Covid Omicron Pattern...

[Rick C]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 2:57:45 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 10:42:16 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 9:39:40 AM UTC-4, legg wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 10:55:35 -0800, John Larkin
jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 08:55:03 -0500, legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 21:28:42 -0800 (PST), Rick C
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:

There does seem to be a pattern of the omicron variant of covid rising in infection rates very rapidly, then peaking and falling off. The drop does not seem to be as rapid and several countries have seen it drop some and plateau.

I\'m surprised by this as I don\'t think it can be explained by changes in behavior. I spend time in Virginia and Puerto Rico where the infection is following roughly the same pattern.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/puerto-rico-covid-cases.html

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/virginia-covid-cases.html

(you may find a pay wall, I seem to be able to work around it by starting at the top and clicking through to reach the states)

However, I see Puerto Rico taking the mask thing very much more seriously. They do congregate in mostly open air bars and restaurants (without masks), but otherwise not a lot of exposure.

In Virginia it seems well over half the people in public are ignoring the mask advice and this has not changed as the infection numbers has risen.

So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short time, well before a significant number of people are infected?

I read that the FDA has pulled the emergency approval for some of the antibody treatments since they are not effective against the omicron strain. So that their use should not be a factor.

Any thoughts?

If positive detection rates are >20%, it doesn\'t take very long
before everyone has it, even those employing serious precautions.

Low case fatality rates ( 0.2 to 0.3%) are unlikely to be achievable
in elderly or immuno-compromised populations, even after vaccination.

It\'s those numbers that need watching.

Testing figures in countries with high test capacity are more likely
to give accurate test positivity rates.

RL

And huge, distorted positive case counts.
Counts are irrelevent. It\'s ppm that\'s the indicator.

US fatalities are above 5ppm/day - as bad as the first
wave in 2020, but not as bad as the one that occured
during the presidenrial election, pre-vax.
The ppm number may be the more relevant number if comparing different population centers, but while comparing the same population at different times the count is sufficient and essentially the same thing. At least until the pandemic starts killing enough people that it reduces the size of the population significantly.

Yeah, it looks like the death rate will be increasing for a bit longer though.

This makes me wonder about the rate of infection from strains other than omicron. Until the rates of infection get large enough to impact the number of available hosts, viral strains do not compete. I would love to see a curve of US infections that excludes the omicron strain or any similar strains allowing view of delta and the earlier strains so the progression of non-omicron strains can be compared.

I think it would provide useful insight to see if there is indeed a human response to the pandemic when a new strain spreads. It may result in more measures to not spread the disease so that the earlier strains have lower infection rates while the new strain proceeds to grow until the measures are effective enough to lower that. I can\'t think of another reason why the omicron variant would be reversing so quickly. But I have my doubts as I don\'t see where many restrictions have been enacted where I spend time.
Yes, i am watching closely how the two strains are coexisting. During the Delta wave, Xi (D614G) was fairly constant, and almost recovering in Nov, while Delta disappeared. If Omicron can exhaust Xi, by using up all the fuel, perhaps the end is in-sight.

CDC claims Omicron is 99.9%. I am not ready to confirm it yet. According to latest data, Omicron is close to 85%, but Xi is still around 11%.

Fuel? What are you talking about?

If you mean uninfected people, there\'s no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It\'s not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I\'ve seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.

--

Rick C.

--- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Ed Lee]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 12:26:25 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 2:57:45 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 10:42:16 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 9:39:40 AM UTC-4, legg wrote:
On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 10:55:35 -0800, John Larkin
jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 08:55:03 -0500, legg <le...@nospam.magma.ca> wrote:

On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 21:28:42 -0800 (PST), Rick C
gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote:

There does seem to be a pattern of the omicron variant of covid rising in infection rates very rapidly, then peaking and falling off. The drop does not seem to be as rapid and several countries have seen it drop some and plateau.

I\'m surprised by this as I don\'t think it can be explained by changes in behavior. I spend time in Virginia and Puerto Rico where the infection is following roughly the same pattern.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/puerto-rico-covid-cases.html

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/virginia-covid-cases..html

(you may find a pay wall, I seem to be able to work around it by starting at the top and clicking through to reach the states)

However, I see Puerto Rico taking the mask thing very much more seriously. They do congregate in mostly open air bars and restaurants (without masks), but otherwise not a lot of exposure.

In Virginia it seems well over half the people in public are ignoring the mask advice and this has not changed as the infection numbers has risen.

So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short time, well before a significant number of people are infected?

I read that the FDA has pulled the emergency approval for some of the antibody treatments since they are not effective against the omicron strain. So that their use should not be a factor.

Any thoughts?

If positive detection rates are >20%, it doesn\'t take very long
before everyone has it, even those employing serious precautions.

Low case fatality rates ( 0.2 to 0.3%) are unlikely to be achievable
in elderly or immuno-compromised populations, even after vaccination.

It\'s those numbers that need watching.

Testing figures in countries with high test capacity are more likely
to give accurate test positivity rates.

RL

And huge, distorted positive case counts.
Counts are irrelevent. It\'s ppm that\'s the indicator.

US fatalities are above 5ppm/day - as bad as the first
wave in 2020, but not as bad as the one that occured
during the presidenrial election, pre-vax.
The ppm number may be the more relevant number if comparing different population centers, but while comparing the same population at different times the count is sufficient and essentially the same thing. At least until the pandemic starts killing enough people that it reduces the size of the population significantly.

Yeah, it looks like the death rate will be increasing for a bit longer though.

This makes me wonder about the rate of infection from strains other than omicron. Until the rates of infection get large enough to impact the number of available hosts, viral strains do not compete. I would love to see a curve of US infections that excludes the omicron strain or any similar strains allowing view of delta and the earlier strains so the progression of non-omicron strains can be compared.

I think it would provide useful insight to see if there is indeed a human response to the pandemic when a new strain spreads. It may result in more measures to not spread the disease so that the earlier strains have lower infection rates while the new strain proceeds to grow until the measures are effective enough to lower that. I can\'t think of another reason why the omicron variant would be reversing so quickly. But I have my doubts as I don\'t see where many restrictions have been enacted where I spend time.
Yes, i am watching closely how the two strains are coexisting. During the Delta wave, Xi (D614G) was fairly constant, and almost recovering in Nov, while Delta disappeared. If Omicron can exhaust Xi, by using up all the fuel, perhaps the end is in-sight.

CDC claims Omicron is 99.9%. I am not ready to confirm it yet. According to latest data, Omicron is close to 85%, but Xi is still around 11%.
Fuel? What are you talking about?

Yes, vulnerable people.

> If you mean uninfected people, there\'s no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It\'s not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I\'ve seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.

Just like fighting fire with fire, you don\'t need to exhaust all fuel. As long as you stop the path of motion, it could be stopped.

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
time, well before a significant number of people are infected?

It\'s puzzled me as well. The only idea I\'ve come up with is that there
is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.

However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak,
which doesn\'t fit with that.

Sylvia.

 

[bitrex]

On 1/27/2022 3:26 PM, Rick C wrote:

On Thursday, January 27, 2022 at 12:56:36 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Rick C <gnuarm.del...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:4871eb80-3a73-4b7a...@googlegroups.com:
On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 5:45:00 PM UTC-4,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
news:d940f6da-4f68-431c...@googlegroups.com:
On Wednesday, January 26, 2022 at 12:00:47 PM UTC-8,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Ed Lee <edward.sh...@gmail.com> wrote in news:88e98142-8239-
45ff-9775-0...@googlegroups.com:
He can\'t handle the real data.
Can you handle a fast moving hunk of lead?

How about we go out in the morning for a duel?

I\'d put one right beyween your eyes from the hip, you pathetic
know nothing real piece of shit.

Childish and primitive respond.

The word is \"response\".

Go take that remedial English course, putz.

Confused... <https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/putz

You fit the \"ineffectual\" part just fine.

Like most people in sed, Ed doesn\'t take you seriously.
Like I give a fat flying fuck what \"Ed\" thinks.
You
seldom say anything worth listening to.
As if your opinion means anything. And no I do not give a fat
flying fuck what a putz like you says, when you waiver from something
bordering on intelligent conversation to this insulting childish
horseshit, you can stick it up your ass and spin on it, child.
You make silly and
superfluous attacks like this stupid example. You call others,
\"child\" and act like one yourself. Why don\'t you grow up and stop
being so silly?
Stop spouting your inane zero reality psych evals.

I guess that\'s just not going to happen. Can you at least play
quietly in the corner and stop disturbing the adults?
And there you go with that childish utter stupidity yet again.

Fuck you, childish punk fuck. You have the mental age of a ten
year old. My fingernail clippings have more on the ball than you do
or ever will.

Going all Phil on us, huh?

You two actually have a lot in common.

Was this u on the beach in Puerto Rico, though:

<https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnewsvideo/comments/sepviw/tensions_rise_in_puerto_rico_as_a_viral_video/>

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid>
wrote:

On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
It\'s puzzled me as well. The only idea I\'ve come up with is that there
is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.

However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak,
which doesn\'t fit with that.

Sylvia.

Containment creates a \"reserve army of the uninfected.\"

(Apologies to uncle Karl)

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

 

[Sylvia Else]

On 29-Jan-22 11:11 am, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <sylvia@email.invalid
wrote:

On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
It\'s puzzled me as well. The only idea I\'ve come up with is that there
is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.

However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak,
which doesn\'t fit with that.

Sylvia.

Containment creates a \"reserve army of the uninfected.\"

(Apologies to uncle Karl)

I certainly don\'t think that WA\'s approach is serving a useful purpose,
at least not unless they can hang on until an Omicron based vaccine can
be distributed there, and that\'s a few months away at a minimum, even if
the Australian government has ordered it (and I can find no information
on that).

Sylvia.

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:08:05 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 12:26:25 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 2:57:45 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 10:42:16 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail..com wrote:
The ppm number may be the more relevant number if comparing different population centers, but while comparing the same population at different times the count is sufficient and essentially the same thing. At least until the pandemic starts killing enough people that it reduces the size of the population significantly.

Yeah, it looks like the death rate will be increasing for a bit longer though.

This makes me wonder about the rate of infection from strains other than omicron. Until the rates of infection get large enough to impact the number of available hosts, viral strains do not compete. I would love to see a curve of US infections that excludes the omicron strain or any similar strains allowing view of delta and the earlier strains so the progression of non-omicron strains can be compared.

I think it would provide useful insight to see if there is indeed a human response to the pandemic when a new strain spreads. It may result in more measures to not spread the disease so that the earlier strains have lower infection rates while the new strain proceeds to grow until the measures are effective enough to lower that. I can\'t think of another reason why the omicron variant would be reversing so quickly. But I have my doubts as I don\'t see where many restrictions have been enacted where I spend time.
Yes, i am watching closely how the two strains are coexisting. During the Delta wave, Xi (D614G) was fairly constant, and almost recovering in Nov, while Delta disappeared. If Omicron can exhaust Xi, by using up all the fuel, perhaps the end is in-sight.

CDC claims Omicron is 99.9%. I am not ready to confirm it yet. According to latest data, Omicron is close to 85%, but Xi is still around 11%.
Fuel? What are you talking about?
Yes, vulnerable people.

That term is used to refer not to people who can catch the virus, but to people who will be suffer morbidity or death. In any event, the total infected by omicron in the US is only around 23 million, still far from enough to impact infection rates of other strains.

If you mean uninfected people, there\'s no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It\'s not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I\'ve seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.
Just like fighting fire with fire, you don\'t need to exhaust all fuel. As long as you stop the path of motion, it could be stopped.

Whatever. I\'m trying to talk about the virus. The omicron variant has not impacted the population enough to cause it\'s own spread to be impacted. Even if it had, the slowdown and reversal would not be this quick. There are other issues at play.

--

Rick C.

--+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
--+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 9:55:52 PM UTC-4, bill....@ieee.org wrote:

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:11:50 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid
wrote:
On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

So what could be a factor that results in a highly infectious strain
rising in rates so rapidly, only to peak and turn around in a short
time, well before a significant number of people are infected?
It\'s puzzled me as well. The only idea I\'ve come up with is that there
is a very high rate of asymptomatic and undetected infections, such that
the infection is really reaching a large proportion of the population.
This neglects the point that people\'s behavior changes when they know that there is a high risk that they will get infected.

I believed this was the active force in prior surges, but you have to make assumptions for that to fit the data. In this case the locations I am familiar with are not showing much difference in results with what would appear to be significantly different reactions. Puerto Rico has been better about mask wearing all along and has taken other measures more recently. There number of new infections is a third of the peak. Virginia has done virtually nothing that I can find and their numbers are approaching a half of the peak. I find nothing Maryland has done and they are at a quarter of the peak.

I\'m not seeing much of a correlation. My personal contact with people in all three locations are that in the mainland states many people are tired of masks and not willing to continue the practice while in Puerto Rico you won\'t find anyone in public without a mask.

However, Western Australia seems to be managing to contain an outbreak, which doesn\'t fit with that.
The West Australian government has made their population very nervous about getting infected - the changes in behavior may kick in earlier and harder there. Apparently hard enough to provide useful protection against even the Omicron strain.
Containment creates a \"reserve army of the uninfected.\"

(Apologies to uncle Karl)
John Larkin hasn\'t really got it into his head that you can vaccinate a population before they have been exposed to the infection. With the Omicron strain this doesn\'t stop them getting infected, but makes them less likely to get infected, and - on average shortens the course of those infections that do happen, and makes it less likely that the vaccinated infected will infect new victims while they are infected.

I\'m not too worried about what a well known idiot thinks of this disease. I\'d rather find information that shows the truth.

--

Rick C.

-+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Anthony William Sloman]

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 10:27:38 PM UTC+11, Martin Brown wrote:

On 29/01/2022 01:55, Anthony William Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 11:11:50 AM UTC+11, John Larkin wrote:
On Sat, 29 Jan 2022 10:00:33 +1100, Sylvia Else <syl...@email.invalid> wrote:
On 26-Jan-22 4:28 pm, Rick C wrote:

<snip>

At the moment Western Australia has got to 90.1% fully vaccinated.

So according to ANU there is nothing to worry about! \"Herd\" immunity has
been reached. I think you will find that is not the case in practice!

Getting to 90% vaccination of the whole population might give you herd immunity.

The 90.1% figure was for eligible adults, We started immunising the five-to-eleven year-olds recently. They are about 10% of the population on their own. We won\'t get to a herd immunity level (if there is one) until we\'ve got most of them vaccinated too.

They rarely get visibly sick when they do get Covid-19, and don\'t stay sick for long, but they are active and do seem to infect other people.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[whit3rd]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 4:11:50 PM UTC-8, John Larkin wrote:

> Containment creates a \"reserve army of the uninfected.\"

Silly.
It ain\'t an army if it won\'t take orders, like, GET VACCINATED.
If it does take orders, it\'s benign to be uninfected.

And, \'containment\' effects a time delay, but does no creation of
any sort. The uninfected were BORN that way, of course.

 

[Martin Brown]

On 29/01/2022 14:12, Rick C wrote:

On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 7:27:38 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown
wrote:

Omicron is slightly less lethal than earlier strains but it is so
much more infectious that without vaccination the body count mounts
up. The new improved BA.2 strain appears to be even more
infectious.

Again, not sure where you are getting your data. Omicron would seem
to be *much* less lethal. It has reached daily infection rates three
times higher than the previous record, but the daily death count is
only a little over half the maximum rate and probably going to peak
very soon. That would imply a death rate of 1/6 of previous strains,
although we won\'t know for sure until the data is properly analyzed.

There are two competing effects.

Omicron is going up against a 66% fully triple vaccinated population
with about 75% double vaccinated in the UK and they are well protected.

So the UK numbers are roughly

Doses % Hospitalised with Covid

2 80 3
1 10 10
0 10 84

An additional 1.5% had previously had a natural Covid infection and so
were not included in the stats. Source BMJ - too early for boosters:

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2306

So 84% of hospitalised patients come from the 10% of people who are
unvaccinated in the UK. Whilst just 3% were double vaccinated.

I\'m not sure what the numbers are in the US but I would be surprised if
the risk of harm were different. It is just that you have ~40% of
unvaccinated refuseniks who also engage in risky behaviour.

Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096

That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
percentage of the population has been previously infected.

It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.

Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
workers.

In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
large cities.

That is what I\'m seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don\'t
seem to correlate with the results.

Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.

neighbours have had it in the past couple of months. My mate who
had it in the initial salvo March 2019 caught it again at a family
Xmas lunch.

How does he trace it to an individual event?

He is fairly cautious (having had it fairly badly once) and there was a
family member who tested LF positive the very next day - the following
day they all tested PCR positive. Only one got away without catching it
on Xmas Day. They spent Boxing Day queuing for Covid PCR tests...

Basically it is a rerun of last winter but with very much higher
peak infection levels and case IFR down by more than an order of
magnitude.

Sorry, I can\'t find what IFR means. \"Interim Final Rule (IFR)\"
doesn\'t seem to be it. Certainly not \"instrument flight rules\".

Infection Fatality Ratio - the odds that if you catch it you die.
More than 10x lower if you are fully vaccinated.

I haven\'t seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
two. The \"booster\" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
protection as the vaccine\'s effects seem to diminish after some
months.

The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.

Also the evidence from Israel is that homogeneous vaccination with
entirely Pfizer is a decidedly suboptimal strategy.

I\'m not convinced that boosting the entire population in the first world
is a sensible thing to do but I wasn\'t going to refuse my dose.

UK data suggests that there is very little difference between
vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The
unvaccinated are more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst
many vaccinated people end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic
carriers.

This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people
every week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of
asymptomatic cases that would be totally missed by the test on
symptoms regime.

https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard


Not sure what you mean by \"onward transmission\" unless you are
referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the
disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave
it to you?

It tells you what fraction of apparently healthy people in that random
representative sample are infected with Covid in the weekly snapshot.

The other testing is all biassed towards suspected cases who are showing
symptoms or being admitted to hospital or employed in a sensitive
position where routine testing is mandated.

After triple vaccination the optimum strategy for anyone who is
reasonably fit may well be to catch Covid whilst the immune
response from the vaccine is at maximum effectiveness. That
combination of vaccinated and surviving a Covid infection might
just provide enough long term immunity to make it an endemic
disease we can live with.

The vaccine works well to prevent serious illness but the way
Omicron is propagating in the UK\'s highly vaccinated population
suggests that the only way out of this is to vaccinate and then let
it run right through the nominally protected population. Too bad
for those immunosuppressed individuals for whom the vaccine doesn\'t
work.

The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming \"Covid Hoax\". They fully
deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid does.

Hoax... what is wrong with people?

It is painted on many of the motorway supports in Newcastle.
They are a very vocal minority that torch 5G masts etc.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Rick C]

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 5:31:15 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 29/01/2022 14:12, Rick C wrote:
On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 7:27:38 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown
wrote:

Omicron is slightly less lethal than earlier strains but it is so
much more infectious that without vaccination the body count mounts
up. The new improved BA.2 strain appears to be even more
infectious.

Again, not sure where you are getting your data. Omicron would seem
to be *much* less lethal. It has reached daily infection rates three
times higher than the previous record, but the daily death count is
only a little over half the maximum rate and probably going to peak
very soon. That would imply a death rate of 1/6 of previous strains,
although we won\'t know for sure until the data is properly analyzed.
There are two competing effects.

Omicron is going up against a 66% fully triple vaccinated population
with about 75% double vaccinated in the UK and they are well protected.

So the UK numbers are roughly

Doses % Hospitalised with Covid

2 80 3
1 10 10
0 10 84

An additional 1.5% had previously had a natural Covid infection and so
were not included in the stats. Source BMJ - too early for boosters:

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2306

So 84% of hospitalised patients come from the 10% of people who are
unvaccinated in the UK. Whilst just 3% were double vaccinated.

I\'m not sure what the numbers are in the US but I would be surprised if
the risk of harm were different. It is just that you have ~40% of
unvaccinated refuseniks who also engage in risky behaviour.

None of this addresses the issue of lethality of the omicron strain.

Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096

That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
percentage of the population has been previously infected.
It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.

??? I think a high reinfection rate with the omicron strain says the prior infections are not very good at preventing this infection.

Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
workers.

In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
large cities.

That is what I\'m seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don\'t
seem to correlate with the results.
Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.

It\'s hard to draw any conclusions when other countries are seeing very low (in comparison) new infection rates. South Africa is seeing infection rates around 15% of the peak value and it\'s too early to say if that is a bottom.

neighbours have had it in the past couple of months. My mate who
had it in the initial salvo March 2019 caught it again at a family
Xmas lunch.

How does he trace it to an individual event?
He is fairly cautious (having had it fairly badly once) and there was a
family member who tested LF positive the very next day - the following
day they all tested PCR positive. Only one got away without catching it
on Xmas Day. They spent Boxing Day queuing for Covid PCR tests...
Basically it is a rerun of last winter but with very much higher
peak infection levels and case IFR down by more than an order of
magnitude.

Sorry, I can\'t find what IFR means. \"Interim Final Rule (IFR)\"
doesn\'t seem to be it. Certainly not \"instrument flight rules\".
Infection Fatality Ratio - the odds that if you catch it you die.
More than 10x lower if you are fully vaccinated.

Far too many abbreviations. It\'s ok to say what you mean. No need to obscure your statements by using such shorthand.

I haven\'t seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
two. The \"booster\" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
protection as the vaccine\'s effects seem to diminish after some
months.
The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.

The 6 month wane is the reason for the \"booster\" shot. Without taking into account timing, the data above doesn\'t say anything about the utility of the booster in preventing an infection from omicron.

Also the evidence from Israel is that homogeneous vaccination with
entirely Pfizer is a decidedly suboptimal strategy.

I\'m not convinced that boosting the entire population in the first world
is a sensible thing to do but I wasn\'t going to refuse my dose.
UK data suggests that there is very little difference between
vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The
unvaccinated are more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst
many vaccinated people end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic
carriers.

This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people
every week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of
asymptomatic cases that would be totally missed by the test on
symptoms regime.

https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard


Not sure what you mean by \"onward transmission\" unless you are
referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the
disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave
it to you?
It tells you what fraction of apparently healthy people in that random
representative sample are infected with Covid in the weekly snapshot.

Sorry, I\'m not following. \"Onward transmission\" means people who have asymptomatic infections?

The other testing is all biassed towards suspected cases who are showing
symptoms or being admitted to hospital or employed in a sensitive
position where routine testing is mandated.
After triple vaccination the optimum strategy for anyone who is
reasonably fit may well be to catch Covid whilst the immune
response from the vaccine is at maximum effectiveness. That
combination of vaccinated and surviving a Covid infection might
just provide enough long term immunity to make it an endemic
disease we can live with.

The vaccine works well to prevent serious illness but the way
Omicron is propagating in the UK\'s highly vaccinated population
suggests that the only way out of this is to vaccinate and then let
it run right through the nominally protected population. Too bad
for those immunosuppressed individuals for whom the vaccine doesn\'t
work.

The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming \"Covid Hoax\". They fully
deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid does.

Hoax... what is wrong with people?
It is painted on many of the motorway supports in Newcastle.
They are a very vocal minority that torch 5G masts etc.

The 5G thing is pretty much insane. Whatever.

--

Rick C.

+-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:

The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were picketing in
Newcastle yesterday claiming \"Covid Hoax\". They fully deserve what they get if
it kills them. Stupid is as stupid does.

Ditto Bristol

 

[server]

Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:st5s9m$1vf$1@dont-email.me:

On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:
The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming \"Covid Hoax\". They
fully deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid
does.

Ditto Bristol

The problem is that the clouds persists AND WORSE, variants WILL occur.

If we all vax\'d up and staved it off from society, we would not have to
worry about the odds of a new variant. There would be no idiots out
there to produce them. But Nooooooo... The cult denies the truth.

The unvaccinated are not just a danger to themselves, they are a
danger to the entire race since all it takes is a single variant that
got the trick down to invading the cell despite a vaccination and
sickens and kills at a higher rate and we\'ll all die as every bed in
every hospital and E-clinic... everywhere fills up with death.

Y\'all Trumpers are stupid fucks.

 

[Rick C]

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 6:48:13 AM UTC-5, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Tom Gardner <spam...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
news:st5s9m$1vf$1...@dont-email.me:
On 29/01/22 11:27, Martin Brown wrote:
The antivaxxers and refuseniks can take their chances. They were
picketing in Newcastle yesterday claiming \"Covid Hoax\". They
fully deserve what they get if it kills them. Stupid is as stupid
does.

Ditto Bristol
The problem is that the clouds persists AND WORSE, variants WILL occur.

If we all vax\'d up and staved it off from society, we would not have to
worry about the odds of a new variant. There would be no idiots out
there to produce them. But Nooooooo... The cult denies the truth.

The unvaccinated are not just a danger to themselves, they are a
danger to the entire race since all it takes is a single variant that
got the trick down to invading the cell despite a vaccination and
sickens and kills at a higher rate and we\'ll all die as every bed in
every hospital and E-clinic... everywhere fills up with death.

Y\'all Trumpers are stupid fucks.

That\'s not completely true. Even with everyone being vaccinated, it is not clear that the virus would be halted. Certainly there would be fewer hospitalizations and deaths, but there are still many infections among the vaccinated, even before omicron.

More than anything else, this pandemic shows the limitations of science and medicine.

--

Rick C.

+-+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+-+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[server]

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:f0051349-2bb5-4a1e-a72a-e9abec1353aan@googlegroups.com:

Certainly there would be fewer hospitalizations and deaths, but
there are still many infections among the vaccinated, even
before omicron.

Which came from unvaccinated unmasked utter idiots.

And the number is not \"many\".

 

[Martin Brown]

On 30/01/2022 11:04, Rick C wrote:

On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 5:31:15 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
On 29/01/2022 14:12, Rick C wrote:
On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 7:27:38 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown
wrote:

Omicron is slightly less lethal than earlier strains but it is so
much more infectious that without vaccination the body count mounts
up. The new improved BA.2 strain appears to be even more
infectious.

Again, not sure where you are getting your data. Omicron would seem
to be *much* less lethal. It has reached daily infection rates three
times higher than the previous record, but the daily death count is
only a little over half the maximum rate and probably going to peak
very soon. That would imply a death rate of 1/6 of previous strains,
although we won\'t know for sure until the data is properly analyzed.
There are two competing effects.

Omicron is going up against a 66% fully triple vaccinated population
with about 75% double vaccinated in the UK and they are well protected.

So the UK numbers are roughly

Doses % Hospitalised with Covid

2 80 3
1 10 10
0 10 84

An additional 1.5% had previously had a natural Covid infection and so
were not included in the stats. Source BMJ - too early for boosters:

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2306

So 84% of hospitalised patients come from the 10% of people who are
unvaccinated in the UK. Whilst just 3% were double vaccinated.

I\'m not sure what the numbers are in the US but I would be surprised if
the risk of harm were different. It is just that you have ~40% of
unvaccinated refuseniks who also engage in risky behaviour.

None of this addresses the issue of lethality of the omicron strain.

However this does and best guesses are that against the unvaccinated the
Omicron strain is about as lethal as the original wild form. eg

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/how-mild-is-omicron-really-69610

It is much less dangerous to the majority vaccinated people.

Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096

That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
percentage of the population has been previously infected.
It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.

??? I think a high reinfection rate with the omicron strain says the prior infections are not very good at preventing this infection.

Indeed but it also says that they are in harms way a lot more often.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/232698/omicron-largely-evades-immunity-from-past/

Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
workers.

In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
large cities.

That is what I\'m seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don\'t
seem to correlate with the results.
Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.

It\'s hard to draw any conclusions when other countries are seeing very low (in comparison) new infection rates. South Africa is seeing infection rates around 15% of the peak value and it\'s too early to say if that is a bottom.

Although the disease may well have saturated their urban centres by now.
Africa has a much younger demographic so you would expect case IFR to be
lower there than in say Japan, Italy or the UK where the demographics is
weighted more toward the elderly.

I haven\'t seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
two. The \"booster\" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
protection as the vaccine\'s effects seem to diminish after some
months.
The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.

The 6 month wane is the reason for the \"booster\" shot. Without taking into account timing, the data above doesn\'t say anything about the utility of the booster in preventing an infection from omicron.

There were younger people still getting their second dose when Omicron
first arrived.
It didn\'t appear to stop them from catching Omicron.

After 90 days or so all bets seem to be off for naturally acquired
immunity preventing reinfection by Covid. Vaccines maybe hold out a
little longer but they mainly prevent serious illness.

Imperial study estimates that we will typically catch endemic Covid on
average every 2-3 years for the foreseeable future.

UK data suggests that there is very little difference between
vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The
unvaccinated are more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst
many vaccinated people end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic
carriers.

This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people
every week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of
asymptomatic cases that would be totally missed by the test on
symptoms regime.

https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard


Not sure what you mean by \"onward transmission\" unless you are
referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the
disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave
it to you?
It tells you what fraction of apparently healthy people in that random
representative sample are infected with Covid in the weekly snapshot.

Sorry, I\'m not following. \"Onward transmission\" means people who have asymptomatic infections?

Their testing methodology finds people in the population who are
infected but don\'t yet know about it. Here is a bit more detail :

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/233381/fall-coronavirus-infections-england-have-stalled/

Onward transmission means what it says. Evidence is that swabs from both
vaccinated and unvaccinated infected individuals have roughly the same
amount of virus in them. The vaccinated are less likely to have symptoms
and be more likely to be out and about, the unvaccinated may stay
infective for longer but are more likely to by poorly and at home.

The two competing factors roughly seem to cancel out. IOW vaccination
cannot prevent onward Omicron transmission in a population all it can do
is limit the damage done to individuals by catching the infection.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Rick C]

On Tuesday, February 1, 2022 at 10:54:25 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:

On 30/01/2022 11:04, Rick C wrote:
On Sunday, January 30, 2022 at 5:31:15 AM UTC-5, Martin Brown wrote:
On 29/01/2022 14:12, Rick C wrote:
On Saturday, January 29, 2022 at 7:27:38 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown
wrote:

Omicron is slightly less lethal than earlier strains but it is so
much more infectious that without vaccination the body count mounts
up. The new improved BA.2 strain appears to be even more
infectious.

Again, not sure where you are getting your data. Omicron would seem
to be *much* less lethal. It has reached daily infection rates three
times higher than the previous record, but the daily death count is
only a little over half the maximum rate and probably going to peak
very soon. That would imply a death rate of 1/6 of previous strains,
although we won\'t know for sure until the data is properly analyzed.
There are two competing effects.

Omicron is going up against a 66% fully triple vaccinated population
with about 75% double vaccinated in the UK and they are well protected.

So the UK numbers are roughly

Doses % Hospitalised with Covid

2 80 3
1 10 10
0 10 84

An additional 1.5% had previously had a natural Covid infection and so
were not included in the stats. Source BMJ - too early for boosters:

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2306

So 84% of hospitalised patients come from the 10% of people who are
unvaccinated in the UK. Whilst just 3% were double vaccinated.

I\'m not sure what the numbers are in the US but I would be surprised if
the risk of harm were different. It is just that you have ~40% of
unvaccinated refuseniks who also engage in risky behaviour.

None of this addresses the issue of lethality of the omicron strain.
However this does and best guesses are that against the unvaccinated the
Omicron strain is about as lethal as the original wild form. eg

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/how-mild-is-omicron-really-69610

It is much less dangerous to the majority vaccinated people.

Sometimes it seems you just like arguing for the sake of arguing. With 53% fully vaccinated and 61% having at least 1 dose, that would seem to be the relevant group. So the omicron variant is much less dangerous overall.

Interesting UK statistic is that 2 out of every 3 people infected
by Omicron had previously tested positive with another strain
earlier in the pandemic. It is still running at about Covid 1%
infected here. (It has been as high as 5% for nearly 4 weeks)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60132096

That alone is not useful information. You would need to know what
percentage of the population has been previously infected.
It is very surprising that the reinfection rate is that high. It hints
that some people are much more prone to catching it than others.

??? I think a high reinfection rate with the omicron strain says the prior infections are not very good at preventing this infection.
Indeed but it also says that they are in harms way a lot more often.

Huh? You seem to like jumps in logic. Whatever.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/232698/omicron-largely-evades-immunity-from-past/
Many of them are young party animals and in England the pubs and
clubs are all open and most are at least double vaccinated. The
other category is people who are occupationally exposed like medics
and some customer facing public service and/or essential front line
workers.

In NI, Scotland and Wales such venues are closed and life has been
much more restricted since Boxing Day (eases this weekend). The
really strange thing is that it is impossible to see much
difference between the two strategies. It was worse in England but
only by as much as you would expect for it containing more very
large cities.

That is what I\'m seeing in the US. The actions we are taking don\'t
seem to correlate with the results.
Yes. It is odd. The infection is still rapidly spreading through young
adults and families with school age children and academia in general.
But it backed off the peak of 200k+ remarkably quickly by comparison
with the very slow tail of earlier waves. OTOH we now seem to be stuck
at 100k/day as a baseline new case level - not really very good.

It\'s hard to draw any conclusions when other countries are seeing very low (in comparison) new infection rates. South Africa is seeing infection rates around 15% of the peak value and it\'s too early to say if that is a bottom.
Although the disease may well have saturated their urban centres by now.
Africa has a much younger demographic so you would expect case IFR to be
lower there than in say Japan, Italy or the UK where the demographics is
weighted more toward the elderly.

Again, not actually relevant to what I said. Rates in South Africa are well down from their peak. This has nothing to do with IFR.

I haven\'t seen evidence a third shot provides better protection than
two. The \"booster\" shot is supposed to *extend* the period of
protection as the vaccine\'s effects seem to diminish after some
months.
The antibodies wane pretty quickly over 6-8 months but the UK
experiments seem to show that the third vaccination is pretty much
essential to provide any protection against Omicron. They also showed
that AZ,AZ,AZ was inferior to AZ,AZ,mRNA. And there were hints that was
the optimal configuration. AZ seems to generate better killer T-cells
but Pfizer provokes a very much higher antibody response as a booster.

The 6 month wane is the reason for the \"booster\" shot. Without taking into account timing, the data above doesn\'t say anything about the utility of the booster in preventing an infection from omicron.
There were younger people still getting their second dose when Omicron
first arrived.
It didn\'t appear to stop them from catching Omicron.

Do you have any real data on that? Or just your personal observations?

After 90 days or so all bets seem to be off for naturally acquired
immunity preventing reinfection by Covid. Vaccines maybe hold out a
little longer but they mainly prevent serious illness.

Imperial study estimates that we will typically catch endemic Covid on
average every 2-3 years for the foreseeable future.
UK data suggests that there is very little difference between
vaccinated and unvaccinated in terms of onward transmission. The
unvaccinated are more likely to be at home and bed ridden whilst
many vaccinated people end up as barely symptomatic or asymptomatic
carriers.

This shows up in the REACT study which tests a random 100k people
every week which shows a higher prevalence in the community of
asymptomatic cases that would be totally missed by the test on
symptoms regime.

https://www.wa.gov.au/government/covid-19-coronavirus/covid-19-coronavirus-vaccination-dashboard


Not sure what you mean by \"onward transmission\" unless you are
referring to catching the disease rather than transmitting the
disease to others. How would random testing be able to tell who gave
it to you?
It tells you what fraction of apparently healthy people in that random
representative sample are infected with Covid in the weekly snapshot.

Sorry, I\'m not following. \"Onward transmission\" means people who have asymptomatic infections?
Their testing methodology finds people in the population who are
infected but don\'t yet know about it. Here is a bit more detail :

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/233381/fall-coronavirus-infections-england-have-stalled/

Onward transmission means what it says. Evidence is that swabs from both
vaccinated and unvaccinated infected individuals have roughly the same
amount of virus in them. The vaccinated are less likely to have symptoms
and be more likely to be out and about, the unvaccinated may stay
infective for longer but are more likely to by poorly and at home.

The two competing factors roughly seem to cancel out. IOW vaccination
cannot prevent onward Omicron transmission in a population all it can do
is limit the damage done to individuals by catching the infection.

So please tell me what \"onward transmission\" means in simple English. None of this is of value until you define that term.

--

Rick C.

---- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Ed Lee]

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:41:17 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:08:05 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 12:26:25 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 2:57:45 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 10:42:16 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
The ppm number may be the more relevant number if comparing different population centers, but while comparing the same population at different times the count is sufficient and essentially the same thing. At least until the pandemic starts killing enough people that it reduces the size of the population significantly.

Yeah, it looks like the death rate will be increasing for a bit longer though.

This makes me wonder about the rate of infection from strains other than omicron. Until the rates of infection get large enough to impact the number of available hosts, viral strains do not compete. I would love to see a curve of US infections that excludes the omicron strain or any similar strains allowing view of delta and the earlier strains so the progression of non-omicron strains can be compared.

I think it would provide useful insight to see if there is indeed a human response to the pandemic when a new strain spreads. It may result in more measures to not spread the disease so that the earlier strains have lower infection rates while the new strain proceeds to grow until the measures are effective enough to lower that. I can\'t think of another reason why the omicron variant would be reversing so quickly. But I have my doubts as I don\'t see where many restrictions have been enacted where I spend time.
Yes, i am watching closely how the two strains are coexisting. During the Delta wave, Xi (D614G) was fairly constant, and almost recovering in Nov, while Delta disappeared. If Omicron can exhaust Xi, by using up all the fuel, perhaps the end is in-sight.

CDC claims Omicron is 99.9%. I am not ready to confirm it yet. According to latest data, Omicron is close to 85%, but Xi is still around 11%.
Fuel? What are you talking about?
Yes, vulnerable people.
That term is used to refer not to people who can catch the virus, but to people who will be suffer morbidity or death. In any event, the total infected by omicron in the US is only around 23 million, still far from enough to impact infection rates of other strains.
If you mean uninfected people, there\'s no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It\'s not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I\'ve seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.
Just like fighting fire with fire, you don\'t need to exhaust all fuel. As long as you stop the path of motion, it could be stopped.
Whatever. I\'m trying to talk about the virus. The omicron variant has not impacted the population enough to cause it\'s own spread to be impacted. Even if it had, the slowdown and reversal would not be this quick. There are other issues at play.

It\'s slowing down in dense population area. The peak was around 85% Omicron, but Xi is coming back at 25%. I believe Xi is doing most of the killings.

Week:
1: (30893) | 7% 92% 1%
2: (13434) | 3% 76% 16%
3: (15960) | 4% 52% 38%
4: ( 7619) | 2% 32% 59%
5: ( 6773) | 12% 19% 60%
6: ( 8068) | 3% 8% 85%
7: ( 7273) | 6% 19% 68%

Column:
1: Samples
2: Xi Class B
3: Xi Class C
4: Omicron

No evidence of Xi Class A (Alpha/Wuhan) or Delta.

 

[Rick C]

On Thursday, February 3, 2022 at 11:21:59 AM UTC-5, Ed Lee wrote:

On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:41:17 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 6:08:05 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 12:26:25 PM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail..com wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 2:57:45 PM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
On Friday, January 28, 2022 at 10:42:16 AM UTC-8, gnuarm.del...@gmail.com wrote:
The ppm number may be the more relevant number if comparing different population centers, but while comparing the same population at different times the count is sufficient and essentially the same thing. At least until the pandemic starts killing enough people that it reduces the size of the population significantly.

Yeah, it looks like the death rate will be increasing for a bit longer though.

This makes me wonder about the rate of infection from strains other than omicron. Until the rates of infection get large enough to impact the number of available hosts, viral strains do not compete. I would love to see a curve of US infections that excludes the omicron strain or any similar strains allowing view of delta and the earlier strains so the progression of non-omicron strains can be compared.

I think it would provide useful insight to see if there is indeed a human response to the pandemic when a new strain spreads. It may result in more measures to not spread the disease so that the earlier strains have lower infection rates while the new strain proceeds to grow until the measures are effective enough to lower that. I can\'t think of another reason why the omicron variant would be reversing so quickly. But I have my doubts as I don\'t see where many restrictions have been enacted where I spend time.
Yes, i am watching closely how the two strains are coexisting. During the Delta wave, Xi (D614G) was fairly constant, and almost recovering in Nov, while Delta disappeared. If Omicron can exhaust Xi, by using up all the fuel, perhaps the end is in-sight.

CDC claims Omicron is 99.9%. I am not ready to confirm it yet. According to latest data, Omicron is close to 85%, but Xi is still around 11%..
Fuel? What are you talking about?
Yes, vulnerable people.
That term is used to refer not to people who can catch the virus, but to people who will be suffer morbidity or death. In any event, the total infected by omicron in the US is only around 23 million, still far from enough to impact infection rates of other strains.
If you mean uninfected people, there\'s no evidence we have even approximated this yet. It\'s not even clear as to which strains provide immunity to which other strains that I\'ve seen. I have read that some funny things are going on with omicron in that regard.
Just like fighting fire with fire, you don\'t need to exhaust all fuel.. As long as you stop the path of motion, it could be stopped.
Whatever. I\'m trying to talk about the virus. The omicron variant has not impacted the population enough to cause it\'s own spread to be impacted. Even if it had, the slowdown and reversal would not be this quick. There are other issues at play.
It\'s slowing down in dense population area. The peak was around 85% Omicron, but Xi is coming back at 25%. I believe Xi is doing most of the killings.

Week:
1: (30893) | 7% 92% 1%
2: (13434) | 3% 76% 16%
3: (15960) | 4% 52% 38%
4: ( 7619) | 2% 32% 59%
5: ( 6773) | 12% 19% 60%
6: ( 8068) | 3% 8% 85%
7: ( 7273) | 6% 19% 68%

Column:
1: Samples
2: Xi Class B
3: Xi Class C
4: Omicron

No evidence of Xi Class A (Alpha/Wuhan) or Delta.

When you work with percentages, it tells you a lot less than working with absolute numbers. But the data you have is strange and you can\'t explain to anyone else how you come up with it, so...

--

Rick C.

---+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
---+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209