COVID-19 (Wuhan Novel Coronavirus) Pandemic Master Thread

[Lurker]

True for Elementary/high schoolers, not necessarily true for college students on a large campus.

Maybe. But I would also assume that they come in contact with fewer high risk people, and the economic benefit to vaccinating them first is smaller. At this point in the game, I'd say that they also likely have a high infection rate already, lessening the impact on the immediate/short-term Rt.

[AsherO]

Maybe. But I would also assume that they come in contact with fewer high risk people, and the economic benefit to vaccinating them first is smaller. At this point in the game, I'd say that they also likely have a high infection rate already, lessening the impact on the immediate/short-term Rt.

All good points. I think it’s too late to end the pandemic quickly. At this point in the game we’re in damage control mode.

I think a big enough percentage of the younger population won’t voluntarily pursue vaccination, to the point that herd immunity won’t be an option until measures are put in place that make vaccinating the path of least resistance. With the individual rights granted by our constitution, I have no idea what that would look like or how it can be enacted.

[Lurker]

All good points. I think it’s too late to end the pandemic quickly. At this point in the game we’re in damage control mode.

I think a big enough percentage of the younger population won’t voluntarily pursue vaccination, to the point that herd immunity won’t be an option until measures are put in place that make vaccinating the path of least resistance. With the individual rights granted by our constitution, I have no idea what that would look like or how it can be enacted.

I'm not looking for herd immunity. I'm looking for an Rt under 1 heading into the third wave. Ultimately, all I have are theories and the only ones who get to hear them are my wife and DDF. I just think our current approach may prove to be a big mistake when we look back on it in a few months.

[AsherO]

I'm not looking for herd immunity. I'm looking for an Rt under 1 heading into the third wave. Ultimately, all I have are theories and the only ones who get to hear them are my wife and DDF. I just think our current approach may prove to be a big mistake when we look back on it in a few months.

I’m confused. Isn’t Rt a dynamic number by definition, with it increasing on the up curve and decreasing on the down curve? If yes, what does it matter if it dips below zero before the third wave, once it starts growing exponentially? Is there evidence that starting at a lower number pre-spike significantly affects the peak?

Are there any countries/regions with vaccination strategies primarily targeting those who are most likely to spread the virus? (Can’t include countries where COVID isn’t widespread, then it’s an apples to oranges comparison as I would agree it makes much more sense in those places to vaccinate those likely to spread COVID).

[Lurker]

I’m confused. Isn’t Rt a dynamic number by definition, with it increasing on the up curve and decreasing on the down curve? If yes, what does it matter if it dips below zero before the third wave, once it starts growing exponentially? Is there evidence that starting at a lower number pre-spike significantly affects the peak?

Sorry, bad choice of words. As I understand it, the numbers coming down after the second wave means the Rt is under 1. The beginning of a third wave would signify the Rt rising above 1. My goal would be to give the infection fewer places to go as we come down off of wave 2, making wave 3 less impactful. Vaccinating highly mobile people would possibly prevent the Rt from climbing too high, and help bring an end to the pandemic sooner.

[AsherO]

Sorry, bad choice of words. As I understand it, the numbers coming down after the second wave means the Rt is under 1. The beginning of a third wave would signify the Rt rising above 1. My goal would be to give the infection fewer places to go as we come down off of wave 2, making wave 3 less impactful. Vaccinating highly mobile people would possibly prevent the Rt from climbing too high, and help bring an end to the pandemic sooner.

Interesting theory. The issue the way I see it is that the most risk-/COVID-averse people (of any age group) are the ones most eager to get vaccinated, and they’re also the least likely to spread it.

[PlatinumGuy]

wait until there is a vaccine approved for children and every child must be vaccinated before being allowed back in school, mark my words.

Pfizer is expecting to have results from the kids trial in April.

[Dan]

Pfizer is expecting to have results from the kids trial in April.

Only 12-15 I think?

[AsherO]

Only 12-15 I think?

Lower rate rate of illness for children below 12 hopefully correlates to a lower rate of transmission as well.

[PlatinumGuy]

There's no perfect solution. There have been 41.2 million doses of the vaccine administered so far. There are between 80-85 million people between the ages of 25-45. My personal opinion is that we'd be much closer to stopping this pandemic with half of that demo partially vaccinated with a single shot than we are now, with 10-20 million seniors vaccinated. There would most definitely be a cost in the short term, but my feelings about what may be coming over the next few months leads me to believe the cost will be much, much greater with our current approach.

Partial vaccination won't achieve anything, the vaccine is only ~60% effective and it's countered by the vaccinated population being more than 2x less careful, thus overall spread goes up and not down.

There are at least 30m vaccinated seniors already, and nursing homes alone are stillabout 1/3rd of the deaths.

Our goal is to relieve stress on hospitals and that's accomplished by vaccinating as many seniors as possible and shrinking the at risk pool.

[Lurker]

Partial vaccination won't achieve anything, the vaccine is only ~60% effective and it's countered by the vaccinated population being more than 2x less careful, thus overall spread goes up and not down.

I'm not sure that math makes sense. People can be as reckless as they want if the prevalence is super low.

There are at least 30m vaccinated seniors already, and nursing homes alone are stillabout 1/3rd of the deaths.

I don't think these numbers are accurate. I'm not sure that we've fully vaccinated 30 million people yet, and a large percentage of those who have been vaccinated are healthcare workers. And the death stats are completely useless, as there is 3-6 weeks between infection and a reported (recorded) death. The numbers we're currently seeing mostly predate the first vaccinations.

Our goal is to relieve stress on hospitals and that's accomplished by vaccinating as many seniors as possible and shrinking the at risk pool.

I appreciate that. I think that lowering the prevalence also keeps the seniors and high risk people out of the hospital. I also don't think that the stress on the hospitals is as big a concern right now, considering we're at 60% of our hospitalizations from 5 weeks ago. We have 4-6 weeks before the third wave. We've administered 42.4M doses. If we ramp up as expected and we can give another 100M+ people a single dose, even at 60%~ effectiveness, I think that completely changes the game.

[avromie7]

Partial vaccination won't achieve anything, the vaccine is only ~60% effective and it's countered by the vaccinated population being more than 2x less careful, thus overall spread goes up and not down.

There are at least 30m vaccinated seniors already, and nursing homes alone are stillabout 1/3rd of the deaths.

Our goal is to relieve stress on hospitals and that's accomplished by vaccinating as many seniors as possible and shrinking the at risk pool.

I don't think the vaccine is showing the number of deaths yet, it'll probably be another couple of months before vaccines have a significant effect on deaths.

[avromie7]

Lower rate rate of illness for children below 12 hopefully correlates to a lower rate of transmission as well.

None of that will satisfy the unions, if they can come up with an excuse they will.

[PlatinumGuy]

I don't think the vaccine is showing the number of deaths yet, it'll probably be another couple of months before vaccines have a significant effect on deaths.

Of course it is. The first vaccine was given in the US on Dec 15, effective ~10 days later by Dec 25. That's high risk people removed from the pool of potential dead, 45 days ago. Again, ~2m NH residents account for 1/3 of current deaths, those are being removed by vaccines from Dec as we speak.

I'm not sure that math makes sense. People can be as reckless as they want if the prevalence is super low.

The prevalence won't go down. If you vaccinate people with ~60% efficacy, and in turn they spread it 2x as much by being less cautious, the prevalence will go up.

We know the natural R is around 3-4, and with the current precautions it hovers around 0.8-1.5.

[avromie7]

Of course it is. The first vaccine was given in the US on Dec 15, effective ~10 days later by Dec 25. That's high risk people removed from the pool of potential dead, 45 days ago. Again, ~2m NH residents account for 1/3 of current deaths, those are being removed by vaccines from Dec as we speak.

Most NH residents were not vaccinated on Dec 15, I don't know if any were. Especially in older people, it can take more than 10 days for the vaccine to be effective.

[PlatinumGuy]

Most NH residents were not vaccinated on Dec 15, I don't know if any were. Especially in older people, it can take more than 10 days for the vaccine to be effective.

Some were, and those effects are already showing. Let's say it takes 20 days instead of 10, we are still 35 days away, and vaccinating staff helps as much as vaccinating the residents.

[Lurker]

Of course it is. The first vaccine was given in the US on Dec 15, effective ~10 days later by Dec 25. That's high risk people removed from the pool of potential dead, 45 days ago. Again, ~2m NH residents account for 1/3 of current deaths, those are being removed by vaccines from Dec as we speak.

Patient #1 was vaccinated on Dec 15, not 30 million seniors. Most vaccinations have occurred within the last 14 days. That's not going to show up until late Feb or March.

The prevalence won't go down. If you vaccinate people with ~60% efficacy, and in turn they spread it 2x as much by being less cautious, the prevalence will go up.

We know the natural R is around 3-4, and with the current precautions it hovers around 0.8-1.5.

We have no idea what the natural Rt is with the number of people with current antibodies. Add in 120M vaccinated people, even at 60%, and that number drops tremendously. You're also assuming everyone drops every precaution. That doesn't happen, especially among those with high risk contacts.

[avromie7]

Some were, and those effects are already showing. Let's say it takes 20 days instead of 10, we are still 35 days away, and vaccinating staff helps as much as vaccinating the residents.

How long does it typically take from contracting the virus until death for a NH resident? I can't imagine we'd see much of the effect yet, in a month or 2 we'll see much more.

[PlatinumGuy]

Patient #1 was vaccinated on Dec 15, not 30 million seniors. Most vaccinations have occurred within the last 14 days. That's not going to show up until late Feb or March.

Again, 1/3 of current deaths are from a pool of 3M LTC residents. That means you can remove 1/3 of the deaths by vaccinating 3M people (at least 1m have natural immunity anyways). I don't know when that happened, but the sooner it does the better and the effects are already showing.

Add in 120M vaccinated people

You're being very inconsistent with your proposed numbers. At 120m people, if you vaccinate spreaders you may slow the spread, but if you vaccinate 120m high risk people Covid isn't a problem anymore insofar as hospitalizations and death.

How long does it typically take from contracting the virus until death for a NH resident? I can't imagine we'd see much of the effect yet, in a month or 2 we'll see much more.

About 3 weeks. Your imagination needs to catch up to reality. All vaccines administered before ~Jan 20 are already reflected in new death counts, and dramatically so.

[PlatinumGuy]

How long does it typically take from contracting the virus until death for a NH resident?

Symptom onset to death is around 7 days

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/928729/S0803_CO-CIN_-_Time_from_symptom_onset_until_death.pdf