Cases continue to climb in Bolton, Blackburn & Bedford, (known B.1.617.2 hotspots), though rate of acceleration in Bolton has slowed slightly, and test positivity there is flat, suggesting surge testing is playing a role in 📈
Continued increase in those areas would be a concern, and it’s worth noting rises in neighbouring Bury and Burnley too.
B.1.617.2 not believed to be dominant in either of these areas, but Sanger data is now 12 days old so that may have changed.
Nonetheless, the same chart shows that high prevalence of B.1.617.2 is by no means a guarantee of prolonged resurgence.
Hounslow, Nottingham and Sefton are all places where B.1.617.2 is believed to be dominant, and yet their upticks reversed and now appear as brief blips.
To be clear, there have been behaviour changes and some small-scale, light-touch restrictions in some of these locations, so drops in cases aren’t necessarily entirely organic.
But nor would any of these examples be described as anything approaching local lockdowns.
I’d sum up that chart as:
• Numbers still climbing in North West, where we know B.1.617.2 is prevalent. Trends haven’t worsened in recent days but nor have they improved. Not terrible, but not great
• Several other B.1.617.2 hotspots faring better: no definitive pattern overall
Second chart:
Across all of the B.1.617.2 hotspots experiencing resurgences, case rises are still largely confined to younger age-groups. This is very good news.
We should get more definitive data on how the vaccines fare against B.1.617.2 in the coming days and weeks, but for now I’d say the continued absence of evidence is beginning to feel to me like evidence of absence [of substantial immune escape].
Other tidbits:
• New PHE technical report on variants expected tomorrow. That should tell us more than the last few days of 4pm dashboard updates have done
• Ramp-up of vaccinations in Bolton is very impressive. More first doses on Tuesday than any time since January
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I would ask people to read what follows carefully. Vaccine efficacy is a nuanced topic and the numbers here need to be interpreted in their proper context.
The data, which the FT has seen, suggest first dose offers around 35% less protection against symptomatic infection with B.1.617.2 compared to B.1.1.7, but after two doses the relative drop is only 7%.
The figures are based on pooled data from the Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines
First, today’s Sanger data on variants at local level. On the surface, this doesn’t look good. Cases of non-B.1.617.2 are in decline, but those red peaks are the variant sending overall rates climbing
To state the obvious: that pattern is not what we want to see, and if things keep going in that direction, we could see national cases rapidly climb again.
But there are a couple of reasons to pause before assuming we’re going to see those peaks steepen and proliferate.
First, the Sanger data is sequences with specimen date before May 8.
We’ve got more days of data since then. It’s not broken down by variant, but it can show us what’s happened to total cases in those areas since May 8.
Answer: growth rates have slowed, in some cases reversed
If B.1.617.2 does prove to be more transmissible, we may need to keep things like indoor masking and tests for entry to large events for a while beyond June 21.
My thoughts:
• No, that wouldn't mean "lockdown never ends". No, it wouldn't be curtailing freedom. It would be a very small compromise for a very large benefit
• As vaccination rates continue to climb further into the year, those few remaining measures could then be eased
• It's still entirely possible any transmissibility advantage will prove to be much smaller than some have estimated. In that event, June 21 plans can proceed as planned
Here's the latest from @AnnaSophieGross and I on the Indian variant, digging into how serious a threat it is currently believed to pose ft.com/content/eb158a…
One thing I think it's important to be clear about is that public health officials and epidemiologists are looking extremely closely at this stuff.
To the extent that policy has not followed one particular path or another, it's because the people looking at the evidence have yet to determine where it points. This is the scientific method, not complacency.
It’s early days, but there are signs that the vaccines may be working against the Indian variant B.1.617.2
Resurgences in Bolton & Blackburn are so far confined to younger people. Cases remain low & flat among the mostly-vaccinated older population.
(We must also note that in the past, the higher levels of social mixing you typically see among younger people have led cases to rise among them first before climbing in the older groups, so vaccines are not the only thing that can cause this. We need this pattern to hold)
What about in India, where the variant originated and is believed to be dominant?
Age-stratified data on cases & deaths here is very patchy. But what little there is also hints at a vaccine effect: share of cases/deaths taken up by the elderly (the most vaccinated) is falling 📉
And now time for a thread where I complain about persistent misreporting of breakthrough infections and vaccine escape:
First, the fact that a small portion of fully vaccinated people can still get infected is not news. That a tiny portion of fully vaccinated people *die* of Covid is not news.
Vaccines greatly reduce your risk of infection, transmission, illness & death. They do not eliminate it.
This is why it’s been so frustrating seeing tweets go viral for screenshotting vaccine trial results with "deaths: 0" in them.
In a trial of hundreds or a couple of thousand people, you may get zero deaths. In the real world (315m people now fully vaccinated) you don’t.