Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Omicron Update, Dec 2

yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 118 posts

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#101

Post by disambiguation »

volta83 wrote: post #49
adam_arthur wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone done the math on whether these lockdown policies have produced objectively better outcomes over the long term? Given that widespread vaccination does not stop infection from spreading, lockdowns seem arbitrary and pointless. Especially when you consider economic consequences, which also inflicts very real pain and suffering on the populace. Anecdotally, it doesn't seem to have made any difference at all in…

Good question. Excess mortality in the USA and the EU in 2020 were ~470k and ~580k deaths. The population of the USA and the EU in Jan 2020 was ~329 and ~447 million. The excess mortality in the USA and the EU in 2020 was ~143 vs ~129 excess deaths per 100.000 inhabitants. The USA had ~10% more excess deaths per capita than the EU. People living in the EU during 2020 had statistically a significantly better chance of…

This is really dumb.

There was no pan-Euro response nor was there a pan-American response, so these groupings are arbitrary. Unless you have an objective "score" that Euro lockdowns and policies on average went further than American lockdown policies, these numbers are meaningless.

You could easily justify the differences as deriving from Europe having an objectively healthier population and better healthcare systems than the US.

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#102

Post by spurgu »

beagle3 wrote: post #98
zamalek wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not news on how vaccines work. Even the smallpox vaccine had this problem, difference is: nearly everyone got vaccinated.

Smallpox vaccine did, in fact, prevent infection and transmission with estimated 95% efficiency and is thus considered sterilizing. The Covid vaccine is very leaky, and Marek’s disease and it’s vaccine in chicken is an interesting comparison. And I did not claim it was news - all I said was that there is no reason to believe SA is a variant breeding ground (any more than any other place) and explained why.

Yeah I'm wondering what the chances are (something like Marek's disease). To put humanity on a path forever dependent on vaccines. If one shot is enough for life then fine, but two shots per year forever? Scary thought.

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#103

Post by spurgu »

simonh wrote: post #93
spurgu wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it actually does not really stop spread to any significant degree (which is evident just by looking around what's going on everywhere). It just makes the symptoms milder. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3... https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7...

Oh, it 'just' saves your life. Oh well, if that's all...

Potentially saves your life if you're in a risk group with co-morbidities yes...

Not downplaying anything here. Reducing the symptoms is great. But interesting also to not that we don't even knows why it does that:

> The reason for the efficacy of the new mRNA vaccines is not clear.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine#Efficacy

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#104

Post by spurgu »

junon wrote: post #96
spurgu wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? The point where R0 dips below 1?

I'm more referring to the fact that Europe is nowhere near the low end of the vaccination percentage health officials stated was necessary to have any chance at controlling this.

Ok, I think initial estimates (back in 2020) were that we'd need a vaccination rate of around 80-85% (which many countries have now). But that got thrown out of the window with force with Delta.

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#105

Post by adam_arthur »

tremon wrote: post #71
adam_arthur wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stated that case counts today are roughly equivalent to pre-vaccine times in most countries This is called verifiable data. Also the numbers in the US south are roughly equivalent to the east/west that had much more stringent lockdown, mask, and vaccine measures. If these policies had any significant impact, you would see a large disparity in outcomes of TX, FL, vs NY, CA. This is also verifiable data. Prove me wro…

You stated that "We've gone from 0% vaccinated, to 60-70% with no discernable dip in infection counts". This is called making misleading claims. There's numerous confounding factors in these numbers that you conveniently ignore, and that you keep ignoring even when they're pointed out to you. This is called doubling-down on an indefensible position. Then, instead of defending why your use of those numbers is scientif…

I don't ask anything of anybody. If you dispute what I'm saying prove me wrong then.

All you've done is is ad hominem and provide no data. I am at least referencing factual data. Looks like I'm following the science and you're not.

Explain the confounding factors for how Texas ended up very similar to NY, despite obesity and comorbidities being much higher in the south. I can tell you from living in both places through the pandemic, that the populace of Texas doesn't care at all about covid and largely takes no precautionary measures vs New York residents who are much more diligent about masking and protocols.

You won't do it because the data doesn't exist to do it. The differences between states with vastly different policies are super marginal. If there was any strong effect, you would see an obvious disparity in outcome.

Does everybody staying inside reduce transmission? Yes, in the short term. Does it do anything in the longer term? No, absolutely not. Unless the draconian lockdown is done in perpetuity, which has devastating consequences.

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#106

Post by volta83 »

MagnumOpus wrote: post #86
adam_arthur wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call 10% difference significantly higher... more like within the margin of error. With such drastic policy differences you would expect to see a larger effect.

The EU didn’t act as one entity in the epidemic/lockdown/furlough policies. In particular Eastern European countries went with US-like policies (and less vaccine provision and even more anti accents) and and suffered more than the US. The Nordics, France and German-speaking countries have half the death rate of the US or less, in some cases even negative excess deaths.

The US didn't act as one entity either.

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#107

Post by adam_arthur »

junon wrote: post #91
adam_arthur wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Covid is spreading at a similar rate today in most countries as it did when it first struck and there was no vaccine at all. Look at the trends in Italy, UK, US, for example. I agree the vaccine helps, but there is no clear impact on reducing spread if you look at infection data in aggregate. We've gone from 0% vaccinated, to 60-70% with no discernable dip in infection counts.

Citation please.

Look at the covid stats for the UK. Do you see a difference?

If you choose not to spend 1 minute to Google it, that's your prerogative. I'm not going to cite my comment like a research paper when the verification is a Google search away.

If you disagree with the stats, feel fee to provide evidence that refutes it. That would enhance the conversation.

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#108

Post by volta83 »

disambiguation wrote: post #101
volta83 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good question. Excess mortality in the USA and the EU in 2020 were ~470k and ~580k deaths. The population of the USA and the EU in Jan 2020 was ~329 and ~447 million. The excess mortality in the USA and the EU in 2020 was ~143 vs ~129 excess deaths per 100.000 inhabitants. The USA had ~10% more excess deaths per capita than the EU. People living in the EU during 2020 had statistically a significantly better chance of…

This is really dumb. There was no pan-Euro response nor was there a pan-American response, so these groupings are arbitrary. Unless you have an objective "score" that Euro lockdowns and policies on average went further than American lockdown policies, these numbers are meaningless. You could easily justify the differences as deriving from Europe having an objectively healthier population and better healthcare systems…

I just showed the data, and summarized that according to the data, people in the EU had better chances.

I never claimed that this data is the result of COVID policies.

This is something you made up, and then proceeded to debunk, which is essentially the definition of a strawman.

Please stop building strawmans and putting words in people's mouth. It's unpolite.

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#109

Post by adam_arthur »

taylodl wrote: post #70
adam_arthur wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, of course. But the virus is endemic and vaccines will not stop it from being caught by everybody at some point. You can't lockdown the virus away. You can't stop the spread by canceling flights either. Just seems like awful policymaking driven by virtue signaling. Covid is here forever, and that's life.

> Covid is here forever, and that's life. Good thing we didn't take that attitude with smallpox. Or polio. We have eradicated disease. It's not like we've never done this before.

Those diseases actually had high mortality rates, unlike covid.

There's something called proportionate response. Personally I think policymakers should consider the actual pros and cons and the weight of them, rather than virtue signal as if everybody can be saved from every ailment, and acting as if second order effects don't exist.

We also could have locked down every winter to save people from dying due to flu. Why do you think we didn't do that before, when it could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives? Why don't we wear masks 24/7 to protect from flu?

Re: Omicron Update, Dec 2

#110

Post by spurgu »

pfg wrote: post #97
spurgu wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> vaccinated index cases are just as likely to infect other household members > It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission You're going to have to dumb it down for me as to how this doesn't refer to spread. > we're now dealing with a variant that is significantly more transmissible And yes, agreed. Many are still focused on data from the pr…

> You're going to have to dumb it down for me as to how this doesn't refer to spread. Vaccinated index cases infecting others in the same household are only one scenario, and in that particular scenario, the study found no impact on spread. The study did find that vaccinated household members were less likely to be infected (SAR 25% vs. 38%) and that vaccinated cases had a faster rate of viral load decline - both of…

WHO is citing that study as well[0], seemingly drawing the same conclusion as I did:

> Prior to the emergence of the delta variant, it was reported that the risk of symptomatic cases in household contacts of vaccinated cases was about 50% lower than that among household contacts of unvaccinated cases(22). However, the impact of vaccination on reducing transmission in the context of the more transmissible delta variant appears to be lower(23).

https://www.who.int/news/item/24-11-2021-interim-statement-o...

[0] The first link I posted, reference 23 in the WHO statement

Post reply on HN