We're going to have another lockdown aren't we?

[faithfulbird20]

So yesterday we got very quick messages for 2nd vaccine 4 weeks after first and a lot of people were saying that's quick...also today school has said they're cancelling all trips too due coronavirus. I guess there's fear it will get a lot worse...honestly think it will be another year or more before things get better...

Ooohhh @TheKeatingFive unmask Nanny!

It's good fondue this thread. Thanks Nanny for injecting some lols into a dreary Friday!

I presume 'planning a lockdown Christmas' (in June) requires 0 planning anyway because you know, it's lockdown.

Riiiight... as I obviously don't meet your towering intellect with maths, can you expand on that slightly?

@NannyAndJohn

Exponential growth is still exponential growth.

But it the rate of doubling has increased from 4 to 10 days, surely the growth is no longer exponential? It would only be exponential if the doubling rate remained the same rather than slowing

@TheKeatingFive

Ah where would this crew be without being able to bust out ‘exponential growth’.

Is that on the crib sheet? When your sums are clearly shown to be bollocks, throw out ‘exponential growth’ and hope for the best. 😆

Made me laugh

To clarify, exponential growth would mean a ever steepening curve, while if the rate of doubling has reduced the curve, while still going up would reduce in steepness

IIRC the "doubling every 4 days" calculation took the case numbers on one specific day (a Thursday) and compared it with the case numbers 4 days earlier (the Sunday on the bank holiday weekend).

My "grasp of mathematics" says a much more sensible comparison would have been to look at 7 day averages to smooth out the "noise" from day to day case number fluctuations, weekend reporting lags etc. Or at least look at the same day of the week when comparing case numbers from individual days.

*you wait until deaths are high before reintroducing restrictions then you've failed to successfully control the wave.

We need to be looking at cases. If we reintroduce restrictions when cases start to rise (which they have been, exponentially, for a while now) then we can get the wave under control and limit the number of hospitalisations and deaths. Unfortunately the government have once again left it too late.* @NannyAndJohn

Yes that would make sense if those most likely to die or be hospitalised haven't been vaccinated. But they have.

Unfortunately there will be some loss of life. But lockdown will also cause loss of life too. It's about weighing up what's best for the population on balance. I say this as someone who was in favour of lockdown previously. It's not a long term solution though.

Exponential means rapid steady growth

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/994839/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_16.pdf

Shows on page 14 that the growth is slowing. It is still growing we still have to be careful but I think it is moving in the right direction

“Quick message” do your messages usually buffer?

Yes

@NannyAndJohn

Exponential growth is still exponential growth.

@NannyAndJohn: does the data you're looking at use the material provided historically by people like Professor Dorothy Crawford? I'm curious. I've read her work (and watched her excellent videos), and am asking the question in the context of that.

This thread.
A few days ago a Covid thread was deleted with the following message ' We are removing this thread because it became a source of misinformation
This one is starting to feel the same.

I don’t anticipate one now as I think the vaccinations will prevent the infections translating to NHS being overwhelmed and a high level of deaths.
I’m am worried about keeping ahead of the covid variants (from poorer areas with low vaccination levels) going into the winter. This first programme is just the start.
For now though, I feel positive compared to where we were.

Did it have the fantasy maths too?

@TheKeatingFive

Did it have the fantasy maths too?

I can't remember but very possibly. It was about things opening back up on 19/7 (or not according to the doom mongers).

Why Sweak? In our area, thanks to G7, the virus is up 850%. It's from a low base but nevertheless very worrying. I had to go into St.Ives yesterday and it was like a normal August, packed streets and very few masks.
The fact that they are offering over 18s the vaccination doesn't mean they will get it tomorrow. My son, 26 and in London, is waiting three weeks for his. Given that the benefits don't kick in for two weeks afterwards I think we are in for trouble. And who thinks all those football fans arriving in London is a good thing?

It's not misinformation it's calculations that weren't wrong even though they were wrong.

Riddle me that one

I noticed a headline that even Neil Ferguson thinks he was a tad pessamistic

His professorial maths is lacking too

I am going to stick with lovely Dr Campbell, he is marvellous. I won't be getting my Covid info from randoms with agendas on MN.

But the fact that the most vulnerable/likely to be hospitalised have been vaccinated means we are unlikely to be in for trouble. I know the vaccine won't work for all, but for the vast majority it will

The focus is on double jabs for the over 50s for good reason. Your son is unlikely to get seriously ill and need medical intervention.

For context I'm 35 and only had one vaccination..I don't want to get ill or spread so I follow measures but I don't think I've got anything to really fear

And no the football fans prob not a great idea. The photos I saw they were crowded together.

it's calculations that weren't wrong even though they were wrong

There was ‘noise’ in the data apparently.

There was absolutely nothing wrong with the projections and modelling made back in early/mid May - they were based on what we knew at the time.

At one point it did look like it was climbing exponentially.

On another forum I use there is someone who collates the data very well and his view was thank god this wasnt around in wave 1 or 2 as it is likely that the lockdown measures we had then wouldnt have work. However it is clear that for the Delta variant the vaccines work very well and are causing it to slow. If it had arrived 4 weeks earlier the picture would be very different. 4 weeks later a lot less of a problem.

Here we have a poster who seems almost desperate to stick to the assumptions about where we were 7-10 days ago which was a lot more pessimistic then where we are now.

Here we have a poster who seems almost desperate to stick to the assumptions about where we were 7-10 days ago which was a lot more pessimistic then where we are now.

Indeed. It almost seems like nanny wants to live in lockdown?

Yes, I suspect we'll have another lockdown but I'm not sure when. The virus is mutating all the time, and people are sick of being masked and cooped up, so they're going to - well, many already are - be ignoring all safety precautions and it's going to run rampant through the population once more. (I read somewhere that the vaccines are only good for approx 9 months, but I'm not sure how true that is.) The winter weather will not help, either. Sad, but I think with the mutations and the Westminster government's total bungling of things to date - we're pretty much doomed to suffer it all over again sooner or later.

@a1poshpaws they aren't 'only good' for 9 months - they've only been around for that long so quite clearly that's the only data we have. Plus potential boosters!

Cheer up - there might be bumps in the road but we are well over the worst. Plus, it's coming home.

@MaybeCrazy2

I personally think so. It’s a respiratory disease, they thrive in winter so that’s when I think we will lockdown. Anywhere between November-January.

Multiorgan disease. Sadly.