Coronavirus Thread

[WigstonWanderer]

20 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

So why do they treat everyone else as idiots?  The "million cases per day by the end of the year" projections made no reference at all to the certainty that even if cases are doubling, they must of necessity stop sooner rather than later.

Could you provide a link to this projection? I’d like to see it in context. There are far too many “projections” taken completely out of context, or using completely different measures of infection count, and sensationalised by the press, or by our friend @Legend_in_blue here.

 

We’ve had one here in Oz where a “leaked projection” was headlined claiming we’d be heading for 200k infections per day. Turns out to be an estimate of what would happen if there were no measures taken, no booster rollout, no change in people’s behaviour, etc.

Edited 22 December 2021 by WigstonWanderer

[dsr-burnley]

14 minutes ago, WigstonWanderer said:

Could you provide a link to this projection? I’d like to see it in context. There are far too many “projections” taken completely out of context, or using completely different measures of infection count, and sensationalised by the press, or by our friend @Legend_in_blue here.

 

We’ve had one here in Oz where a “leaked projection” was headlined claiming we’d be heading for 200k infections per day. Turns out to be an estimate of what would happen if there were no measures taken, no booster rollout, no change in people’s behaviour, etc.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/08/omicron-cases-could-exceed-1m-by-month-end-sajid-javid

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spi-m-o-consensus-statement-on-covid-19-15-december-2021/spi-m-o-consensus-statement-on-covid-19-15-december-2021

 

One is the Health Secretary making a statement ot the House of Commons, the other is a SAGE official report.  Both predict a million cases based on the UK being under the current restrictions, which were introduced on 8th December.  SAGE goes further - it predicts 600,000 to 2 million cases per day by late December to January.

[Nick]

So will today be the day Boris announces a circuit breaker of sorts from the 27th? Has his party now done all the PR they had in their locker with hospitality grants and lower isolation periods? Will he wait that bit longer to make it look like they are examining data hour by hour and then give us the news as close to knocking off before Xmas as he can? Rest of Europe and other UK governments ‘ahead of the curve and following the science’ not too much mention of the ‘r’ rate in recent decision making?

[yorkie1999]

16 minutes ago, dsr-burnley said:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/08/omicron-cases-could-exceed-1m-by-month-end-sajid-javid

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/spi-m-o-consensus-statement-on-covid-19-15-december-2021/spi-m-o-consensus-statement-on-covid-19-15-december-2021

 

One is the Health Secretary making a statement ot the House of Commons, the other is a SAGE official report.  Both predict a million cases based on the UK being under the current restrictions, which were introduced on 8th December.  SAGE goes further - it predicts 600,000 to 2 million cases per day by late December to January.

Thing is, they can't predict peoples behavior as, from what i've seen this morning, there's hardly anyone about. People have all suddenly got the virus, or have just thought fvck it, i'm staying in bed.

[Legend_in_blue]

8 minutes ago, Nick said:

So will today be the day Boris announces a circuit breaker of sorts from the 27th? Has his party now done all the PR they had in their locker with hospitality grants and lower isolation periods? Will he wait that bit longer to make it look like they are examining data hour by hour and then give us the news as close to knocking off before Xmas as he can? Rest of Europe and other UK governments ‘ahead of the curve and following the science’ not too much mention of the ‘r’ rate in recent decision making?

He doesn't have the data to back up further restrictions at the moment and the models are completely over exaggerated.  We all know he's a master at telling huge lies but I think even he would struggle to come up with justifiable, believable lies to reinforce the need for further restrictions at present.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

2 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

He doesn't have the data to back up further restrictions at the moment and the models are completely over exaggerated.  We all know he's a master at telling huge lies but I think even he would struggle to come up with justifiable, believable lies to reinforce the need for further restrictions at present.

If we go into lockdown again he knows he’s finished as PM, guiding us through this tricky situation and avoiding lockdown is probably his only way of gaining some public support, high stakes indeed. 

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

28 minutes ago, OrielCaziado said:

Seeing how quiet many Cities are I can’t help feeling a full on lockdown of pubs and restaurants straight after Xmas is a massive over reaction and totally not needed. I was down the rugby at the weekend and I’d say only half to two thirds of the tickets sold came to the match. Pubs will be quiet all next week except for New Years. Why force a closure when it’s not really needed due to people choosing their own precautions. 

Problem with that is say a normal shift this time of year in a mid sized pub has 12 staff on, if its absolutely dead then maybe you have 5 staff on, what happens to the other 7 staff who were meant to be put on? They won't be being paid, the industry needs support. 

[OrielCaziado]

1 minute ago, Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot said:

Problem with that is say a normal shift this time of year in a mid sized pub has 12 staff on, if its absolutely dead then maybe you have 5 staff on, what happens to the other 7 staff who were meant to be put on? They won't be being paid, the industry needs support. 

Yes but that’s not a justification to close them. Support is a different conversation completely.  By closing them a lot of people get that doomed feeling that lockdowns bring. When the pubs re opened last time I was weeks actually going to one but the knowledge and freedom that I could nip down the pub helped my mental well-being loads. Shutting everything down in a period where depression is at its highest is a last resort move in my opinion. 

[MonkeyTennis?]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

PCR tests - correct

 

LFT’s do not continue to show positive 

Good to hear, but it's still on the govt website as follows (and I appreciate this may be updated soon):

 

"The 90-day window after a positive test:

 

"If someone has tested positive with a PCR test, they should not be tested using either PCR or rapid lateral flow tests for 90 days, unless they develop new symptoms during this time – in which case they should be retested immediately using PCR.

This 90-day period is from the initial onset of symptoms or, if asymptomatic when tested, their positive test result."

 

This is also what you get told by track and trace when they speak to you about testing positive.

 

I'm very happy if people can stop isolating sooner, and if LFTs work to identify the end of infectiousness, but it would have been nice if someone said how the advice can change from 90 days to 7 days, because it poses a lot of questions, especially: if people do keep testing positive on LFTs despite not being infectious, then is that a potential recipe for more chaos and absences from work than just sticking to 10 days, and telling people not to test for 3 months?

 

So has the science changed, was the initial guidance wrong (which I can believe) or is this a quick fix with possible unintended consequences?

[Nick]

39 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

He doesn't have the data to back up further restrictions at the moment and the models are completely over exaggerated.  We all know he's a master at telling huge lies but I think even he would struggle to come up with justifiable, believable lies to reinforce the need for further restrictions at present.

So (and this is not meant aggressively) do you think the restrictions being imposed post Xmas by Scottish, Welsh and governments all over Europe are unjustifiable?

[StanSP]

I don't agree with severe restrictions on the back of this news. 

 

While I get any hospitalisations aren't favourable, given its a generally milder disease, plus the added boost of vaccines in our bodies, is it sensible to presume the volume of hospitalisations is still likely to be lower (or remain low at current levels) compared to previous high levels caused by from other variants?

 

 

 

[Innovindil]

1 minute ago, Nick said:

So (and this is not meant aggressively) do you think the restrictions being imposed post Xmas by Scottish, Welsh and governments all over Europe are unjustifiable?

Honestly I'd like to hear from the Scottish and Welsh folk themselves. To me it seems like overkill. Would be interesting to see if they feel the same. 

 

I'm hoping we just ride it out. So far all the numbers seem lower than last year. And plenty are getting their boosters every day. Shouldn't need to do anymore damage to the economy or businesses. 

[st albans fox]

17 minutes ago, MonkeyTennis? said:

Good to hear, but it's still on the govt website as follows (and I appreciate this may be updated soon):

 

"The 90-day window after a positive test:

 

"If someone has tested positive with a PCR test, they should not be tested using either PCR or rapid lateral flow tests for 90 days, unless they develop new symptoms during this time – in which case they should be retested immediately using PCR.

This 90-day period is from the initial onset of symptoms or, if asymptomatic when tested, their positive test result."

 

This is also what you get told by track and trace when they speak to you about testing positive.

 

I'm very happy if people can stop isolating sooner, and if LFTs work to identify the end of infectiousness, but it would have been nice if someone said how the advice can change from 90 days to 7 days, because it poses a lot of questions, especially: if people do keep testing positive on LFTs despite not being infectious, then is that a potential recipe for more chaos and absences from work than just sticking to 10 days, and telling people not to test for 3 months?

 

So has the science changed, was the initial guidance wrong (which I can believe) or is this a quick fix with possible unintended consequences?

I’m sure they will have to change it ref LFT’s. Can anyone on here say that they have or know (actually know) anyone that has tested positive on LFT more than two weeks after being positive ?? 
 

my experience is that the line slowly disappears as you clear the infection and then it’s gone 

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

I don't agree with severe restrictions on the back of this news. 

 

While I get any hospitalisations aren't favourable, given its a generally milder disease, plus the added boost of vaccines in our bodies, is it sensible to presume the volume of hospitalisations is still likely to be lower (or remain low at current levels) compared to previous high levels caused by from other variants?

 

 

 

It really does depend on what the highest caseload would be given each societal situation, which is difficult to know.

[st albans fox]

10 minutes ago, StanSP said:

I don't agree with severe restrictions on the back of this news. 

 

While I get any hospitalisations aren't favourable, given its a generally milder disease, plus the added boost of vaccines in our bodies, is it sensible to presume the volume of hospitalisations is still likely to be lower (or remain low at current levels) compared to previous high levels caused by from other variants?

 

 

 

If that’s all true then it’s everything that we’ve assumed since we got early info from s Africa about omicron 

 

But the point about numbers is relevant Sunil. Hopefully the boosters mean that the v v small percentage of a v v large number is still manageable - however, the lack of isolating staff will probably be the biggest issue in hospitals managing to cope with the surge in patients with covid needing their care.  trying to keep those numbers going into hospital at a manageable level is the trick 

 

it could be that they decide Xmas is more bubbled with family whereas new year is more parties outside of bubbles - hence they may think that saying new year parties are not advisable will be enough - together with the schools being shut until after new year anyway.

 

 

Edited 22 December 2021 by st albans fox

[filbertway]

3 hours ago, Legend_in_blue said:

Have cases even doubled at all?  It's not looking great for these people.  No wonder they are requesting further restrictions right now, it would make their projections have greater weight.

This is my issue with taking action based on worst case scenario predictions.

 

I'm on board with having the plan ready and good to go if needed, but why commit to something that may not be necessary and hit the entire country so hard.

 

Seems really weird to me that Scotland and Wales have committed to carrying out such drastic action on something there is no way they can be sure of.

 

[The Horse's Mouth]

6 minutes ago, filbertway said:

This is my issue with taking action based on worst case scenario predictions.

 

I'm on board with having the plan ready and good to go if needed, but why commit to something that may not be necessary and hit the entire country so hard.

 

Seems really weird to me that Scotland and Wales have committed to carrying out such drastic action on something there is no way they can be sure of.

 

Its not surprising with how their governments have acted so far, I just hope Boris does hold his nerve here 

[CosbehFox]

21 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Honestly I'd like to hear from the Scottish and Welsh folk themselves. To me it seems like overkill. Would be interesting to see if they feel the same. 

 

I'm hoping we just ride it out. So far all the numbers seem lower than last year. And plenty are getting their boosters every day. Shouldn't need to do anymore damage to the economy or businesses. 

I know they have a horse in the race but a lot of the Scottish football fans I follow on social media are utterly dismayed at the decision. 

[The Horse's Mouth]

Aren't a lot of the omitted delta as well? It's a fine line of having delta becoming less common and the Omicron becoming the variant which is very much on track 

[filbertway]

Just now, The Horse's Mouth said:

Its not surprising with how their governments have acted so far, I just hope Boris does hold his nerve here 

It's not...Sturgeon hasn't made one decision herself yet either, she's always copied us or Wales every time

 

I fully support a lockdown/restrictions if there appears to be trouble brewing, just not one that's based on some bloke lobbing in some massive numbers into excel which basically amounts to the whole country having a 24/7 orgy.

[UniFox21]

26 minutes ago, StanSP said:

I don't agree with severe restrictions on the back of this news. 

 

While I get any hospitalisations aren't favourable, given its a generally milder disease, plus the added boost of vaccines in our bodies, is it sensible to presume the volume of hospitalisations is still likely to be lower (or remain low at current levels) compared to previous high levels caused by from other variants?

 

 

 

Severe restrictions aren't ideal at all, but can understand some of them. With a high transmission rate we'll be seeing a lot more people isolating putting us in issues. 

Its all managing the levels to give us the best chance of getting through it and getting back to normal 

[Legend_in_blue]

46 minutes ago, Nick said:

So (and this is not meant aggressively) do you think the restrictions being imposed post Xmas by Scottish, Welsh and governments all over Europe are unjustifiable?

Scotland have had stricter and longer restrictions than us and yet are currently in a worse position.  But restrictions control the virus?  Too many conflicting sets of data now to suggest restrictions are good in the long term.

[Farrington fox]

So in Wales you can be fined £60 for going to work from your office. But take your laptop to the pub and sit there working with a pint and it's fine. You cannot make up this nonsense. Only idiots like Drakeford and Sturgeon could dream up these kind of rules.

 

[OrielCaziado]

1 minute ago, Farrington fox said:

So in Wales you can be fined £60 for going to work from your office. But take your laptop to the pub and sit there working with a pint and it's fine. You cannot make up this nonsense. Only idiots like Drakeford and Sturgeon could dream up these kind of rules.

 

I can’t see how they could ever prosecute a single person. Internet playing up at home is the only answer anybody caught in the office needs to reply with. 

[Robo61]

45 minutes ago, filbertway said:

This is my issue with taking action based on worst case scenario predictions.

 

I'm on board with having the plan ready and good to go if needed, but why commit to something that may not be necessary and hit the entire country so hard.

 

Seems really weird to me that Scotland and Wales have committed to carrying out such drastic action on something there is no way they can be sure of.

 

Simply because it will be too late at the point we become sure,  and then we will need to fully lockdown.  Better to take less drastic procautions early in my view.  But then that has never been the way of this Government and is why we are in the mess we are in on so many fronts.