#COVID19 | Page 876 | Vital Football

#COVID19

It's an endemic virus, there will be levels of mortality, like there are with flu.

Some people are hoping for zero Covid, which we will never have.
The point is that vaccinating only a small percentage only protects that percentage against the virus that has been vaccinated against.
Sounds straight forward / obvious, right?

If you leave 'the' virus to circulate in a vast number of humans, it will soon evade the protections gifted by vaccination. If the changes are small then serious disease and death is likely to still be avoided when new strains are encountered by vaccinated people but that strategy has little longevity.

Not many believe zero covid is likely long term (but it clearly is possible. See NZ).
However, aiming for very low numbers is obviously desirable for many reasons. In fact, we have a de facto zero measles policy, a de facto zero mumps policy, a de facto zero rubella policy, polio, SARS, Ebola, MERS, Zika, Tuberculosis, bubonic plague, leprosy, etc, and so on for many diseases.
For those diseases, nobody flippantly says, as you just did (and I paraphrase), "it will become an endemic virus and people will die".
 
The point is that vaccinating only a small percentage only protects that percentage against the virus that has been vaccinated against.
Sounds straight forward / obvious, right?

If you leave 'the' virus to circulate in a vast number of humans, it will soon evade the protections gifted by vaccination. If the changes are small then serious disease and death is likely to still be avoided when new strains are encountered by vaccinated people but that strategy has little longevity.

Not many believe zero covid is likely long term (but it clearly is possible. See NZ).
However, aiming for very low numbers is obviously desirable for many reasons. In fact, we have a de facto zero measles policy, a de facto zero mumps policy, a de facto zero rubella policy, polio, SARS, Ebola, MERS, Zika, Tuberculosis, bubonic plague, leprosy, etc, and so on for many diseases.
For those diseases, nobody flippantly says, as you just did (and I paraphrase), "it will become an endemic virus and people will die".
Not sure i read this correctly but i thought i read that not one case of flu this year has been recorded by public health England? If thats right then surely excess deaths from respiratory illness ( including Covid 19) needs analysis.
 
The point is that vaccinating only a small percentage only protects that percentage against the virus that has been vaccinated against.
Sounds straight forward / obvious, right?

If you leave 'the' virus to circulate in a vast number of humans, it will soon evade the protections gifted by vaccination. If the changes are small then serious disease and death is likely to still be avoided when new strains are encountered by vaccinated people but that strategy has little longevity.

Not many believe zero covid is likely long term (but it clearly is possible. See NZ).
However, aiming for very low numbers is obviously desirable for many reasons. In fact, we have a de facto zero measles policy, a de facto zero mumps policy, a de facto zero rubella policy, polio, SARS, Ebola, MERS, Zika, Tuberculosis, bubonic plague, leprosy, etc, and so on for many diseases.
For those diseases, nobody flippantly says, as you just did (and I paraphrase), "it will become an endemic virus and people will die".

He has no moral compass.
 
Not sure i read this correctly but i thought i read that not one case of flu this year has been recorded by public health England? If thats right then surely excess deaths from respiratory illness ( including Covid 19) needs analysis.
What is your point?
 
Community levels of flu are down by 95% compared with the 5 year average.
You could go down some rabbit hole about misdiagnosis here but I wouldn't bother. This is based on community testing and lab diagnostics in 71 countries.
Lockdown, social distancing, washing hands, screens, masks (to a lesser extent for flu) will all be contributing to this.

It raises the question not of why we shouldn't accept 20k covid deaths a year, but why we currently accept 20k flu deaths a year. I'm not suggesting lockdown every winter, but some changes in practice and behaviour have been less draconian and will have been important in reducing flu.

Maybe try seeing it as a positive, rather than a conspiracy or mistake. Strett thinks zero covid is a ridiculous fantasy and yet we have come pretty damn close to zero flu!
 
Community levels of flu are down by 95% compared with the 5 year average.
You could go down some rabbit hole about misdiagnosis here but I wouldn't bother. This is based on community testing and lab diagnostics in 71 countries.
Lockdown, social distancing, washing hands, screens, masks (to a lesser extent for flu) will all be contributing to this.

It raises the question not of why we shouldn't accept 20k covid deaths a year, but why we currently accept 20k flu deaths a year. I'm not suggesting lockdown every winter, but some changes in practice and behaviour have been less draconian and will have been important in reducing flu.

Maybe try seeing it as a positive, rather than a conspiracy or mistake. Strett thinks zero covid is a ridiculous fantasy and yet we have come pretty damn close to zero flu!
I am not looking at it as a negative at all! And i am not into conspiracy or fantasy. I am just saying that we may have to a large degree swapped death from one virus to another.
 
OK. Made up figures. 2017 flu deaths 1000 covid deaths 0 total 1000 deaths. 2021 flu deaths 0 covid deaths 1000 total 1000 deaths. I think you can see the point that i am trying to make.
Yes, I see the point you are making but it just doesn't make much sense.

We can agree that some of the old folk that died of covid didn't die of flu. But they didn't die of covid because there wasn't any flu going around. So it isn't a swap.

Also, many more people have died over the last 12 months than usually die. One way of measuring how many it is through the 'excess deaths' figure. Then you have to ask "excess" of what baseline? Well, its the 5 year average baseline that includes many deaths every year due to flu. So, really, bearing in mind we had pretty much no flu season this year at all, it is somewhat justifiable to be adding those deaths from flu that might have been expected to the covid-related deaths of c120,000 because the 5 year average (that we are subtracting from the total deaths) doesn't really apply.
 
OK. Made up figures. 2017 flu deaths 1000 covid deaths 0 total 1000 deaths. 2021 flu deaths 0 covid deaths 1000 total 1000 deaths. I think you can see the point that i am trying to make.

Better to make up figures like this:

2017
flu deaths 10,000
covid deaths 0
total 10,000 deaths
expected deaths = 10,000
excess deaths = 0

2021
flu deaths 0
covid deaths 120,000
total 120,000 deaths.
expected deaths = 10,000
excess deaths = 110,000 (ten thousand covid deaths missing from the figures)

Not a swap, and actually pretty close to the truth.
 
Last edited: