Why do you think the number of new infections has reduced so dramatically ? Lockdown measures or the vaccination or both ?

[frumpety]

Or neither ?

[quote MistressoftheDarkSide]Hopefully it's a bit of both and the herd immunity thing but this was in the Guardian this morning:

www.theguardian.com/world/2021/mar/31/fewer-quarter-covid-symptoms-request-test-uk-study[/quote]
Obviously it's not good if people aren't getting tests and aren't isolating, but unless it's a new phenomenon (and that article also says - buried quite deep in it! - that compliance has actually improved over time) it shouldn't make any difference to the trend in cases, which is that they're hugely down.

Trouble is that infection rates are relatively high and rising in a few parts of the country. The low rates across the country are masking the few areas where infection rates is still a problem.

So, in some areas, neither the "lockdown" nor vaccinations have yet got the numbers low enough. With relaxation of restrictions in those areas, covid could spread rapidly outwards to other areas again.

@Waxonwaxoff0

Both. I'm glad to see that it's been more than 2 weeks since the kids went back to school and cases still decreasing. I'm feeling cautiously optimistic. Can't shake the feeling that it's too good to be true though!

Cases ARE increasing in some areas though and that's a real worry.

I agree that the still relatively high rates in some areas are concerning, but I honestly don't know what you do about it, and no one else seems to. Leicester is still well above average and it's been under harsh restrictions for a year, it clearly isn't working as a strategy.

Both.

You can't compare this lockdown to the first in terms of reduction in numbers because they weren't testing much until Mayish.

The fact that we seem to be plateaued on about 5k a day does seem to me to be a worry though. In July we were about 5k a week, and this government tends to be slow to act, which means if we get a variant that is resistant to the vaccines or something else changes the situation, then we could shoot up again.
It does worry me that I hear people talk about the "low" case numbers. Realistically: no we're not low. We may be at 10% of the height of the peak, but 5k a day is not low, and it's very easy for people to get complacent and think that it doesn't matter any more, because "hardly anyone has it".

If you look at the heat maps you can see the situation in secondary schools in particular could be critical.

UK has done well with vaccines. Now remains to be seen if they can continue to be ahead of the game here. Hopefully they use the leeway we have been given with them to make sure we won't be getting seriously rising figures again.

I fear it's starting to creep up again in Scotland, most local authority areas have had an increase in the number of cases per 100k in the last week and the R rate curve is going up again. Hospital admissions are well down cases aren't AND we are still in lockdown! I assume the rise is due in part to testing in schools but the secondaries aren't all back yet so expect that will go up again after the Easter hols.

There are booster jabs lined up for the autumn because immunity to both covid and the vaccine is deemed to be months not years so by the time summer has finished we will see another wave and probably another lockdown citing a new variant with failing immunity.

Both of those may have had an effect but probably more that the wave dissipated naturally as they are wont to do.

@Heathermary1995

There are booster jabs lined up for the autumn because immunity to both covid and the vaccine is deemed to be months not years so by the time summer has finished we will see another wave and probably another lockdown citing a new variant with failing immunity.

I thought the reason for the Autumn booster was the SA variant, which the current vaccines are not as effective against - although still pretty good at preventing hospitalisation and death even from that.

It’s not that immunity from either vaccine or infection is deemed to be months not years, it’s that we don’t know yet when it will start to wane enough to worry about.

Studies are ongoing..... which I find reassuring, because if the number of reinfections started to really ramp up after six months, we should be seeing it by now.

The vaccination/ ever warmer weather.

The evidence is looking good on vaccine sucess. The infection/ vaccination rates reduced cases more clearly in the 80+ age range on top of the lockdown trend. We've also had an earlier winter peak than Europe over Christmas.

I am curious about Europe's current surge which at present overlaps with the peak last year. It was curtailed by lockdowns, but there has been speculation that they cane in at about the natural peak anyway. Lockdowns influence peaks and troughs but at a community level as peaks approach people do change their behaviour and become more cautious, and immunity increases from people who were recently ill.
So with less effect from vaccination, is Europe just repeating last year's seasonal pattern to within a few weeks. All countries have had restrictions but these have varied, but the same patterns tend to repeat themselves.

While lockdown works as a temporary measure, it is not consequence free. It initially brings cases down but really is most effective for about 4-6 weeks to cut a few transmission cycles before fatigue and social harm sets in. Leicester and certain parts of the north who have had the longest and even unbroken strict measures for 12 months now are showing that it's very far from being an effective long term response. Partly fatigue, partly because it doesn't address high risk structual problems in peoples' lifestyles.

The lockdown served its purpose in keeping cases down over the winter when the NHS is usually under a lot of pressure - even without the added strain of another respiratory virus!

Now that we’ve vaccinated the more vulnerable groups, the nhs shouldn’t come under strain even with the higher case numbers - simply because the people who are currently unvaccinated are the groups less likely to be seriously ill anyway. So I’m not sure the lockdown is really necessary anymore. It seems to be dragging on a bit with justifications of ‘preventing mutations’ etc being given now instead of ‘save the nhs’.

both plus the weather the last couple of weeks = people spend more time outdoors

The rate of decline in cases was hidden during the first lockdown because we were only testing a fraction of those infected. So while it may appear the recent lockdown was more successful, the converse is true.

Nevertheless it was certainly the lockdown drove down case numbers, NOT the vaccine nor "natural" immunity which will have had very limited impact throughout January and early February. As we're starting to open up, the hope is that vaccination will offset the increase in mixing and keep R

The fact only a quarter of those with symptoms are testing is quite worrying!

Now that we’ve vaccinated the more vulnerable groups, the nhs shouldn’t come under strain even with the higher case numbers - simply because the people who are currently unvaccinated are the groups less likely to be seriously ill anyway. So I’m not sure the lockdown is really necessary anymore. It seems to be dragging on a bit with justifications of ‘preventing mutations’ etc being given now instead of ‘save the nhs’

Chile have vaccinated more than the UK, have unlocked quickly - and have loads of problems now.

It is a myth that as soon as you vaccinate the elderly you can rapidly unlock.

More info here: twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1377029757578149892

I would say both.
The 'uptick' among secondary school age students when the schools went back shows that the lockdown keeping them apart was suppressing transmission, regardless of the vaccines.

While the "vulnerable" may be vaccinated, that is far from the end of the story with the efficacy of vaccines in the immunosuppressed extremely low:
www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/vaccines/91631

and many affected by long covid
www.bbc.com/news/health-56601911

1.1. million in 4 weeks during Febuary - 20% of those infected!
For 196,000 of those it limited their day to day activities a lot! 697,000 had suffered for over 12 weeks, and 70,000 for over a year!

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/prevalenceofongoingsymptomsfollowingcoronaviruscovid19infectionintheuk/1april2021

@Scarby9

I would say both. The 'uptick' among secondary school age students when the schools went back shows that the lockdown keeping them apart was suppressing transmission, regardless of the vaccines.

Worried about how grim schools are going to get by the time we get near half term, going to be a lot of unwell kids and a lot with long covid.

Watching the figures, since schools went back the number of cases has levelled out, so they aren't going down any more.

So a lot of that was lockdown.

But the number hospitalised and the numbers of deaths are still going down. That is vaccine.

I was talking to someone yesterday and we were saying that the number of cases doesn't matter so much, Covid will be around for years. What matters is that it becomes a non fatal disease. So it will become like flu.

I was talking to someone yesterday and we were saying that the number of cases doesn't matter so much, Covid will be around for years. What matters is that it becomes a non fatal disease. So it will become like flu.

Covid will never become like flu. Diseases don't have to be fatal to be expensive and problematic.

I think vaccination is the majority of the reason, especially for the reduced number of deaths.

@MargaretThursday

Both.

You can't compare this lockdown to the first in terms of reduction in numbers because they weren't testing much until Mayish.

The fact that we seem to be plateaued on about 5k a day does seem to me to be a worry though. In July we were about 5k a week, and this government tends to be slow to act, which means if we get a variant that is resistant to the vaccines or something else changes the situation, then we could shoot up again.
It does worry me that I hear people talk about the "low" case numbers. Realistically: no we're not low. We may be at 10% of the height of the peak, but 5k a day is not low, and it's very easy for people to get complacent and think that it doesn't matter any more, because "hardly anyone has it".

If you look at the heat maps you can see the situation in secondary schools in particular could be critical.

UK has done well with vaccines. Now remains to be seen if they can continue to be ahead of the game here. Hopefully they use the leeway we have been given with them to make sure we won't be getting seriously rising figures again.

I'm not sure yet about plateauing. The ONS figures continue to show a fall, while the government reports a rise in the daily announcements, but the latter is likely down to increased testing with the LF tests.

As ONS have been consistent throughout the epidemic I feel their figures are more reliable.

@beginningoftheend

I was talking to someone yesterday and we were saying that the number of cases doesn't matter so much, Covid will be around for years. What matters is that it becomes a non fatal disease. So it will become like flu.

Covid will never become like flu. Diseases don't have to be fatal to be expensive and problematic.

the whole point is that people who are vaccinated don't get it seriously, and don't get hospitalised and don't die.

That is why we are vaccinating.

There will come a point when we have to balance risk and benefit and we will go back to life as normal and just add covid to the list of vaccines we have and to the list of illnesses we can get.

It's both.