Yes, I read that. Check this one:
* https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/uk-covid-19-strategy-questions-unanswered-coronavirus-outbreak
Antony Costello is an absolute legend - I'd put him in a similar class to Paul Fine (I think they're both great, different reasons though).
Cheers,
-- Andrei
On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 05:05:31PM +0000, Dale, Helen [helda42] wrote:
> Date: Sun, 15 Mar 2020 17:05:31 +0000
> From: "Dale, Helen [helda42]" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: Andrei Morgan <[log in to unmask]>, Greg Dropkin <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: RE: Herd immunity - why 60%?
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/15/epidemiologist-britain-herd-immunity-coronavirus-covid-19
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dale, Helen [helda42]
> Sent: 15 March 2020 11:46
> To: 'Andrei Morgan' <[log in to unmask]>; 'Greg Dropkin' <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: RE: Herd immunity - why 60%?
>
> https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/world/europe/coronavirus-britain-boris-johnson.html
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dale, Helen [helda42]
> Sent: 15 March 2020 11:28
> To: 'Andrei Morgan' <[log in to unmask]>; Greg Dropkin <[log in to unmask]>
> Cc: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: RE: Herd immunity - why 60%?
>
> I don't think herd immunity is actually the PHE strategy. The original press conference was focused on flattening the curve. Herd immunity will be an inevitable outcome with continued spreading. I think they have confused and scared everyone talking about 60% + like it's an objective...I don't think this is their actual strategy. I think they were concerned about aggressive measures leading to secondary peaks next winter - according to my friend that is a public health trainee... and sustaining social isolation...
> Although this doesn't account for the fact that we just need to buy time, and early action will have a much bigger effect.
>
> Either way they are not responding quickly enough or with strict enough measures, so I am not defending their actions in any way, I think it's stupid and irresponsible! Just the explanations given to me by my colleague....
>
> Helen
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrei Morgan <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: 14 March 2020 22:50
> To: Greg Dropkin <[log in to unmask]>
> Cc: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Herd immunity - why 60%?
>
> Hi Greg and all,
>
> Yes, I agree with you - I think (am hoping?!) this is going to backfire quite spectacularly on the conservatives. A silver lining we might not want...
>
> I've now put my code up on the web:
>
> * https://0xacab.org/asm/covid19
>
> I will reiterate it is *very* crude - the number of deaths is circa 10 million or more for the UK, which is clearly ridiculous. The main point I was trying to make was about "flattening the curve" - I want to show how this relates to ITU bed occupation at some point, but don't have time at present. I'm also not retired and guess I should do some 'real'
> work at some point ;-)
>
> Anyway, would love to hear your thoughts about it. I don't have any data to hand about long term immunity - my guess is it's pretty high, but it really depends on the disease. For instance, we all have *some* immunity to the flu, but different strains mutate and circulate etc, so that level is different every year.
>
> Tomorrow I'm on call, I'm not quite sure if/when I'll be able to catch up with the flood of emails that is bound to come to this list. But great to see the list being used in productive ways!
>
> Best wishes,
>
> -- Andrei
>
> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 10:15:31PM -0000, Greg Dropkin wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 22:15:31 -0000 (UTC) hi
> >
> > even without any modelling, if they think 60% is the threshold they
> > are aiming for over 30m adults to be infected, which means over
> > 300,000 deaths at 1%, and 100,000 deaths at 0.3%. Which you would have
> > thought is political suicide, once the public realises.
> >
> > if time permits I'll try your model and send you some R code to
> > compare
> >
> > Do you have data for other diseases on the percentage of survivors who
> > get long term immunity?
> >
> > Greg
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Paul Fine is amazing, he taught me loads about infectious disease
> > > epidemiology and was the one who got me interested in the subject
> > > (albeit, as a secondary interest/hobby - my main focus is perinatal
> > > and non-communicable disease epidemiology). Interestingly enough, he
> > > started life as a veterinarian before getting into human epi...
> > >
> > > Anyway, the UK's herd immunity idea is, put mildly, bollocks. I've
> > > written another post today in which I've started to explain some of
> > > the flaws with the UK strategy although I haven't completely
> > > elaborated them
> > > - don't want to freak people out too much all at once! Please feel
> > > free to comment, either directly on the article or on list or just
> > > directly to me via email. Both articles I've written are on my site:
> > >
> > > * https://www.andreimorgan.net
> > >
> > > Best wishes,
> > >
> > > -- Andrei
> > >
> > > On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 09:25:02PM +0000, Thomas Cox wrote:
> > >> I think the first two paragraphs should have made that clear.
> > >>
> > >> Abstract
> > >>
> > >> The term “herd immunity” is widely used but carries a variety of
> > >> meanings [1–7]. Some authors use it to describe the proportion
> > >> immune among individuals in a population. Others use it with
> > >> reference to a particular threshold proportion of immune
> > >> individuals that should lead to a decline in incidence of
> > >> infection. Still others use it to refer to a pattern of immunity
> > >> that should protect a population from invasion of a new infection.
> > >> A common implication of the term is that the risk of infection
> > >> among susceptible individuals in a population is reduced by the
> > >> presence and proximity of immune individuals (this is sometimes
> > >> referred to as “indirect protection” or a “herd effect”). We
> > >> provide brief historical, epidemiologic, theoretical, and pragmatic public health perspectives on this concept.
> > >>
> > >> Though coined almost a century ago [8], the term “herd immunity”
> > >> was not widely used until recent decades, its use stimulated by the
> > >> increasing use of vaccines, discussions of disease eradication, and
> > >> analyses of the costs and benefits of vaccination programs. An
> > >> important milestone was the recognition by Smith in 1970 [9] and
> > >> Dietz in 1975 [10] of a simple threshold theorem—that if immunity
> > >> (ie, successful vaccination) were delivered at random and if
> > >> members of a population mixed at random, such that on average each
> > >> individual contacted R0 individuals in a manner sufficient to
> > >> transmit the infection [11, 12], then incidence of the infection
> > >> would decline if the proportion immune exceeded (R0 − 1)/R0, or 1 –1/R0. This is illustrated in Figures 1 and 2.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Thomas Cox PhD RN
> > >> [log in to unmask]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Saturday, March 14, 2020, 05:13:28 PM EDT, John Whittington
> > >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> At 20:59 14/03/2020, Thomas Cox wrote:
> > >> >and yet...
> > >> >https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/52/7/911/299077
> > >>
> > >> After a very quick skip through, that all seems to be about
> > >> immunological herd immunity in the sense I described it. Could you
> > >> perhaps direct me to the part which you were wanting to bring to my
> > >> attention? Thanks
> > >>
> > >> Kind Regards,
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> John
> > >>
> > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> Dr John Whittington, Voice: +44 (0) 1296 730225 Mediscience
> > >> Services Fax: +44 (0) 1296 738893 Twyford Manor, Twyford,
> > >> E-mail: [log in to unmask] Buckingham MK18 4EL, UK
> > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ******************************************************
> > >> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will
> > >> go only to the sender of this message.
> > >> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> > >> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to
> > >> [log in to unmask]
> > >> Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the
> > >> sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of
> > >> views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find
> > >> out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and
> > >> read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to
> > >> visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
> > >> *******************************************************
> > >
> > > --
> > > Andrei Morgan MRCPCH, MSc, PhD (Epidemiology / Neonatology)
> > > https://www.andreimorgan.net
> > >
> > > Honorary Clinical Lecturer,
> > > Department of Neonatology,
> > > Institute for Women's Health,
> > > University College London
> > >
> > >
> > > ******************************************************
> > > Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your message will
> > > go only to the sender of this message.
> > > If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> > > 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically to
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > > Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the
> > > sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of
> > > views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find
> > > out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and
> > > read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to
> > > visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
> > > *******************************************************
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Andrei Morgan MRCPCH, MSc, PhD (Epidemiology / Neonatology) https://www.andreimorgan.net
>
> Honorary Clinical Lecturer,
> Department of Neonatology,
> Institute for Women's Health,
> University College London
>
--
Andrei Morgan MRCPCH, MSc, PhD (Epidemiology / Neonatology)
https://www.andreimorgan.net
Honorary Clinical Lecturer,
Department of Neonatology,
Institute for Women's Health,
University College London
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|
