Or you can just screenshot the qr, for me it was easier to find on my phone gallery than going into documents and downloads
So Compulsory Vaccinations are Happening Then…..
- Thread starter Colin Warnek
- Start date
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
You can also add your Covid passes to your phone wallet - this saves a lot of time.
Laughing
Well-known member
Absolutely correct, would it have worked? The Austrian government clearly don't think so.
I am not sure the 9 days would have given enough time to give a fair reflection on the strategy. Would it have started to reflect on the data? You would think so and it didn't. Their new infection data is a straight line up, at the same angle.
In any event it was considered inadequate as a strategy for some reason.
Jonny_Rondos_Disco_pants
Well-known member
There are very long queues at their vaccination centres, infact they’re overwhelmed. Lots of young people who thought they didn’t need it as they weren’t at risk are now getting vaccinated.
Last edited:
Laughing
Well-known member
Yes I commented on that earlier. Their jab centers can't cope and they are talking 22 days to do 10% of the population, whilst threatening mandatory jabs.
I don't know if they were slow to get going or just haven't assigned the resources.
Again it seems rather odd that it will take them nearly 3 months to complete their vaccination programme whilst threatening with mandatory vaccinations.
As I say I don't know the back story.
MolteniArcore
Well-known member
I suppose if the lockdowns are encouraging people get vaccinated it is a good thing although it's a shame that is the push that was needed.
Went to Spain on a Dad's and Lads weekend.
The locator form was a pain, even though the wife did it. Asked for seat numbers on the plane, we just made them up rather than pay for seat reservations.
When getting on the plane, it was only quarter full, we sat where we wanted.
My son, who's not vaccinated, used my QR code to get out of the country.
I did a 2 day drive through test upon my return. It came back inconclusive, please take another one, for £20.
I never bothered, and had not come backs.
Complete farce.
Laughing
Well-known member
It could be the lockdown Molteni. As I said I don't know the back story. Perhaps their vaccination centers have been very quiet until the government stepped in. If they were as busy as they are now, the government edict seems a bit strange.
The way some people put their points across in this thread is totally bonkers. And the way they attempt to discredit others is, at best, disingenuous. From both sides may I add!
For the record - I'm fully jabbed including booster, and think getting the vaccine is a no-brainer. But I wouldn't be in favour of mandatory vaccines.
A few things I'd like to comment on (in a civil way, hopefully!):
However there is no-one credible suggesting we will need 3 doses per annum. Yes, some people have had 3 doses this year but this is because this is a very common pattern in distributing vaccines - based on how the immune system works. The idea is that the final "booster" dose gives a longer lasting, higher level of immunity. It still might not work, and we may need a 4th or 5th jab, we simply don't know. But this is how vaccines work in general - look at this tweet from someone who worked on the vaccines:
Also the link you provide suggests that the majority of people admitted to hospital with Covid are vaccinated. I believe that is true, simply because the vast majority of people are vaccinated. I imagine the per 100k rate of vaccinated vs unvaccinated tells a different story. However, the original article was talking about ICU, not admittance. For someone to end up in ICU they must be quite poorly and fortunately the vaccinated people tend to get better quicker. The remaining unvaccinated are the ones that end up in ICU. Even then, a large proportion of the deaths are in vaccinated people as they tend to be the older people who don't make it to ICU, but it is the unvaccinated people (in their 20s, 30s, 40s) that are taking up valuable space in ICUs.
Our understanding of how vaccines and immune systems work suggest that (hopefully) we will have a longer lasting immunity from the booster than the previous 2 doses - this is how it works with other diseases/vaccines. Maybe we'll need a 4th, or indeed an altered vaccine - but at the moment this is the hope.
For the record - I'm fully jabbed including booster, and think getting the vaccine is a no-brainer. But I wouldn't be in favour of mandatory vaccines.
A few things I'd like to comment on (in a civil way, hopefully!):
Assuming you meant January 2021 (there was no serious information around vaccines in 2020, let alone expectations), there was hope that a vaccine would prevent transmission but the main goal of the vaccine was to stop serious disease. There was some expectation (JVT mentioned in one of the pressers) that a vaccine would somewhat reduce transmission (reduce, not prevent 100%) based on our previous experience with these kinds of viruses (Flu, SARS, etc...). It was only when we had further results from trials and studies that showed definitively that it reduces transmission (even the AZ vaccines against Delta reduce it by 50% or so, which is still significant).
Again assuming January 2021 was meant - this was the working theory based on the Alpha (Kent) variant. It showed significant protection against transmission and serious illness (neither 100%). We didn't have any data on how long this would last for so any numbers were guesswork. Then Delta hit, which as we know is more dangerous and more infectious and this changed the goalposts, including requiring a booster.
However there is no-one credible suggesting we will need 3 doses per annum. Yes, some people have had 3 doses this year but this is because this is a very common pattern in distributing vaccines - based on how the immune system works. The idea is that the final "booster" dose gives a longer lasting, higher level of immunity. It still might not work, and we may need a 4th or 5th jab, we simply don't know. But this is how vaccines work in general - look at this tweet from someone who worked on the vaccines:
Someone from Pfizer has said that there are Delta specific versions available but they aren't needed yet (and haven't been through trials I believe?). The belief is that the booster will provide the level of cover required. It's not about changing the "recipe", it's about exposure and how your body builds immunity based on that exposure.
If more people were vaccinated, then the infections would still happen but it is extremely unlikely that infections will rise - in fact it is much more likely that they will go down. Especially once boosters have been administered. Why do you think infections would still rise when more people get vaccinated? Check out this chart - https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1462444715144527876
Would you believe it if the information came from a Dr. at James Cook? This blog has been running throughout the pandemic and offers a great first-hand account of how things currently are playing out - https://www.nomoresurgeons.comI have some serious doubts about that article. Its anonymous for a start and this fact checked website says something very different.
Most people admitted to hospital with Covid-19 are vaccinated - Full Fact
The vaccines are not perfect, and the vast majority of vulnerable people have been vaccinated, so the small proportion who get seriously ill still amount to a lot of people.fullfact.org
It doesn't distinguish between ICU and non ICU but when 65% of covid hospitalizations are vaccinated it is very unlikely our ICU wads are full of unvaccinated.
Also the link you provide suggests that the majority of people admitted to hospital with Covid are vaccinated. I believe that is true, simply because the vast majority of people are vaccinated. I imagine the per 100k rate of vaccinated vs unvaccinated tells a different story. However, the original article was talking about ICU, not admittance. For someone to end up in ICU they must be quite poorly and fortunately the vaccinated people tend to get better quicker. The remaining unvaccinated are the ones that end up in ICU. Even then, a large proportion of the deaths are in vaccinated people as they tend to be the older people who don't make it to ICU, but it is the unvaccinated people (in their 20s, 30s, 40s) that are taking up valuable space in ICUs.
That was the understanding and expectation at the time, and then Delta arrived. Things change and we have to adapt, hopefully this time we will fare better!
Because the evidence shows the booster performs very well against Delta (transmission and against illness) and has already been through all of the trials etc... We would have to jab everyone again with the "new" vaccine, which would raise its own questions (plus it needs to go through all the trials etc first).
Our understanding of how vaccines and immune systems work suggest that (hopefully) we will have a longer lasting immunity from the booster than the previous 2 doses - this is how it works with other diseases/vaccines. Maybe we'll need a 4th, or indeed an altered vaccine - but at the moment this is the hope.
Laughing
Well-known member
Too complex to answer just my bits inline Matt, but briefly.
I called out that particular news story as unlikely because the numbers don't support the narrative and I did give death numbers for vaccinated v unvaccinated per 100K to allow for the differential in numbers. I think you are 5 times more likely to die from covid unvaccinated when compared to vaccinated, overall. Clearly this number changes with age etc.
Clearly with the numbers dying that are vaccinated versus the unvaccinated, and for this you can ignore the per 100k, everyone who needs a bed needs a bed, ICU beds are not filled with the unvaccinated. I thought it was an emotive, anecdotal piece and should be treated as such.
On the subject of infections falling or rising if everyone was vaccinated. i don't think that is true. Numbers are rising with about 70% (cant remember the number) of the entire population vaccinated, most of the 30% are at little or no risk, teenagers and kids. Whilst they still add to the infection numbers, they don't generally add to the hospitalization numbers.
I believe hospitalizations are dropping, but they may be dropping on the back of a recent drop in infections. Now infections are rising again, if we don't see a rise in the next day or so, of hospitalizations, then it may be a good point. Remember we don't care if we have hundreds of thousands of infections, only if people are being hospitalised, so perhaps the better question would be, if everyone was vaccinated, would hospitalizations drop? yup, I think they would, clearly. Enough though? I don't know.
I did download my Covid QRCs but the issue is uploading it to the Spanish Locator Form. Maybe a .pdf is OK now, but when I tried it was had to be done by taking a picture of the QRC and live uploading it. You have to submit the form prior to travel and you get another QRC back. That QRC declares whether your vaccine history was uploaded - or in my case not uploaded. It's a faff.
NorthumberlandBoro
Well-known member
I think we just uploaded a screenshot of the qrc for the locator form, rather than the pdf. Completing the Spanish locator form was a right pain however.
The data just shows people who died within 28 days of a positive Covid test. Covid is not necessarily the cause.
The point I was trying to make (perhaps badly!) is that:
- Elderly people (regardless of vax status) tend not to make it to ICU, because they wouldn't survive it regardless. It is a tough, arduous process.
- Vaccinated younger people tend not to make it to ICU, because they generally recover quicker and don't get to that state
- Unvaccinated younger people are more likely to make it to ICU, because they don't recover as well or as quick
You are right that everyone who needs a bed, needs a bed. The difference is in the kind of bed - an ICU bed requires a lot more staff full-time, and these staff ideally need to be ICU trained. As the name implies it is a much more intensive environment and it is this which is causing the problems, as it takes staff away from elsewhere in the hospital. When we hear people say "we are low on beds" in relation to covid, what they really mean is "we are low on suitable beds and/or staff that are capable of managing them".
If there were roughly the same number of people going into hospital, but much much fewer going into ICU we would be in a much better place - which is where the vaccine comes in.
The question of "will they drop enough" is the right one, and we won't ever know until it either does or doesn't happen. Would be nice to find out at least
The data that you see in the daily reporting is within 28 days of a positive test, and this is just a means by which we can take a fairly accurate reading on a day by day basis in order to report that. You are right that someone could indeed report a positive test and then die from something completely unrelated. This number may also include people who died over the last few days (sometimes even longer), it just depends on when this death was reported - I think it usually says "deaths reported today (within 28 days of a positive test)" or something along those lines. This is also why the number of people reported as dying on a weekend is lower, and the first couple of days in a week are higher - it is all based on when the death was reported, and not every location is able to report on a weekend.
However, the figures are actually analysed later on and each death (as always) is signed off by a doctor and any necessary investigation is carried out to determine the actual cause of death. This is the recorded and the numbers are revised (and available for public consumption from the ONS). What you will find in here is that the original "guess" number is about right, and actually is undercounting slightly (last time I looked anyway, which was a while ago!).
In other words, there are more people who are catching covid and dying outside of the 28-day window than there are people who are catching it and dying within 28-days of something unrelated (e.g. hit by a bus)
Last edited:
I know every death has to be signed off by at least one doctor, and I know (for example) that someone who has tested positive for Covid and is then hit by a bus would not be recorded as a Covid death. However it's impossible to retroactively determine precisely whether someone who dies with (say) four conditions listed on their death certificate died because of Covid, or would have died anyway without Covid. So we have, in Donald Rumsfeld's analogy, known knowns (ie people who died of Covid and only Covid), known unknowns (ie people who died with Covid and other conditions), and unknown unknowns (people who died of something else that may have been caused because they couldn't get timely treatment since hospitals and GPs were busy dealing with Covid cases).
Andy_W
Well-known member
It can take a week to develop symptoms, and another week for those to pass onto others in the household and for those to develop symptoms etc, these are "baked in", so changes don't happen instantly, can take up to two weeks or even more, depends how good the testing is and how people are open to testing.
It's like how we locked down March 23rd, 2020, but cases didn't peak till April the 7th, two weeks later, they were baked in.
It's not that the initial Austrian measures were not working, just that they didn't give them time to work/show up, and/or didn't think it was going to be enough. For them, locking everyone down was probably the right choice, in hindsight. Don't forget they might have thought it was going to slow up in-between confirming the unvaccinated lock down, and were probably basing than on data from weeks before.
They locked the unvaccinated down on the 15th (probably made that decision a week or tow earlier, based on cases from 2-4 weeks earlier), and on the 23rd they had their first decline after exponential growth. They locked everyone down on the 22nd I think, and one day isn't enough for everyone to show symptoms, or show on a test, and not long enough for the baked in cases to materialise. The they will likely level off over the next week or so, and then it should sink like a stone.
Laughing
Well-known member
I have no idea of their thinking, it could be many things, including public outrage.
Andy_W
Well-known member
There's been lots of description about this, PHE should have used much smaller age bands, and will be doing in the future..
Average age of vaccinated in 10-59 is 50+, average age of unvaccinated in 10-59 is 24, from what I've read.
Effectively the age risk, overcomes the vaccination benefit.
The vaccinated are >90% less likely to die than the unvaccinated (based on the same age and risk profile), but average of 10-59 (24 year olds) are on average 50x less likely to die than 50+ etc (based on the same risk profile).
This twitter thread explains it:
Also called the Simpsons Paradox.
Andy_W
Well-known member
Bit of both I suppose, but my thinking is >75% to do with it wasn't going to be enough.