D&D and the rising pandemic

[Zardnaar]

Australia has had first Covid related death in 10 months.

Australia: New South Wales confirms first Covid-related death in 10 months

A woman in her 90s died in Sydney, as state officials warn of a surge in new infections.

www.bbc.com

Currently in lockdown, delta variant 5 million people in Sydney iirc.

Most of the reasonably safe places have had breakouts last few weeks (Taiwan, Vietname, Fiji, Australia).

 

[CapnZapp]

Because they express pretty much the same thing. And, in fact, the real number is 1) not a universal number, and is highly situation-dependent, and 2) likely to mislead people into risky action, because they don't understand odds and risk worth a good gosh-darn.

If they say it is 93% effective, that means you are 93% less likely to get it than a similar person in the same circumstances. And by "get it" they don't mean "become infected and detectable by some particular test". They mean, "become symptomatic", actually get sick.

But how likely is that, exactly? There are too many variables for anyone to tell you that. The more abstract number can be found in statistics over large groups, the detailed version for an individual cannot be.

I am not sure this is correct.

I have seen reports that give significantly different numbers for "getting infected" (the state most important for transmitting the disease) and "getting hospitalized or otherwise seriously inconvenienced" (the state most important for the individual).

On the order of perhaps 85% and 98% respectively for a vaccine that's reported at 85% but really protects 98% against serious complications.

The reason I'm frustrated with news sources is that while the first number is arguably more important for humanity as a whole, the news never make that prioritization any other time, so why now? News are sold to individuals, why not report the important number for the reader?!

 

[CapnZapp]

Australia has had first Covid related death in 10 months.

Australia: New South Wales confirms first Covid-related death in 10 months

A woman in her 90s died in Sydney, as state officials warn of a surge in new infections.

www.bbc.com

Currently in lockdown, delta variant 5 million people in Sydney iirc.

Less then 10% fully vaccinated. Ouch.

I truly believed Australia was one of the rich industrialized countries. I would have guessed roughly half the population (and certainly every 90-year old!) was fully or partially vaccinated... Do you know what the reason is?

Most of the reasonably safe places have had breakouts last few weeks (Taiwan, Vietname, Fiji, Australia).

There are no safe places.

 

[Zardnaar]

Less then 10% fully vaccinated. Ouch.

I truly believed Australia was one of the rich industrialized countries. I would have guessed roughly half the population (and certainly every 90-year old!) was fully or partially vaccinated... Do you know what the reason is?


There are no safe places.

NZs reasonably safe

Reason we don't have high vaccination rates is vaccine availability. Buying thems not the problem.

Other nations also need them more as well. Plus we're helping out several small states.

Stuff

i.stuff.co.nz

Is it a communication thing overseas? US/UK media more sensationalist from what I've seen/read.


Government's always been (reasonably) clear about goals and strategy. It's over when it's over.

 

[Hussar]

Less then 10% fully vaccinated. Ouch.

I truly believed Australia was one of the rich industrialized countries. I would have guessed roughly half the population (and certainly every 90-year old!) was fully or partially vaccinated... Do you know what the reason is?


There are no safe places.

I wish we were half here in Japan. I believe that we're at 25% for the first shot.

I get to make a reservation tomorrow for my first shot. Not actually go mind you. Just make the reservation. Actual time to be announced.

 

[Umbran]

I have seen reports that give significantly different numbers for "getting infected" (the state most important for transmitting the disease) and "getting hospitalized or otherwise seriously inconvenienced" (the state most important for the individual).

Of course you are seeing different numbers, because asymptomatic infection is a thing. Preventing all infection was not the measure of effectiveness in development of the vaccines, though. And preventing transmission was not measured in development at all. The vaccines are extremely good at keeping you out of the hospital, very good at keeping you from getting sick. They also happen to be good at keeping you from getting infected at all, and preventing transmission (which are only slightly related).

The reason I'm frustrated with news sources is that while the first number is arguably more important for humanity as a whole

Because it is significantly harder to do. It calls for finding thousands of vaccinated people (a representative sample of the population - across all ages, sexes, races, socio-economic classes, and so on), and following up with them to do tests at frequent and regular intervals, when they have no other reason to interact with the healthcare system. You need a similar population to test "don't get sick", but follow up can be done on the phone.

Plus, it is only arguably the most important number. "You don't get sick" is an excellent number. It includes "you don't die" and "you don't wind up in the hospital" as well as "you don't go on a ventilator", for example, all of which is extremely relevant to society when looking at a pandemic - it basically means "you will be no burden to the healthcare system", which is a major concern to a system facing greter volume than it can handle.

News are sold to individuals, why not report the important number for the reader?!

Oh, while "don't get infected" is arguably most important to society, it is NOT the most important to the individual. Individuals don't give a rat's patoot if they get infected - they care about getting seriously sick or dying.

 

[CapnZapp]

Reason we don't have high vaccination rates is vaccine availability. Buying thems not the problem.

Sorry but several European countries are at 50% fully vaccinated.

Just saying that if vaccine availability is lower for you, the EU, the US and the UK did something your government did not.

My surprise was because I had a fuzzy notion AUS and NZ are at similar levels of industrial capacity, vaccine purchasing power and what not.

10% is more akin to a much MUCH less developed country than I took AUSNZ to be. Naturally I wondered if there was consensus around the reason.

I don't know, complacency due to the successful travel bubble, leaders not taking the pandemic seriously or whatnot.

I don't know, which is why I'm asking

 

[CapnZapp]

Of course you are seeing different numbers, because asymptomatic infection is a thing. Preventing all infection was not the measure of effectiveness in development of the vaccines, though. And preventing transmission was not measured in development at all. The vaccines are extremely good at keeping you out of the hospital, very good at keeping you from getting sick. They also happen to be good at keeping you from getting infected at all, and preventing transmission (which are only slightly related).



Because it is significantly harder to do. It calls for finding thousands of vaccinated people (a representative sample of the population - across all ages, sexes, races, socio-economic classes, and so on), and following up with them to do tests at frequent and regular intervals, when they have no other reason to interact with the healthcare system. You need a similar population to test "don't get sick", but follow up can be done on the phone.

Plus, it is only arguably the most important number. "You don't get sick" is an excellent number. It includes "you don't die" and "you don't wind up in the hospital" as well as "you don't go on a ventilator", for example, all of which is extremely relevant to society when looking at a pandemic - it basically means "you will be no burden to the healthcare system", which is a major concern to a system facing greter volume than it can handle.



Oh, while "don't get infected" is arguably most important to society, it is NOT the most important to the individual. Individuals don't give a rat's patoot if they get infected - they care about getting seriously sick or dying.

My point is because of vaccines with a reported percentage of maybe 75% or 80%.

In Pfizer's case, the difference between a figure of maybe 96% and 99% (examples, I don't know the precise numbers) is so little that the population regards them as essentially the same.

But when a vaccine percentage number like 80% gets bandied about in the press I want to shout "the interesting number is 98%!!"

Yes 80% intuitively comes across as low. But it is also not relevant.

It has only contributed to scepticism against Astra Zeneca, for instance.

It would have been infinitely more valuable if the general public got the choice between 98% and 99%.

I'm not talking about blood clots. Just generally venting my frustration at the press using a number that isn't important, basically.

 

[Zardnaar]

Sorry but several European countries are at 50% fully vaccinated.

Just saying that if vaccine availability is lower for you, the EU, the US and the UK did something your government did not.

My surprise was because I had a fuzzy notion AUS and NZ are at similar levels of industrial capacity, vaccine purchasing power and what not.

10% is more akin to a much MUCH less developed country than I took AUSNZ to be. Naturally I wondered if there was consensus around the reason.

I don't know, complacency due to the successful travel bubble, leaders not taking the pandemic seriously or whatnot.

I don't know, which is why I'm asking

EU and USA manufacture vaccines we don't.

Government's can block exports or directly or indirectly pressure the manufacturers to supply them first.

Australia is running ads for vaccinations you can't get while here they think by the end of the year you can get one.

Other countries need the vaccines more as well. Downside is if delta gets out of control.

Australia richer than NZ and I think the average Australian household is richer than USA (not GDP per Capita). Better wealth distribution.

So it's mostly supply issues and perhaps mono vaccine option due to the way healthcare is funded/applied. They selected Pfizer here that's your only option.

 

[Eltab]

EU and USA manufacture vaccines we don't.

That lack can be fixed.

It would not be a bad thing if some wealthy nation not normally thought of as "cutting edge of technology" were to start research into "what medicines kill viruses?" It looks like we are going to face animal-to-human transmission of something new every decade or so. Having a solid foundation of options - which need not be optimised - available at need would be a plus.