stay open later.
Re: Covid vaccination linked to 'substantial reduction' in hospital admissions
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree completely. The only reason they used for shutting everything down at first was so hospitals don't get overrun. That's clearly not happening right now in most places. Also, it's not uncommon for the flu to cause hospitals to exceed capacity and we don't shut down for that.
This is what I found bizarre about NZ's approach. Their goals was 0 _cases_ in the entire country. It's a great accomplishment but perhaps unnecessary.
The big advantage of getting to zero is that after the initial severe lockdown life gets mostly back to normal.