Have you seen the guidelines? Based on hospitalization rates (I think) and whether one falls into a very broad category of health issues which supposedly includes between 2/3 and 3/4 of the population of the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
Printable View
Have you seen the guidelines? Based on hospitalization rates (I think) and whether one falls into a very broad category of health issues which supposedly includes between 2/3 and 3/4 of the population of the USA.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
Apparently the CDC risk levels take into account hospitalizations as well as new case numbers.
Quote:
COVID-19 Community Levels are a new tool to help communities decide what prevention steps to take based on the latest data. Levels can be low, medium, or high and are determined by looking at hospital beds being used, hospital admissions, and the total number of new COVID-19 cases in an area.
Sent kid to school this morning mask-less for the first time in almost 2 years.
Kids are tougher than adults with this shit but I sincerely hope the masked days are over.
Fingers crossed.
Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
the case rates set by the cdc are high to elevate levels (>200 case avg per 100,000 people), at least, supposedly, higher than the science/data dictates. if a state or county chooses to clamp down based on the cdc guidance, a surge will be well underway and effectiveness of that clamping down will not be too great, especially for ba2 variant or variants with similar transmissibility and rapid onset. AND who is getting tested at a test center or the hospital? my speculation and observation is that these days peeps getting tested are those being admitted to the hospital, those that want to do something fun and need a negative test, those that need a negative test to do something like go back to work, and those that are confused. with free rapid tests being available, people are testing at home, and if they test positive, then they stay home and self isolate w/o reporting themselves to the local gov.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
A more relevant question, is there age breakdown of vax effectiveness from infection?
I feel like I’ve seen 60% effective from infection thrown around for “fully” vaxed people. I think that was in the UK, and I believe that was from January data. But I can’t remember seeing age breakdown.
I can't cite a source (I could if I wasn't too lazy to find it) talking about vaccine effectiveness against omicron and there was definitely less effectiveness in older people. I don't recall if they broke it down more than over and under 65.
NHS in UK puts out a weekly report that includes a chapter on vaccine effectiveness. My take from memory is it's about 90% vs infection (pre-omicron) 2 weeks after vaccination or boost. This declines by about half over 3-6 months. For omicron, it started lower and declined faster. The Pfizer protection was less than AZ or Moderna - minimal after 5 months. Effectiveness against hospitalization or death remained 70-90% for all the vaccines.
Check the report before trusting my numbers.
Of course they are. We are suppose to leave May 21st for 21 days. :nonono2:Quote:
Originally Posted by funkendrenchman
30 years from now and kids will either be looking at the old photos and videos of everyone wearing masks laughing.... Or look at the images of everyone not warning masks and laughing.. Hoping it's the former and not the latter....
We're probably going to get at least one more wave but hopefully each subsequent one is less and less deadly. I guess we all get flu and COVID vaccine every fall going forward.
Thanks. Here’s the most recent report: https://assets.publishing.service.go...rt-week-10.pdfQuote:
Originally Posted by LongShortLong
It doesn’t have the age breakdown that I was looking for, but table 2 on page 12 is interesting. Omicron symptomatic infection vs triple vax effectiveness: 50-75% effective 0-3 months after vax, 40-50% effective 4-6 months after third vax (all vax combined).
Shit. Cases/hospitalizations increasing in Europe again:
https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/15/healt...-us/index.html
My wife provides services to many immunocompromised kids, some that are too young to be vaxed. Schools are now mask free/optional. She had two no-shows so far today because the kids are out sick. She wasn’t given a heads-up about the no-shows, like she normally would, because their teacher and the classroom aid are also out sick….
Death rates, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by The SnowShow
Attachment 409587
Cdc just published on wastewater surveillance. 15% of the sites have a >1000% increase in detection of covid mRNA on 15-day average. Is this the trigger to start instituting new guidelines or mandates or rhetoric to the public? https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tra...r-surveillance
My daughter tests weekly for her theater group. Wife was sick Friday and Saturday.. and then decides to tell me a coworker she works in the same office cubicle space with (but masked in KN95s) frequent tested positive TUESDAY. I'm like.. that would have been useful info to hate TUESDAY! Anyway, rapid test Saturday night for wife came back negative so I assumed we're all good still good. I donated blood Friday so antibody test might be interesting, but not expecting anything there..
Hoping our best practices of boosting at least annually and masks in sketchy situations will keep us safe enough so hospitals can keep up. That's the most important measure of how locked down or not we are IMHO... hospital and ICU capacity
I think this will depend on whether we, as a society, are willing to except (or re-except) the reality of getting sick and possibly getting long covid, getting others sick and possibly getting others long covid, and getting people sick and them dying or it’s a huge level of debt due to a long hospital stay. We’ve previously excepted a similar reality with influenza, though I am not aware of something similar to long covid as a result of a flu infection. I’m not sure if that reality will be acceptable again.Quote:
Originally Posted by SumJongGuy
Damn, check out the New Zealand numbers (current average daily case rate 330 per 100K population). NZ spent most of the last two years as the global success story, isolating itself from the pandemic not just due to geography, but incredibly strict testing, quarantine, and contract tracing. And as it turns out, they just ended up keeping themselves ripe and ready for the virus's inevitable incursion. The lesson? I don't know, maybe "flatten the curve" was more the right approach than "dodge the curve".
Hong Kong too...and maybe mainland China soon to follow. those chinese vaccines appear to be less than stellar at preventing disease, reducing spread, and keeping people out of hospitals.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobz
I'll betcha their numbers overall are still massively lower than most other countries'. Not to mention they managed to bypass the most virulent strains. They've only had a total of 102 deaths. I know NZ is a small country, but that's pretty remarkable when you consider the U.S. was seeing 2,500+ deaths per day just a few weeks ago. We've had 3,000 deaths per million, they've had 20.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobz
I do think flatten the curve makes more sense than dodge it. Each population will eventually have outbreaks so yeah, NZ is ripe for an explosion. Just too hard to keep incredibly locked down forever.
I'm the only one who thought, and still thinks, that the whole world should have done zero-covid?
Only if you’re a pathetically weak-willed twat.Quote:
Originally Posted by The SnowShow
Bring back the full lockdowns. I’ve never experienced a happier time than March and April, 2020 when the world was moving at the pace it should be. That time period showcased how we have built an entire society around superfluous, despicably consumptive activities.
Yeah, but whatamIgonnado without my almond milk dirty macha?Quote:
Originally Posted by glademaster
In all seriousness, do you know how many millions of people went without work during that time?
No. If cases, hospitalizations, and deaths start rising again it's time to start reinstituting measures, well before the hospitals and ICU's are full.Quote:
Originally Posted by SumJongGuy
Their approach made sense. Shut out the world until vaccines roll out and they get 90% + of the population vaccinated. Then when a more spreadable and less deadly variant shows up that makes folks only mildly ill, crack the door open and let that one in. Only a few deaths and they move on. 400k cases and only 102 deaths out of 5 million people is pretty fucking amazing. California is still over 100 deaths PER DAY.Quote:
Originally Posted by The AD
That and when your whole country looks like the lord of the rings and you have some kickass skiing, locking the front door for a while and enjoying it isn't the worst idea either.
By "capacity" I omitted trends.. Agree that mandates come back BEFORE the hospitals are FULL.. But fine to relax while at normal capacity. They just said that COVID related hospitalization is down 85% from what it was here mid January. Also that it seems to be leveling out there..Quote:
Originally Posted by old goat
Same here. Those countries that tried got screwed by the rest of us disease-ridden vermin who couldn't get our shit together.Quote:
Originally Posted by riser4
Those countries that tried zero-covid demonstrated containment of outbreaks several times, starting with Wuhan. The Olympics showed containment of omicron - ended with no cases. My guess is China's current "surge" is due to omicron. That means they've been able to control covid internally. Without reintroductions from the plague-world covid would die.