Coronavirus thread

[Pohjolas Daughter]

On CNN website:  "No unvaccinated players at Australian Open, says Victoria state Premier"

Victoria Premier Daniel Andrews said his government will not apply for travel permits to allow unvaccinated tennis players to compete at the Australian Open in the state after Prime Minister Scott Morrison indicated they would be allowed into the country.

Morrison said earlier on Wednesday that unvaccinated players would be free to compete at the grand slam after undergoing a two-week Covid-19 quarantine provided that Victoria, which hosts the tournament in Melbourne, applied for permits for them.
Andrews said his state would make no such applications.
"On behalf of every vaccinated Victorian who has done the right thing, my government will not be applying for an exemption for any unvaccinated player," he told reporters.
"If we don't apply for an exemption, then no exemption will be granted and then the whole issue is basically resolved."
Australia's borders have been effectively sealed for 18 months due to the Covid-19 pandemic, though authorities approve travel exemptions for special cases.
Victoria has been Australia's hardest-hit state, with its capital Melbourne locked down six times. The sixth lockdown ended on Friday, but only for fully vaccinated adults.
Unvaccinated adults remain banned from pubs, restaurants, sporting events and other parts of the economy, and may be shut out until well into 2022.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/27/tennis/australia-open-unvaccinated-players-spt-intl/index.html

PD

[Mandryka]

Yes, and this is why I in a post above wrote, that the epidemy can't be controlled, but will continue to spread among the vaccinated people. The consequence is, that people at risk - like me - are even more at risk now.

In Europe at least, the interventions are all about managing when the peaks and troughs are - regulating the flow for the health infrastructure. You prevent some disease in Winter 2021 by giving vaccine in Autumn, the vaccine eventually wanes, people start to catch it again in early summer 2022,  there'll then be the question of timing the fourth dose so that the peaks are manageable in Winter 2023, and so on.

My prediction is that the disease will become harder to control not because of any evolution in the biology of the virus, but because the people will become less cooperative about vaccination. The history of vaccination here in the Uk suggests that people clamour for vaccines when they're scared, and are pretty disinterested when they're not. That's why we'll all be led to authoritarian surveillance and punishment measures - vaccine passes, employment law demanding vaccination etc. Even Britain.

Familiarity breeds contempt.

[MusicTurner]

That's one option.

Another option would be that as more and more people get in contact with cases that have been hard or fatal, and time passes without major side effects of vaccines, they'll join the vaccine programme. I've met and talked to people who lost relatives for example, and know a colleague, who suffers from long-term covid effects, besides the press reporting.

I agree though that if the prospects continue into say vaccine no.6, 7 or 8, the energy might fade out somewhat. Yet, procedures could also become a routine.

[T. D.]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-29/russia-suffers-deadliest-sept-since-world-war-as-covid-untamed

Russia suffered its deadliest September since World War II, according to figures published Friday, even before the peak of its current wave of the Covid-19 pandemic forced authorities to order non-working days for the first week of November.

There were 44,265 deaths associated with the virus last month, bringing the pandemic's total to nearly half a million, according to Federal Statistics Service data published late Friday. That contributed to the highest number of September fatalities since the war, said Alexei Raksha, a demographer who left the agency last year after a dispute over its coronavirus numbers.

[MusicTurner]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-29/russia-suffers-deadliest-sept-since-world-war-as-covid-untamed

Russia suffered its deadliest September since World War II, according to figures published Friday, even before the peak of its current wave of the Covid-19 pandemic forced authorities to order non-working days for the first week of November.

There were 44,265 deaths associated with the virus last month, bringing the pandemic's total to nearly half a million, according to Federal Statistics Service data published late Friday. That contributed to the highest number of September fatalities since the war, said Alexei Raksha, a demographer who left the agency last year after a dispute over its coronavirus numbers.

-> "Russia's average life expectancy has fallen by five years in the last 18 months, to about 69, he estimates. "

[Karl Henning]

Since Trump lost the election, the Trumpiest areas of the country have had a death toll 50% higher than blue areas. The GOP is killing its own voters with its own lies. And they don't care.

[T. D.]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-31/colorado-lets-hospitals-turn-away-patients-as-covid-surges-anew

[Mandryka]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/covid-europe-epicentre-pandemic-who

It looks like cases are increasing dramatically in Europe and WHO are suggesting that countries impose non-pharmaceutical interventions to protect the health system from having to deal with lots and lots more cases.

As far as I can see there's no hope whatsoever of ever ditching the masks and the passes etc -- if countries adopt the values which led WHO to make that recommendation.

On the other hand, the UK approach means that the country is free of constraints, and  public health feels the pressure from people with covid, which it can handle -- but at the expense of dealing with serious elective therapies -- the joint replacements, the cancer therapies etc.

But there is a hope that these unwanted health effects of the UK strategy will attenuate -- by boosting vaccine effectiveness for example.

[Holden]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/nov/04/covid-europe-epicentre-pandemic-who

It looks like cases are increasing dramatically in Europe and WHO are suggesting that countries impose non-pharmaceutical interventions to protect the health system from having to deal with lots and lots more cases.

As far as I can see there's no hope whatsoever of ever ditching the masks and the passes etc -- if countries adopt the values which led WHO to make that recommendation.

On the other hand, the UK approach means that the country is free of constraints, and  public health feels the pressure from people with covid, which it can handle -- but at the expense of dealing with serious elective therapies -- the joint replacements, the cancer therapies etc.

But there is a hope that these unwanted health effects of the UK strategy will attenuate -- by boosting vaccine effectiveness for example.

Just looking at current UK figures, it seems as if your vaccination campaign is doing its thing. I didn't check to see how many of the current cases were non vaxed but current trends would suggest a large proportion but that may not be the case.

[Mandryka]

Just looking at current UK figures, it seems as if your vaccination campaign is doing its thing. I didn't check to see how many of the current cases were non vaxed but current trends would suggest a large proportion but that may not be the case.

I think it's clear that the European countries with a good vaccination rate supplemented with compulsory restrictions  are seeing less serious disease pro rata than the Uk. It would be a great surprise to me if vaccination alone would take the serious disease level of the UK to the level of France or Italy.

The UK is effectively sacrificing the lives of a small but not insignificant number of its citizens in order to avoid compulsory masks and such like.

Where does that come from? What political philosophy does that come from, what conception of liberty, equality and fraternity? How did we get to this?

[SimonNZ]

 The game changing, back to normal safely news I've been waiting for.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/pfizer-says-antiviral-pill-cuts-risk-severe-covid-19-by-89-2021-11-05/

[SimonNZ]

Nobody? This is interesting to me because I've mentioned this news to a number of people irl and elsewhere online and nobody is as excited as I am.

It's very weird for me to be the Pollyanna in a situation like this.

Is the skepticism a sort of "I'll believe it when I see it"?

[Que]

The game changing, back to normal safely news I've been waiting for.

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/pfizer-says-antiviral-pill-cuts-risk-severe-covid-19-by-89-2021-11-05/

Hopefully a game changer on Covid patients currently overcrowding the hospitals and overtaxing health care systems, which in a lot of countries are close to breaking point....

[Florestan]

Given their record of fraud and deceit, I wouldn't trust Pfizer even if they said "It's a fine day today".

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-largest-health-care-fraud-settlement-its-history

[Pfizer] will pay a criminal fine of $1.195 billion, the largest criminal fine ever imposed in the United States for any matter.

"The size and seriousness of this resolution, including the huge criminal fine of $1.3 billion, reflect the seriousness and scope of Pfizer's crimes," said Mike Loucks, acting U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. "Pfizer violated the law over an extensive time period. Furthermore, at the very same time Pfizer was in our office negotiating and resolving the allegations of criminal conduct by its then newly acquired subsidiary, Warner-Lambert, Pfizer was itself in its other operations violating those very same laws. Today's enormous fine demonstrates that such blatant and continued disregard of the law will not be tolerated."

And this is going to be my first and last post on the topic.

[amw]

It's hard to judge a single clinical trial, funded by the drug manufacturer, for which the data are not publicly available. Manufacturer funded trials are the single largest source of bias in science, given the ease of manipulating statistical significance with different analyses, excluding parts of the dataset, and so on; until the paper is published and findings are replicated by independent researchers I personally would remain skeptical. It is promising that they're moving to the next stage in the clinical trials so quickly; it's less promising that the FDA and other regulators are trying to get the drugs approved (a number of past medications were approved based on a single trial from the manufacturer, only for the results to turn out to not be replicable, or for undesirable side effects to be found, etc.)

I got burned out on miracle drugs by clinical trials for cancer therapies—there are so many cases where a new treatment seemed to have promise in stage I or II, and then fall apart in stage III, or for the findings to be not replicable by later researchers, or in some cases for later findings that the treatment in fact did more harm than good—and that's a field with generally high quality research with fewer conflicts of interest/manufacturers putting a thumb on the scale in some way.

That said this is obviously just a single person's opinion & I do trust medical science; just, with the acknowledgment that it is a process in a constant state of change, where a single data point is never sufficient to indicate scientific progress.

[Pohjolas Daughter]

Nobody? This is interesting to me because I've mentioned this news to a number of people irl and elsewhere online and nobody is as excited as I am.

It's very weird for me to be the Pollyanna in a situation like this.

Is the skepticism a sort of "I'll believe it when I see it"?

Thank you for that link.  I'm cautiously optimistic after reading it.  Fingers crossed here.

PD

[Karl Henning]

Nobody? This is interesting to me because I've mentioned this news to a number of people irl and elsewhere online and nobody is as excited as I am.

It's very weird for me to be the Pollyanna in a situation like this.

Is the skepticism a sort of "I'll believe it when I see it"?

Good news, undeniably!

[T. D.]

Nobody? This is interesting to me because I've mentioned this news to a number of people irl and elsewhere online and nobody is as excited as I am.

It's very weird for me to be the Pollyanna in a situation like this.

Is the skepticism a sort of "I'll believe it when I see it"?

I read this story (which includes some statistics from the survey) when it came out on Friday [may need Google to avoid paywall].
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-05/pfizer-to-seek-u-s-nod-for-covid-pill-after-strong-results

Numbers look pretty good, but the survey only consisted of 1,219 people.
I follow financial markets, and the somewhat muted market reaction indicated that it's not generally seen as a "silver bullet", though the travel sector rallied.

My opinion is that the pill is good news, but it's for treatment of infected rather than protection from infection. Might even wind up reducing vaccination rates, so infections remain high with collateral threats to high-risk segments of the population.

And will anti-vaxxers even take the pill? Same source as the vaccine they avoid. Seems to me that it'd be easier for Bill Gates to imbed nefarious microchips in pills than in vaccines. 

As far as Pfizer being evil: Possibly, and they're definitely profiteering by leaking results of a tiny survey and trying to speed approval. But that's the world we live in...big corporations dominate, and that's where any treatments will likely originate.

[SimonNZ]

It's hard to judge a single clinical trial, funded by the drug manufacturer, for which the data are not publicly available. Manufacturer funded trials are the single largest source of bias in science, given the ease of manipulating statistical significance with different analyses, excluding parts of the dataset, and so on; until the paper is published and findings are replicated by independent researchers I personally would remain skeptical. It is promising that they're moving to the next stage in the clinical trials so quickly; it's less promising that the FDA and other regulators are trying to get the drugs approved (a number of past medications were approved based on a single trial from the manufacturer, only for the results to turn out to not be replicable, or for undesirable side effects to be found, etc.)

I got burned out on miracle drugs by clinical trials for cancer therapies—there are so many cases where a new treatment seemed to have promise in stage I or II, and then fall apart in stage III, or for the findings to be not replicable by later researchers, or in some cases for later findings that the treatment in fact did more harm than good—and that's a field with generally high quality research with fewer conflicts of interest/manufacturers putting a thumb on the scale in some way.

That said this is obviously just a single person's opinion & I do trust medical science; just, with the acknowledgment that it is a process in a constant state of change, where a single data point is never sufficient to indicate scientific progress.

All good points. Thanks.

How do you feel about the Merck pill which has now been approved for use in Britain?

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/britain-approves-mercks-oral-covid-19-pill-2021-11-04/

[Karl Henning]

Tangentially: Return of scurvy under Tory rule as cases of Victorian illness double in decade.