Coronavirus Thread

[Legend_in_blue]

47 minutes ago, Buce said:

 

No he fvcking didn't; why do you continually misrepresent what people are actually saying?

 

Here is what was said (I've bolded and upsized the salient points to prevent you being confused by too many words. Just read them slowly, I'm sure you'll be ok):

 

“If you have enough cases per day, the resulting number of hospitalisations we think could still pose potentially major challenges for any health system,” Ferguson added. In the report released on Friday, the scientists say booster doses would be “critical” to mitigate the impact of future Omicron waves in countries with high levels of circulating virus.

Worst-case scenario modelling by the team, which assumes no change in people’s behaviour and no other interventions being brought in, suggests the UK could experience more than 5,000 deaths a day at the peak of the Omicron wave, but Ghani said this was “an illustration of the need to act rather than a prediction”.

Any and all.

 

This sounds like a Red Bull get out of jail free card to me.

 

Prediction/projection, whatever, the headline is panic inducing and is not required.  It'll also be hopelessly inaccurate like the other garbage he churns out.

[st albans fox]

28 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Putting Omicron to one side, delta seems to have hammered us in this winter which was always going to be a genuine threat. Annoyingly we aren't going to have a chance to assess just how bad and whether the road map of this year and a pretty much normal way of life again could be achieved year round and not this seasonal restrictions and lockdowns that are going to occur again this year. It won't be 2 weeks either, it will be very much the same as last winter.

could be 2, could be 4

the rumour that they are leaving hospitality outdoors (to avoid having to pay anything out ) means that it’s a very lax lockdown coming …. by the end of the year they will have data on percentages of omicron leading to hospitalisations so will adjust their call based on that. 

[st albans fox]

Just now, Legend_in_blue said:

Any and all.

 

This sounds like a Red Bull get out of jail free card to me.

 

Prediction/projection, whatever, the headline is panic inducing and is not required.  It'll also be hopelessly inaccurate like the other garbage he churns out.

Isn’t the headline down to the media - I would stop bashing the scientists - they’re just doing their job - it’s the politicians that make the calls based on science, economy and general well being. 
 

as one said on the radio the other day - I’m just processing the data and being a scientist. I can’t make a call on what to do based on the science. I can just tell you what I think as a scientist based on the science. the govt have to decide what to do. 

[Corky]

3 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

Rumours from the Times off a January circuit break for two weeks. In part still allowing hospitality business to open but outdoor only (probably the worst outcome for them). 
 

I don’t think circuit breakers work at all; if you assume the idea behind lockdown/circuit breakers is to lessen the load on the NHS, you need at least four weeks because of the lag 

This one could allow for the booster jab immunity to kick in. If the drive continues in the next two weeks that should hopefully bring most to the immunity needed by mid-January.

 

We're starting to see people change their behaviour (lots of bookings cancelled) and I think a lot are prioritising what they do. Schools are shut now so children mixing will be reduced. Working from home has increased. Christmas- New Year tends to be a quieter period. Even the football matches being called off has stopped hundreds of thousands of people travelling this week and weekend.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Isn’t the headline down to the media - I would stop bashing the scientists - they’re just doing their job - it’s the politicians that make the calls based on science, economy and general well being. 
 

as one said on the radio the other day - I’m just processing the data and being a scientist. I can’t make a call on what to do based on the science. I can just tell you what I think as a scientist based on the science. the govt have to decide what to do. 

Criticism of scientists and the method they use on this matter is fine...

 

....as long as it is accompanied by a proven better method of understanding the world in general and this matter in particular. Otherwise it seems rather hollow.

 

I've not seen any such proof.

[Legend_in_blue]

3 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Isn’t the headline down to the media - I would stop bashing the scientists - they’re just doing their job - it’s the politicians that make the calls based on science, economy and general well being. 
 

as one said on the radio the other day - I’m just processing the data and being a scientist. I can’t make a call on what to do based on the science. I can just tell you what I think as a scientist based on the science. the govt have to decide what to do. 

 

He isn't processing data though.  He's making assumptions which his modelling is based on.

 

South Africa are processing data though but it doesn't appear to be carrying much weight due to a combination of the season, younger people and "it's only been 3 weeks".

[kenny]

2 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

I’ve had similar dealings with the NHS as Kenny. 
 

NHS trusts are notoriously slow paying you on construction projects. When you are a huge construction magnate like Balfour Beattie, that’s okay. It hurts when you are far smaller because you are dependent on cash flow and making sure sub-contractors getting paid. I believe that’s what he’s getting at. 
 

Quite often the funding of that nature is via capital hence if it doesn’t get spent by the end of the financial year, it’s returned back to the pot. 

This is all true, though it is better since the government legislated to stop slow payments of subcontractors. 

 

It's more a general point, that I believe we spend reasonably well on health but that the cash is not reasonably spent. My big criticism of the government and health is that it hasn't done anything to address the inefficiency of the spending. 

 

I suspect that it's something that can't be fixed so it will be a political cock waving exercise between the parties on who can waste the most on the nhs.

[grobyfox1990]

3 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

It is because those in power want it to fail, so they force it to fail, then they can break it up, saying 'see? - it failed' and sell it to their greedy mates.

 

Next question?

I don’t think it would be ‘their mates’ it would be an American private equity fund, black stone, kkr, Apollo. Someone who has the nous and capability to rip a massive organisation apart and start again 

 

next question - do you think this will overall be net bad for the average uk citizen, given how much we pay in tax for the nhs compared to average use 

 

don’t go absolutely wild or assume that’s what I want to happen, it’s the next question

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

He isn't processing data though.  He's making assumptions which his modelling is based on.

 

South Africa are processing data though but it doesn't appear to be carrying much weight due to a combination of the season, younger people and "it's only been 3 weeks".

You have to make some assumptions - and your data leads you to many different potential outcomes. Unfortunately, the media seem to want to only publicise the worst case - that’s not the fault of science 

 

can any of our non U.K. contributors advise how the boosters are being administered?

you would have thought that a more sophisticated booking system could have been used whereby those who haven’t had a covid infection over the past nine months were prioritised (within age groups).  I’m aware of some double jabbed who have had infection in early November being boosted already whilst those who have had two jabs six months ago struggle to get an appointment.  Seems a bit crude to me. 

 

 

 

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, kenny said:

This is all true, though it is better since the government legislated to stop slow payments of subcontractors. 

 

It's more a general point, that I believe we spend reasonably well on health but that the cash is not reasonably spent. My big criticism of the government and health is that it hasn't done anything to address the inefficiency of the spending. 

 

I suspect that it's something that can't be fixed so it will be a political cock waving exercise between the parties on who can waste the most on the nhs.

I’ve been told sorties where NHS contractors have been over quoting for jobs (because they don’t want them) and then being awarded the contract on an even higher value (because the budgets need to be spent to avoid them being dropped back ).  It’s nuts. 

[Fox92]

Had my booster this morning. With the amount of "walk in available" texts I received this week, I expected the surgery to be packed out but I was straight in and done (and still 10 mins earlier than my actual appointment). 

[kenny]

2 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I’ve been told sorties where NHS contractors have been over quoting for jobs (because they don’t want them) and then being awarded the contract on an even higher value (because the budgets need to be spent to avoid them being dropped back ).  It’s nuts. 

I've not heard anything like that. They should be able to return any unspent money if a cheaper option is found.

 

There is an issue that local trusts/authorities find it difficult to move cash around,  so they find it difficult to spend spare on things they need. 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

I don’t think it would be ‘their mates’ it would be an American private equity fund, black stone, kkr, Apollo. Someone who has the nous and capability to rip a massive organisation apart and start again 

 

next question - do you think this will overall be net bad for the average uk citizen, given how much we pay in tax for the nhs compared to average use 

 

don’t go absolutely wild or assume that’s what I want to happen, it’s the next question

It's a fair question.

 

And a passing glance at the US healthcare "system" and its level of medical bankruptcies and overall health outcome statistics gives one that answer.

 

Yes.

[SpacedX]

46 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

He isn't processing data though.  He's making assumptions which his modelling is based on.

 

South Africa are processing data though but it doesn't appear to be carrying much weight due to a combination of the season, younger people and "it's only been 3 weeks".

The data emerging from South Africa is of great use, however it is still limited, it does need to be treated with caution due to the aforementioned factors, in addition to the understanding that over 80% have been previously infected with another strain of Covid-19.

 

 We still know practically nothing about the virulence and implications of omicron in the long-term. What we do know is that the speed of transmission is of great concern and case rates are already soaring. A small proportion of a huge number is a worry at this time of year with hospitals at 94 - 96% capacity. 

 

In respect of Ferguson's figures per se, Professor Azra Ghani, an epidemiologist at Imperial and one of the researchers behind the modelling, has somewhat diplomatically interjected and suggested that the 5,000 deaths per day estimate was an 'illustration of the need to act'. 

 

Science works through proving itself wrong - its mission if you like is to continually disprove and falsify whatever it posits. 

 

Opinion is completely the opposite. It seeks to reinforce and dogmatically enforce its claims upon others - almost invariably with an agenda driving it. Ferguson has come forward and publicly accepted that his projections concerning Delta this Autumn were wrong. I'l remind you again of Mike Yeadon's damaging self-publicity this time last year that you repeatedly parroted on here when he insisted that London has reached herd immunity and the country was soon to follow. Neither he nor yourself have had the integrity to similarly recant this claim. 

 

Cue inevitable laughing emoji in 3...2...1

Edited 18 December 2021 by Line-X

[BKLFox]

12 minutes ago, kenny said:

This is all true, though it is better since the government legislated to stop slow payments of subcontractors. 

 

It's more a general point, that I believe we spend reasonably well on health but that the cash is not reasonably spent. My big criticism of the government and health is that it hasn't done anything to address the inefficiency of the spending. 

 

I suspect that it's something that can't be fixed so it will be a political cock waving exercise between the parties on who can waste the most on the nhs.

From my previous comments I agree it’s easier as you say for the parties to say well we’ll add an additional £1bn into the pot if you pick us then the next party say we see your £1bn and raise you £2bn. Instead of 1 saying we will forensically look through how the budget is spent and potentially save that £2bn, they won’t because it’s drummed into peoples heads that the NHS is drastically underfunded and it would be political suicide to not say you’ll put ‘x’ into the NHS pit.

[HighPeakFox]

49 minutes ago, grobyfox1990 said:

I don’t think it would be ‘their mates’ it would be an American private equity fund, black stone, kkr, Apollo. Someone who has the nous and capability to rip a massive organisation apart and start again 

 

next question - do you think this will overall be net bad for the average uk citizen, given how much we pay in tax for the nhs compared to average use 

 

don’t go absolutely wild or assume that’s what I want to happen, it’s the next question

They're already selling it off, bit by bit - and when I say 'their mates' i mean that there's a group of like minds around the world, all in the same filthy game of disaster capitalism, where everything has a price and nothing important is of value.

 

So yes, I think it will be a disaster for the average UK citizen.

Edited 18 December 2021 by HighPeakFox

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, HighPeakFox said:

They're already selling it off, bit by bit - and when I say 'their mates' i mean that there's a gorup of like minds around the world, all in the same filthy game of disaster capitalism, where everything has a price and nothing important is of value.

 

So yes, I think it will be a disaster for the average UK citizen.

This may come as cold comfort because it will be no good end for anyone else either, but such people won't be spared should they choose the "wrong" disaster to try and profit from.

[Saigon Fox]

29 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

You have to make some assumptions - and your data leads you to many different potential outcomes. Unfortunately, the media seem to want to only publicise the worst case - that’s not the fault of science 

 

can any of our non U.K. contributors advise how the boosters are being administered?

you would have thought that a more sophisticated booking system could have been used whereby those who haven’t had a covid infection over the past nine months were prioritised (within age groups).  I’m aware of some double jabbed who have had infection in early November being boosted already whilst those who have had two jabs six months ago struggle to get an appointment.  Seems a bit crude to me. 

 

 

 

In Russia we paid a clinic for Sputnik and obtained the vaccine with ease. A couple of weeks ago we flew to Croatia and went to a walk-in centre and had the J&J. Completely free, no questions asked. There were lines for boosters too - locals and tourists just queue and wait their turn. I'm planning on having Sputnik Lite in Feb as a further booster. I work in a school, so need to max out on coverage. 

 

On another note, arrived at LHR this morning from Moscow via Zurich. People, just put a mask over your shnoz and mush, it's not hard.

 

Edited 18 December 2021 by Saigon Fox

[HighPeakFox]

1 minute ago, Saigon Fox said:

In Russia we paid a clinic for Sputnik and obtained the vaccine with ease. A couple of weeks ago we flew to Croatia and went to a walk-in centre and had the J&J. Completely free, no questions asked. There were lines for boosters too - locals and tourists just queue and wait their turn. I'm planning on having Sputnik Lite in Feb as a further booster. I work in a school, so need to max out on coverage. 

 

On another note, just arrived, at LHR, this morning, from Moscow via Zurich. People, just put a mask over your shnoz and mush, it's not hard.

 

BUT IT'S NEVER ENDING, MY LIFE IS OVER.

[Heathrow fox]

27 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's a fair question.

 

And a passing glance at the US healthcare "system" and its level of medical bankruptcies and overall health outcome statistics gives one that answer.

 

Yes.

 £5000/£10000 just to give birth 

[martyn]

London will likely be at, or approaching a peak by the time any lockdown occurs. Talk of locking down after Christmas is simply because politically it'd be the 1000th of 1000 cuts for Johnson to do it before.

 

We should know a lot more by then about the UK context anyway, with London being the Guinea pig .The South African data is promising, but it's hard to interpret given the overall large increase in their population immunity after their Delta wave. Omicron could therefore appear less severe because they got slammed hard by Delta and have confronted Omicron with much more population immunity, hence better relative outcomes. The UK's context hasn't changed much for Delta or Omicron.

 

My own hunch is that Omicron is likely less severe than Delta, and in addition to the real world South Africa data, some of the laboratory findings seem to be coming to a consensus now that Omicron doesn't infect lungs as easily (Hong Kong study cited by @st albans fox the other day + corroborated now to some extent by a a separate study at Gupta's lab at Cambridge University). Whether it's less severe to the extent that a massive case wave doesn't overwhelm the NHS remains to be seen.

Edited 18 December 2021 by martyn

[Farrington fox]

Dr John. The NHS can't even keep their website up to speed.

 

 

 

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Dr John. The NHS can't even keep their website up to speed.

 

 

 

They’ll all be isolating ! 

[SpacedX]

10 minutes ago, Farrington fox said:

Dr John.

 

[grobyfox1990]

55 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

It's a fair question.

 

And a passing glance at the US healthcare "system" and its level of medical bankruptcies and overall health outcome statistics gives one that answer.

 

Yes.

 

43 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

They're already selling it off, bit by bit - and when I say 'their mates' i mean that there's a group of like minds around the world, all in the same filthy game of disaster capitalism, where everything has a price and nothing important is of value.

 

So yes, I think it will be a disaster for the average UK citizen.

I agree. I’ve worked in the US, and for a huge multi national with decent healthcare coverage. If you get seriously sick there, you’re life is pretty f***d unless you’ve got savings, even with said coverage a lot of the time. I never got sick whilst I was there luckily, but I had colleagues. 
 

under such a system, the uk would be finished!!! 25% of adults have less than £100 in savings lol.