Will Audax as we know it recover from this?

[Geriatricdolan]

I would like to think that Audax will again return to some sort of normality in the future, but probably not for a couple of years at least and not until most of the World's population has been vaccinated.  Until then I think it will be as quoted above.  Sadly, I cant see LEL or PBP happening anytime soon!

That IF vaccines allow return to life "as normal". Assuming they cut the number of hospitalisations by 90%, you might still end up having large numbers of people in hospital in the absence of basic respiratory hygiene.
That shouldn't be a problem for most events, but as you say, events relying on large number of cyclists to be viable, with many sharing dormitories might be harder to organise.

[FifeingEejit]

There's a point of diminishing returns, there's always going to be a point at which some people are going to be thrown to the lions.


Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

[Davef]

We have had events for years despite the fact they spread the flu and many people die of that. Once less people are dying of covid than the flu it would be unreasonable not to return to normal. That is not the case yet, but we are fairly rapidly moving that way.

[FifeingEejit]

Influenza does't cause the same level of long term conditions and medium term illness in the working age population either.

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

[Geriatricdolan]

We have had events for years despite the fact they spread the flu and many people die of that. Once less people are dying of covid than the flu it would be unreasonable not to return to normal. That is not the case yet, but we are fairly rapidly moving that way.

Funny you say that, as I was thinking the same, but differently. I don't think we will ever be allowed to go to work with a flu and Paracetamol, like it was acceptable before... now that we know that spreading viruses actually kill people.
I honestly didn't know that almost 10,000 people die of flu every year, despite vaccines and all... if you asked me last year, I would have thought maybe a few hundred frail elderly, nowhere near 10K.

Now that we are all very aware of what respiratory viruses do, we are not going back to that way of living, it just won't be socially acceptable

[Geriatricdolan]

There's a point of diminishing returns, there's always going to be a point at which some people are going to be thrown to the lions.


Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

Of course, but...

Without a vaccine, for every 10,000 infections, roughly you have 500 people in hospital and 100 deaths, with the vaccine you have the same for 100,000 infections.
So, if instead of having 1 in 50 with the disease as we did in January, you have 1 in 5, you are still at emergency point and in need to lock down.
It's not unthinkable to have 1 in 5 infected in the absence of any restriction.

[FifeingEejit]

Yes, hence why the public vaccination programme isn't only Interested in high risk workers and those over 65, as it is with flu.



Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

[Geriatricdolan]

Yes, hence why the public vaccination programme isn't only Interested in high risk workers and those over 65, as it is with flu.



Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

yes, but the 90% applies across the board. Everything is factored in, immunity included... the maths are really quite simple and you can only keep a lid on the thing if you implement some form of restriction (masks? No large gatherings? Some basic social distancing on public transport?).

Basically, while now it's the plague, next winter it will be a flu on steroids... if you don't do anything, you still will get 50,000 deaths, which I would like to think it's not acceptable

[Davef]

Yes, hence why the public vaccination programme isn't only Interested in high risk workers and those over 65, as it is with flu.



Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

yes, but the 90% applies across the board. Everything is factored in, immunity included... the maths are really quite simple and you can only keep a lid on the thing if you implement some form of restriction (masks? No large gatherings? Some basic social distancing on public transport?).

Basically, while now it's the plague, next winter it will be a flu on steroids... if you don't do anything, you still will get 50,000 deaths, which I would like to think it's not acceptable

Where are you getting 90% from ?
From the trial data I believe some vaccinated people got covid but non sufficiently badly to require hospitalisation.

The vaccination rate is generally very high - high 90s.

Add to this that prevalence will be dramatically reduced due to the vastly reduced effective R.

Now obviously there is the possibility of new variants evolving but without that I would predict hospitalisation due to covid in the 3rd wave will be 1 or 2% of at the peak of 2nd.

There will be societal changes in the same way that in the Far East mask wearing has continued decades and as you say isolating when ill is likely to become normal behaviour.

[FifeingEejit]

Oops never posted my follow up.

In mid-January I was receiving regular ward closure e-mails and at one point there was a general call for any available staff to be redeployed, that's how bad it was.

A few weeks later the wards were all but empty and there's rarely been a closure due to Covid getting into non-covid areas.

That's the impact of the vaccinaction programme when it was targeting those over 65 and frontline staff.

Its also why the Scottish release of restrictions has been significantly sped up while still appearing cautious.
And why Johnston can be bullish about no more lockdown and most restrictions being released by the end of June.

It's also why an EU politician was able to say rather sourly, that we may delight in our success at vaccination but at the cost of being stuck on our little island. (my phrasing)


There'll be a point where we can lib people suffering from covid in the infectious diseases unit rather than have them cripple the hospitals

Sent from my BKL-L09 using Tapatalk

[Geriatricdolan]

Where are you getting 90% from ?
From the trial data I believe some vaccinated people got covid but non sufficiently badly to require hospitalisation.

Recent UK data showed the efficacy of Pfizer + AZ vaccines in reducing hospitalisation and death was about 90%.

Of course, if it was 99% that would be another order of magnitude and basically put a natural lid to the disease, but at the moment it is not.

Another way to stop the disease altogether would be to have a very effective treatment at home, like a very good antiviral drug... that combined with the vaccine would stop it

[salar55]

Spanish flu ? It lasted about 2 years and how many people travelled out of the home town/city to spread the virus. A jab every year or so to protect us in the future ?

[Hot Flatus]

^ probably this.

I'm not informed enough to understand the differences between covid and Spanish Flu, but I do understand the notion that if covid is allowed to spread in unvaccinated parts of the world, then eventually it may mutate into a form that evades current vaccines. In fact, it already has to some extent.  So, it seems like a yearly vaccination, with a seasonal picking off the frail is likely.

[Davef]

Recent UK data showed the efficacy of Pfizer + AZ vaccines in reducing hospitalisation and death was about 90%.

Do you have a link to this ? The most recent I have seen from AZ is from US study

AstraZeneca has updated the efficacy result of its coronavirus vaccine trial in the US, after health officials insisted they wanted to include the latest information.
The Anglo-Swedish firm has now adjusted the efficacy rate of its vaccine from 79% to 76%.
Further data from the US trial showed efficacy among the over 65s rose from 80% to 85%.
AstraZeneca said it now looked forward to getting US regulatory approval.
The company said the trial results confirm the vaccine "is highly effective in adults" and it remains 100% effective at preventing severe cases of the disease.

[Geriatricdolan]

Recent UK data showed the efficacy of Pfizer + AZ vaccines in reducing hospitalisation and death was about 90%.

Do you have a link to this ? The most recent I have seen from AZ is from US study

AstraZeneca has updated the efficacy result of its coronavirus vaccine trial in the US, after health officials insisted they wanted to include the latest information.
The Anglo-Swedish firm has now adjusted the efficacy rate of its vaccine from 79% to 76%.
Further data from the US trial showed efficacy among the over 65s rose from 80% to 85%.
AstraZeneca said it now looked forward to getting US regulatory approval.
The company said the trial results confirm the vaccine "is highly effective in adults" and it remains 100% effective at preventing severe cases of the disease.

They were numbers presented by Whitty a couple of weeks ago at one of the press conferences... wouldn't know where to source them.

But even if it was 100% effective, which it won't be... if the uptake is 90%, then you still have 10% of the population with no immunity, so again, you need some form of measures to protect them.

To go back to the point, it's about whether you see organisers prepared to stuff 150 riders in a dormitory with 40 beds... I see it as unlikely

[cygnet]

^ probably this.

I'm not informed enough to understand the differences between covid and Spanish Flu, but I do understand the notion that if covid is allowed to spread in unvaccinated parts of the world, then eventually it may mutate into a form that evades current vaccines. In fact, it already has to some extent.  So, it seems like a yearly vaccination, with a seasonal picking off the frail is likely.

Spanish Flu is referenced quite regularly, I find little mention of the late 1950s flu pandemic (apart from a thread (by LWaB?) that I can't find right now). The lack of publicity of this event makes it hard to try and understand what happened then.

[cygnet]

Recent UK data showed the efficacy of Pfizer + AZ vaccines in reducing hospitalisation and death was about 90%.

Do you have a link to this ? The most recent I have seen from AZ is from US study

AstraZeneca has updated the efficacy result of its coronavirus vaccine trial in the US, after health officials insisted they wanted to include the latest information.
The Anglo-Swedish firm has now adjusted the efficacy rate of its vaccine from 79% to 76%.
Further data from the US trial showed efficacy among the over 65s rose from 80% to 85%.
AstraZeneca said it now looked forward to getting US regulatory approval.
The company said the trial results confirm the vaccine "is highly effective in adults" and it remains 100% effective at preventing severe cases of the disease.

They were numbers presented by Whitty a couple of weeks ago at one of the press conferences... wouldn't know where to source them.

But even if it was 100% effective, which it won't be... if the uptake is 90%, then you still have 10% of the population with no immunity, so again, you need some form of measures to protect them.

To go back to the point, it's about whether you see organisers prepared to stuff 150 riders in a dormitory with 40 beds... I see it as unlikely

My bold.

Do you?

You assume 100% saturation of the virus. How realistic is that?
Do you define immunity as
1) kills the virus or
2) presents no issues to the infected person?

[Hot Flatus]

^ probably this.

I'm not informed enough to understand the differences between covid and Spanish Flu, but I do understand the notion that if covid is allowed to spread in unvaccinated parts of the world, then eventually it may mutate into a form that evades current vaccines. In fact, it already has to some extent.  So, it seems like a yearly vaccination, with a seasonal picking off the frail is likely.

Spanish Flu is referenced quite regularly, I find little mention of the late 1950s flu pandemic (apart from a thread (by LWaB?) that I can't find right now). The lack of publicity of this event makes it hard to try and understand what happened then.

I didn't know about it until covid encouraged me to research other pandemics. Est. 30,000 UK deaths, so way below current Covid, 70-116k deaths in US. But, 1-4 million worldwide (estimated) so just as most British people are blissfully unaware of the Bengal famine which resulted in about 3 million deaths (half a Holocaust) let alone the part played by Britain in creating the conditions for it to occur, or the 10k Kenyans who died trying to rid their country of the Britishin the 1950s, I'd suggest that the lack of awareness of the worldwide death toll of the 50's flu epidemic comes from the same place. It happened largely in countries populated by people whose lives are not as valuable as ours.

[salar55]

Ensuring distance integrity for audax events in Scotland was patchy prior to 2010 when distances started being subject to an independent peer review.  Before that, it was the organiser acting alone who set the event distance. 

It was common knowledge that many events were underdistance and significantly so in some cases. 

Its no great surprise that a number of long standing events and their most ardent supporters have melted away from the audax scene in the last decade or so.

I wonder what age these ex audaxers were in the eighties, many were racing cyclists at a crossroads and decided Audax would keep them fit without killing themselves. Another issue is that the records are not complete. I was told always add to the distance as you will always be pestered by someone who's cateye is reading short of distance and feels that they have been short changed. 😄

[salar55]

^ probably this.

I'm not informed enough to understand the differences between covid and Spanish Flu, but I do understand the notion that if covid is allowed to spread in unvaccinated parts of the world, then eventually it may mutate into a form that evades current vaccines. In fact, it already has to some extent.  So, it seems like a yearly vaccination, with a seasonal picking off the frail is likely.

Spanish Flu is referenced quite regularly, I find little mention of the late 1950s flu pandemic (apart from a thread (by LWaB?) that I can't find right now). The lack of publicity of this event makes it hard to try and understand what happened then.

I didn't know about it until covid encouraged me to research other pandemics. Est. 30,000 UK deaths, so way below current Covid, 70-116k deaths in US. But, 1-4 million worldwide (estimated) so just as most British people are blissfully unaware of the Bengal famine which resulted in about 3 million deaths (half a Holocaust) let alone the part played by Britain in creating the conditions for it to occur, or the 10k Kenyans who died trying to rid their country of the Britishin the 1950s, I'd suggest that the lack of awareness of the worldwide death toll of the 50's flu epidemic comes from the same place. It happened largely in countries populated by people whose lives are not as valuable as ours.

UK population was about 40 million in 1920.

[Hot Flatus]

And 52 million in 1958, when the 50's flu epidemic hit.

That is the epidemic I am referring to in the post you quote.

[MikeFromLFE]

I wonder what age these ex audaxers were in the eighties, many were racing cyclists at a crossroads and decided Audax would keep them fit without killing themselves.

Its a point well made. I came into Audax late 80s, and my peak (small foothill really) was mid 90s, and my recollection is that, yes, there was a preponderance of older men on 'fast touring' type machines (and very few female riders).
This is almost certainly where the 'saddlebag & mudguard' image of Audaxers comes from (if it's still a thing).

[LittleWheelsandBig]

PBP only dropped the mandatory mudguard requirement in 1995 and national organisations generally took a few years to follow suit.

https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=117680 is the thread about cycling and previous epidemics.

[Geriatricdolan]

Do you define immunity as
1) kills the virus or
2) presents no issues to the infected person?

Neither... immunity is if you have been exposed to the virus/vaccine relatively recently and have antibodies... that will lower risk to some extent, but it won't be neither 1) nor 2)

[Hot Flatus]

I wonder what age these ex audaxers were in the eighties, many were racing cyclists at a crossroads and decided Audax would keep them fit without killing themselves.

Its a point well made. I came into Audax late 80s, and my peak (small foothill really) was mid 90s, and my recollection is that, yes, there was a preponderance of older men on 'fast touring' type machines (and very few female riders).
This is almost certainly where the 'saddlebag & mudguard' image of Audaxers comes from (if it's still a thing).

I did my first audax in 2006. I was on a carbon racing bike. Told it wasn't "suitable for audax" by more than one other rider.  Don't recall seeing any other CF race machines. Did the Mille Cymru on it 3.5 years later. Was one of the roughly 50% of entrants who actually finished it (with comparative ease I might add) 

I think steel tourers are now the minority by a long way, and heavy canvas Carradice is giving way to nylon bikepacking kit. Attitudes are changing and the narrow exclusionary mindset is almost dead. Its bloody great seeing more women, and doubly great seeing women who kick everyone else's arse.  Long may it continue to evolve.

Nothing stays the same forever, audax will and must change appropriately, but there are many elements that I hope remain, especially the culture of volunteerism.