COVID-19 — Coronavirus

[cleavers]

Is he in a care home, thought it was those in care homes first ?

No.

 

[ctwrd]

Biggest issue in my local area at the moment seems to be transmission in our hospital amongst staff.

Given all the gear they have to wear I guess they are passing it amongst themselves by bringing it in rather than off patients.

again, though it is surely expected/normal that there would be/will be some spread amongst nhs staff

 

[Healdplace]

You seem to think staying in tier 3 is a good idea. It isn't. The unemployment it will unleash in 2021 is horrendous.
It is vital that Covidiots stop being Covidiots over the next few months.

I think staying in tier 3 either side of Christmas is yes. I would think differently but for the crazy free for all over Christmas.

And I also think an extra two or three weeks when most are off work anyway in tier 3 is better than all of January and February in full lockdown. Which is a very real possible consequence of cases spiking in GM over the next 3 weeks.

As i have said repeatedly I do see both sides of the argument. And I express my preference and reasons. But it is not true that I am putting lives ahead of livelihoods here by doing so. I actually think the lower the NW stays the quicker it comes out of wave 2 in the new year. And livelihoods can be reclaimed rather than shut down again out of necessity to pay for a a festive period coupled with reduced restrictions before and after.

Am I wrong? Are you right? Possibly. Both are arguments that can be made. But they are legitimate views on the data not a political point scoring. As from my perspective it makes zero difference. It will not change what I do over the next 4 months at all.

 

[cleavers]

Very similar, pleased your Dad has got his jab, at that age it must be such a relief.

They've both been very careful, but have tried to carry on as normal as possible, I think I've worried about them more than they have.

 

[blueparrot]

Given all the gear they have to wear I guess they are passing it amongst themselves by bringing it in rather than off patients.

again, though it is surely expected/normal that there would be/will be some spread amongst nhs staff

It’s definately been brought in from outside. Don’t know about this particular outbreak ,but my daughters hospital had a similar outbreak amongst staff a few months ago, like this one they were all in one ward and in that case it turned out the staff from that ward spread by breaking rules during breaks.

 

[BlueAnorak]

Asymptomatic people thought to have 42% less chance of transmitting covid

https://jammi.utpjournals.press/doi/10.3138/jammi-2020-0030

While in households, asymptomatic people transmitting at a rate of 0.7% compared to 18% for symptomatic

Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

This systematic review and meta-analysis examines evidence for household transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), disaggregated by several covariates, and compares it with other coronaviruses

jamanetwork.com

Literature now hinting that Asymptomatic people are probably not the secret reservoir originally thought

Interesting article. But 42% less chance than a symptomatic carrier is still a big chance. 4%-41% as opposed to 46%+

 

[mcfc_ms]

My grandparents had theirs done today at the drive in one in Hyde. Nipped round this evening to see them from the back door. They were delighted they have had it and booked in for round 2 in January

 

[ctwrd]

I think staying in tier 3 either side of Christmas is yes. I would think differently but for the crazy free for all over Christmas.

And I also think an extra two or three weeks when most are off work anyway in tier 3 is better than all of January and February in full lockdown. Which is a very real possible consequence of cases spiking in GM over the next 3 weeks.

As i have said repeatedly I do see both sides of the argument. And I express my preference and reasons. But it is not true that I am putting lives ahead of livelihoods here by doing so. I actually think the lower the NW stays the quicker it comes out of wave 2 in the new year. And livelihoods can be reclaimed rather than shut down again out of necessity to pay for a a festive period coupled with reduced restrictions before and after.

Am I wrong? Are you right? Possibly. Both are arguments that can be made. But they are legitimate views on the data not a political point scoring. As from my perspective it makes zero difference. It will not change what I do over the next 4 months at all.

I don’t necessarily agree with Manchester staying in tier 3 but don’t see the point in moving to tier 2 the week before Christmas and would delay until January.

it will only take one or two venues to breach the rules to be plastered over the papers to give false impression of the whole area.

cases will probably rise again anyway and in a way if we go into tier 2 now and they rise, the rise will be blamed on tier 2 when it isn’t necessarily the case

 

[ayrshire_blue]

Asymptomatic people thought to have 42% less chance of transmitting covid

https://jammi.utpjournals.press/doi/10.3138/jammi-2020-0030

While in households, asymptomatic people transmitting at a rate of 0.7% compared to 18% for symptomatic

Household Transmission of SARS-CoV-2

This systematic review and meta-analysis examines evidence for household transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), disaggregated by several covariates, and compares it with other coronaviruses

jamanetwork.com

Literature now hinting that Asymptomatic people are probably not the secret reservoir originally thought

This is good news if true.

 

[Healdplace]

I don’t necessarily agree with Manchester staying in tier 3 but don’t see the point in moving to tier 2 the week before Christmas and would delay until January.

it will only take one or two venues to breach the rules to be plastered over the papers to give false impression of the whole area.

cases will probably rise again anyway and in a way if we go into tier 2 now and they rise, the rise will be blamed on tier 2 when it isn’t necessarily the case

I agree that this is the best compromise and what I would do in the circumstances too. I guess we will know tomorrow.

Cases will rise because of Christmas and it being January. Its how these viruses work. And why starting off from the lowest point achievable is the safest course.

 

[ctwrd]

That’s just not correct and I politely suggest you read the article which takes quotes directly from them. They are in a cohort where they can mix despite being from households of more than one.

they are categorically not in a bubble.

Just for information:

 

[Healdplace]

There is a new feature on the Gov web site. A heat map tracking the ages in narrow bands across the pandemic of who is testing positive week to week.

Fascinating to see how this has changed through time.

Right now the lowest numbers aside from from those aged 0 to 4 (almost nil) are in a surprising age group.

65 - 74.

Indeed they seem to have been low through much of the pandemic.

 

[ayrshire_blue]

There is a new feature on the Gov web site. A heat map tracking the ages in narrow bands across the pandemic of who is testing positive week to week.

Fascinating to see how this has changed through time.

Right now the lowest numbers aside from from those aged 0 to 4 (almost nil) are in a surprising age group.

65 - 74.

Indeed they seem to have been low through much of the pandemic.

That's quite bizarre.

 

[shemnel]

Interesting article. But 42% less chance than a symptomatic carrier is still a big chance. 4%-41% as opposed to 46%+

No the transmission rate is asymptomatic people is 0 to 2.2% as opposed to 1 to 18% symptomatic

 

[ctwrd]

That's quite bizarre.

It makes sense. That category is full of those who shielded and have continued to do so where possible. Thereby less likely to catch virus.

however, those that do are at greater risk of dying so it doesn’t take as many positive cases to get deaths compared to younger age groups

 

[Cheer Up Peter Reid]

There is a new feature on the Gov web site. A heat map tracking the ages in narrow bands across the pandemic of who is testing positive week to week.

Fascinating to see how this has changed through time.

Right now the lowest numbers aside from from those aged 0 to 4 (almost nil) are in a surprising age group.

65 - 74.

Indeed they seem to have been low through much of the pandemic.

I would guess some of the factors are kids left home, no longer going out to work, not yet in a care home, and behaving more carefully due to their risk of a severe illness?

 

[squirtyflower]

I would guess some of the factors are kids left home, no longer going out to work, not yet in a care home, and behaving more carefully due to their risk of a severe illness?

Just what I was going to say.
Added to that they are still mobile, shop when it’s less crowded and not that desperate to go to hospitality and take the risk of getting ill.

 

[artfuldodger]

I think people don’t quite realise that it is perfectly possible that the case numbers rise naturally and not as a result of some sort of recklessness. It always has to be linked to rule breaking/partying/teenagers etc...

what we are seeing is the natural rise and fall of a virus.
London will probably peak soon and dip again in January at the same time as the north will be catching up on the rise again only to fall itself again a bit later on.

repeat over and over until the end of March when spring is here and it will naturally fall again (hopefully aided by vaccinations).

The need to blame rises in cases on people seems to be driven by media and government (and some of the medical profession) to pass blame from themselves.

So true. It’s all the fault of students/teenagers/children/holiday makers/drinkers/eaters/runners/gym goers/shoppers/tier hoppers/churchgoers/BAME community etc etc. And are we to believe that from July to November us northerners were naughty and cases rose, but now we’ve seen the light. But Londoners have been model citizens until last month? And the same in almost every other European country?

 

[ayrshire_blue]

It makes sense. That category is full of those who shielded and have continued to do so where possible. Thereby less likely to catch virus.

however, those that do are at greater risk of dying so it doesn’t take as many positive cases to get deaths compared to younger age groups

Yeah when you put it like that, but why that specific age group, assuming it rises again for 75+ who've also been shielding etc.

 

[cleavers]

That's quite bizarre.

Maybe not, I was looking at our area last night, and the oldest group went from the highest, to the least over a couple of days, my summation was not many in the oldest group, and some had sadly died.