Coronavirus (2021) thread

[SWP's back]

So best to ignore them?

I’d certainly be inclined to ignore models that ignore likely real world data such as hospitalisation rate of omicron rather than delta. The SA scientists are also scientists you know. One set is wrong.

 

[SWP's back]

I do too, lockdown or no lockdown.

We’re at the point where some people are more scared of a lockdown than a deadly virus.

We‘re all going to suck it up and face whatever happens between now and the end of January.

To be honest, after being triple jabbed, I’m more scared of the crocodiles in my local golf course than I am of omicron at this point.

 

[BlueAnorak]

I don’t think it has anything to do with politics. It’s literally to stop the NHS from being overwhelmed and so that not too many people are dying.

At present, the number of people in ICU (has actually gone down this week to last) and number of deaths (weekly average down at 112) means that a lockdown is likely not necessary. But having a precautionary circuit-breaker since the cases have sky-rocketed to an all-time high, wouldn’t be a bad idea.

If ICU and deaths numbers start to increase at a rapid rate, we should tighten restrictions.

The govt’s popularity is at an all-time low so they won’t be doing this for popularity reasons.

If Omicron hospitalisations start to rocket then there may be a need for a 2 or 3 week fire-break. The data just isn't there at the moment to do this...

COVID-19: Omicron daily overview

An overview and summary of case data for Omicron focusing on confirmed and SGTF cases in the UK.

www.gov.uk

The only problem is the number of NHS staff who will be off sick. As Omicron infects more quickly the 10 days isolation time needs to come down to say 6.

 

[SWP's back]

So from a preventative aspect it didn't work then. Cool.

You really are a fucking troll.

 

[Gabriel]

The only problem is the number of NHS staff who will be off sick. As Omicron infects more quickly the 10 days isolation time needs to come down to say 6.

Sajid Javid said he was against doing that this morning.

 

[BobKowalski]

We didn’t take any. That’s the point.

We did. It was called summer. Ventilation is one of the key mitigating factors as with any airborne virus. Additionally the vaccination rollout was well under way and, speaking personally, I kept wearing a mask. I was in a minority, but say 20% kept up mask wearing, so that would be a mitigating factor.

 

[SWP's back]

Immunization currently prevents 2-3 million deaths

Prevents. Deaths.

you’re own post. You didn’t even read it.

 

[Hart of the Matter]

The real truth is no one wants a situation where they or their loved ones die an excruciating and extended death (possibly alone) for want of treatment. I hope this wave is well managed to maximise that availability...

 

[meltonblue]

Im certain she said hospitalisations but if I’m wrong, happy to retract on it.

It wouldn’t have been, that’s 100x worse than Sages high end estimate.

 

[SWP's back]

We did. It was called summer. Ventilation is one of the key mitigating factors as with any airborne virus. Additionally the vaccination rollout was well under way and, speaking personally, I kept wearing a mask. I was in a minority, but say 20% kept up mask wearing, so that would be a mitigating factor.

The report was in September and about October and they called for a lockdown or there would be 200k per positives per day (of delta).

We took no measures. Your enboldened post above is a pure fiction and bears no relation to the facts in hand.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

This is absolutely insane. Journo had a chat with a SAGE modeller on twitter and I can't get my head around his admission that essentially they only do scary models because there's no point doing encouraging models as they're not asked to. Genuinely mad.

But if they did mid-way models and the reality of hospitalisations and deaths ended up being up at the worst-case scenario numbers, they’d be criticised even more than they are for doing worst-case scenarios.

Look what happened right back at the very beginning last March with the govt being too laidback and not proactive enough with it - they were absolutely hammered and said to have blood on their hands for not following SAGE’s worst-case scenario. So now I reckon they feel they have to go for the worst case. They’d be criticised no matter what they do.

 

[blueinsa]

It wouldn’t have been, that’s 100x worse than Sages high end estimate.

It is possible she said hospitalisations by mistake.

100x their high end estimate? That would suggest they are getting better ;-)

 

[Bluewonder]

I don’t think it has anything to do with politics. It’s literally to stop the NHS from being overwhelmed and so that not too many people are dying.

At present, the number of people in ICU (has actually gone down this week to last) and number of deaths (weekly average down at 112) means that a lockdown is likely not necessary. But having a precautionary circuit-breaker since the cases have sky-rocketed to an all-time high, wouldn’t be a bad idea.

If ICU and deaths numbers start to increase at a rapid rate, we should tighten restrictions.

The govt’s popularity is at an all-time low so they won’t be doing this for popularity reasons.

You don't spend tens of billions of pounds on a precautionary measure.
Think of all the good that could be done with that money.

 

[Deleted member 77198]

L

We should meet somewhere in the middle then with the modelling.

The truth is what people want.

It’s not about us, it’s about the infrastructure around it all. You have to model the maximum so that the NHS is prepared for the need of the infrastructure around the worst case.

 

[meltonblue]

It is possible she said hospitalisations by mistake.

100x their high end estimate? That would suggest they are getting better ;-)

Although I don’t think people have interpreted the sage modelling correctly at all, that did make me laugh :)

 

[BlueAnorak]

Sajid Javid said he was against doing that this morning.

I know. It just makes a collapse of the NHS more likely.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

To be honest, after being triple jabbed, I’m more scared of the crocodiles in my local golf course than I am of omicron at this point.

Which could be proven correct or incorrect.

I think it’s potentially dangerous that people are beginning to believe they are now immune to Covid.

 

[blueinsa]

L

It’s not about us, it’s about the infrastructure around it all. You have to model the maximum so that the NHS is prepared for the need of the infrastructure around the worst case.

We have been protecting the NHS in winter for years now and long before covid came along.

A grown up discussion is urgently needed now re how we fund/run the NHS because doomsday scenarios and restrictions/lockdowns is not the answer.

 

[True_Blue69]

I have had this thing for 2 weeks now and am just getting out of the woods, couldn't get my booster because I have been ill with it. Really hoping you're one of those without full blown symptoms mate, be safe and keep well pal.

How long did it take you show symptoms? Tested positive myself but other than a slightly sore back not really got any symptoms, just wondering if they are still to come.

 

[BlueAnorak]

But if they did mid-way models and the reality of hospitalisations and deaths ended up being up at the worst-case scenario numbers, they’d be criticised even more than they are for doing worst-case scenarios.

Look what happened right back at the very beginning last March with the govt being too laidback and not proactive enough with it - they were absolutely hammered and said to have blood on their hands for not following SAGE’s worst-case scenario. So now I reckon they feel they have to go for the worst case. They’d be criticised no matter what they do.

You do models with 4 outcomes.
I'm not difficult.