2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 26, 2021 20:00:20 GMT
Do they have a negative LFT? (Can't read as paywalled). I suspect in a few months we will follow S.Africas lead and do the same
|
|
2,177 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by talkingheads on Dec 26, 2021 21:20:22 GMT
Do they have a negative LFT? (Can't read as paywalled). I suspect in a few months we will follow S.Africas lead and do the same Doesn't really matter does it? You can test negative one day then positive the next. If you have symptoms you should isolate, simple as that.
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 26, 2021 23:06:30 GMT
Do they have a negative LFT? (Can't read as paywalled). I suspect in a few months we will follow S.Africas lead and do the same Doesn't really matter does it? You can test negative one day then positive the next. If you have symptoms you should isolate, simple as that. Daily LFTs. But as I said, s.africa are probably leading the way for how other counties will deal with covid going forward.
|
|
311 posts
|
Post by olliebean on Dec 26, 2021 23:19:48 GMT
I've seen plenty of stories of hospitality workers being told by their employers that they have to go into work regardless of symptoms unless and until they have a positive PCR test result, in some cases even after a positive LFT. Absolutely wrong-headed and certainly against the guidance, if not the law (I'm a bit vague about exactly what is legally prohibited now, since it's considerably less than I was avoiding doing anyway).
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 27, 2021 0:28:45 GMT
I've seen plenty of stories of hospitality workers being told by their employers that they have to go into work regardless of symptoms unless and until they have a positive PCR test result, in some cases even after a positive LFT. Absolutely wrong-headed and certainly against the guidance, if not the law (I'm a bit vague about exactly what is legally prohibited now, since it's considerably less than I was avoiding doing anyway). Yeah it's definitely illegal. You are let required to isolate and seek a PCR test if you either start exhibiting the 3 main coronavirus symptoms or have had a positive LFT The government really need to update the symptomatic guidance as this is very different now that many people have prior immunity from vaccination or infection
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 27, 2021 0:31:18 GMT
Die is cast now. Hopefully the govt was right! . Given that numbers haven't been recorded over Christmas, we'll be in a much better position to assess the situation tomorrow Sadly, in not taking earlier action, I suspect we'll end up suffering more for it in the form of harsher restrictions but let's see
|
|
2,177 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by talkingheads on Dec 27, 2021 15:34:54 GMT
No restrictions announced, which is good - but make no mistake, this is a purely financial decision not one based on public health. It means struggling businesses get zero financial support or furlough at the hardest time of the year.
|
|
4,596 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Dec 27, 2021 16:08:27 GMT
No restrictions announced, which is good - but make no mistake, this is a purely financial decision not one based on public health. It means struggling businesses get zero financial support or furlough at the hardest time of the year. But most importantly the daily mail is happy...
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Dec 27, 2021 17:26:15 GMT
Great to see ventilator capacity so under-used in London: one-on-one care a huge drain on expert-level resources. Far fewer families in despair. Last years Delta peak occured on the 22nd January when mechanical ventilator use peaked at 1,200. Yesterday 232. Last seven days very, very helpful data on Omnicrom. Next seven can confirm. coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=nhsRegion&areaName=London
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 27, 2021 17:33:22 GMT
Tbh if we aren't doing any this week, doing it in Jan seems pointless.
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Dec 27, 2021 17:44:45 GMT
Tbh if we aren't doing any this week, doing it in Jan seems pointless. If anything, the peak would have come forward a week, imo. It's just recollection but we didn't have that cold snap last year we had in early/mid-December this year. Population heavily boosted for Christmas, as well.
Can't map last winters pattern onto this.
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 27, 2021 21:05:06 GMT
Worth reading the whole thread but doesn't sound like the NHS is about to collapse (fingers crossed)
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 27, 2021 22:23:43 GMT
I think we will follow the US example and change it to 5 days isolation
Some interesting news that Omicron gives a person enhanced immunity against Delta
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 27, 2021 23:55:55 GMT
I think we will follow the US example and change it to 5 days isolation Some interesting news that Omicron gives a person enhanced immunity against Delta This would be incredibly reckless, especially what we know about infectious periods and the fact they aren't requiring a negative test to release from isolation. The things you are quoting here are beginning to get a little far fetched, especially that you aren't able to provide the science to back it. We've said this time and time again, if you can find the data to support a claim, do share it, it helps everyone here to understand your thinking deeper and aids healthy debate. On your second point, of course we would expect infection with omicron to provide some level of defence against other variants of coronavirus. The spike proteins on all coronavirus variants are still similar enough for this to be the case. This is precisely why a booster, produced with the original variant, provides a significant level of protection. I'm not exactly sure how relevant this however, especially as Omicron is fast becoming the dominant variant
|
|
|
Post by londonpostie on Dec 28, 2021 0:49:40 GMT
Sadly, in not taking earlier action, I suspect we'll end up suffering more for it in the form of harsher restrictions but let's see
The previous post complaining of "cherry-picking" a world-recognised expert over the The Guardian was prize-winning. Not clear what the difference is between this stuff and straight-up trolling - the one here comes after a post pointing out the official data (and link) that those on mechanical ventilators in London are at 17% of last winter's Delta peak.
Maybe it's becasue his goalposts move almost evey day; from the certainty of cases overwhelming the NHS, to ditto on hospitalisations, now to restrictions. The constant is that it's all a catastrophe, "sadly".
The factual truth is that there are 1,000 fewer families TONIGHT with a loved one on a ventilator somewhere in London. That should be acknowedged.
Incidentally, while the page is still there, The Guardian seem to have taken down the most recent top-level catastrophising from its Science EDITOR: 'The science is clear: the case for more Covid restrictions is overwhelming' ...
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 28, 2021 5:20:35 GMT
I think we will follow the US example and change it to 5 days isolation Some interesting news that Omicron gives a person enhanced immunity against Delta This would be incredibly reckless, especially what we know about infectious periods and the fact they aren't requiring a negative test to release from isolation. The things you are quoting here are beginning to get a little far fetched, especially that you aren't able to provide the science to back it. We've said this time and time again, if you can find the data to support a claim, do share it, it helps everyone here to understand your thinking deeper and aids healthy debate. On your second point, of course we would expect infection with omicron to provide some level of defence against other variants of coronavirus. The spike proteins on all coronavirus variants are still similar enough for this to be the case. This is precisely why a booster, produced with the original variant, provides a significant level of protection. I'm not exactly sure how relevant this however, especially as Omicron is fast becoming the dominant variant The CDC have supplied their reasoning for reducing the isolation period. On the second point, omicron is looking milder than Delta for sure.it seems. If it kills of Delta, that's a good thing
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 28, 2021 8:24:33 GMT
Sadly, in not taking earlier action, I suspect we'll end up suffering more for it in the form of harsher restrictions but let's see
The previous post complaining of "cherry-picking" a world-recognised expert over the The Guardian was prize-winning. Not clear what the difference is between this stuff and straight-up trolling - the one here comes after a post pointing out the official data (and link) that those on mechanical ventilators in London are at 17% of last winter's Delta peak.
Maybe it's becasue his goalposts move almost evey day; from the certainty of cases overwhelming the NHS, to ditto on hospitalisations, now to restrictions. The constant is that it's all a catastrophe, "sadly".
The factual truth is that there are 1,000 fewer families TONIGHT with a loved one on a ventilator somewhere in London. That should be acknowedged.
Incidentally, while the page is still there, The Guardian seem to have taken down the most recent top-level catastrophising from its Science EDITOR: 'The science is clear: the case for more Covid restrictions is overwhelming' ...
None of what I post is trolling. Everything that I post on here is backed by current data from highly respected scientists/organisations. It's quite clear that you like to throw 'trolling' around when you don't like what you see. It's silly and immature to do so and doesn't belong on this forum. Presenting facts and data to counter something would be a far more mature way to debate something you don't think is correct. Here's why we need to be careful when looking specifically at mechanical ventilation and comparing things directly to last winter - Last winter, pretty much all elective procedures and outpatient appointments had to be cancelled to cope with the overwhelming strain caused by covid. This was incredibly detrimental to the health of many. This can't happen again and as a result covid bed capacity is not going to be 'like for like' what we saw at last years peak. We must look at the maximum capacity whilst allowing other essential functions to continue as close to normal levels as possible -Mechanical ventilation beds were a very important metric to look at in early waves due to increased severity of disease (be this through lower levels of population immunity or variant specific disease characteristics). If we see start to see hospitalisations increase over the coming weeks, even with milder disease, we still have to potential to see major issues. There is finite space on wards and finite staff resources -Looking at mechanical ventilation now is giving you a picture that is about 1 month old. On average it takes around a week to 10 days from symptom onset to the first stage of hospitalisation and a further few weeks on top of that before we see the sickest patients starting to need ICU beds. When we start to see these numbers increase we are already far too late. We have already started to see a significant increase in hospitalisations across the UK (data from nhs website) we wouldn't expect to see this hit ICU for another week or 2
|
|
311 posts
|
Post by olliebean on Dec 28, 2021 10:12:34 GMT
On the second point, omicron is looking milder than Delta for sure.it seems. If it kills of Delta, that's a good thing Once again: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but more than 3 times as many people get it at once than Delta, that's more people in hospital than with Delta.
Also, on a personal level: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but you're more than 3 times as likely to catch it as Delta, then you're more likely to end up in hospital than with Delta.
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 28, 2021 11:16:08 GMT
On the second point, omicron is looking milder than Delta for sure.it seems. If it kills of Delta, that's a good thing Once again: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but more than 3 times as many people get it at once than Delta, that's more people in hospital than with Delta.
Also, on a personal level: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but you're more than 3 times as likely to catch it as Delta, then you're more likely to end up in hospital than with Delta.
Um... not really. As an exampe If a group of people are 33% likely to go to to the hospital from delta but now are 11% likely with omicron, it doesn't mean we can exactly 11% of people getting it in a group needing the hospital. A reduction in illness is a GOOD thing. Not sure why people are poo pooing it every time it's raised.
|
|
4,799 posts
|
Post by The Matthew on Dec 28, 2021 11:21:21 GMT
Once again: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but more than 3 times as many people get it at once than Delta, that's more people in hospital than with Delta. Also, on a personal level: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but you're more than 3 times as likely to catch it as Delta, then you're more likely to end up in hospital than with Delta.
It's because most people don't understand this that I wish maths education in schools was better suited to real life. Algebra and trigonometry are all very well but most people will never use them for anything other than passing an exam, while a decent grasp of probability and statistics is necessary for understanding many things.
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 28, 2021 11:33:10 GMT
It seems fairy clear that the link between cases and hospitlisations are even more delinked: they aren't moving up in the same way
|
|
724 posts
|
Post by Latecomer on Dec 28, 2021 11:45:23 GMT
The severity of the illness is almost a moot point now. If there is so much f it around that all the staff catch it and have to stay off….and if it is less severe but maybe enough to floor people so they need oxygen for a day or two (and there are a lot of unvaccinated around that it will seep into if everyone has it!) then we are still heading for trouble.
My mum is ok so far but the care home now has 5 cases and staffing is precarious…..of course it is. They all have to stay in rooms.
Not sure what the answer is, but am fairly sure it doesn’t involve mass partying in enclosed spaces or people crowding into pubs/sales over the next few days.
Oh and what of the antivirals for the vulnerable? Delivered to your door if you show symptoms? Have we sorted that out yet?
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 28, 2021 11:45:56 GMT
Once again: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but more than 3 times as many people get it at once than Delta, that's more people in hospital than with Delta. Also, on a personal level: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but you're more than 3 times as likely to catch it as Delta, then you're more likely to end up in hospital than with Delta.
Um... not really. As an exampe If a group of people are 33% likely to go to to the hospital from delta but now are 11% likely with omicron, it doesn't mean we can exactly 11% of people getting it in a group needing the hospital. A reduction in illness is a GOOD thing. Not sure why people are poo pooing it every time it's raised. Zhadif, the reason why people are saying this is because the things you are quoting make no sense. Nobody is questioning the decrease in severity of this wave, whether that's caused by population immunity or otherwise. As so many people keep pointing out to you, a reduction in disease severity coupled with an increase in its ability to spread by a similar if not greater magnitude, cancels this effect out. The link you've posted doesn't suggest anything further than we've seen already with the research released from South Africa and the UKHSA
|
|
311 posts
|
Post by olliebean on Dec 28, 2021 11:47:10 GMT
Once again: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but more than 3 times as many people get it at once than Delta, that's more people in hospital than with Delta.
Also, on a personal level: if it's 1/3 as likely to put you in hospital as Delta, but you're more than 3 times as likely to catch it as Delta, then you're more likely to end up in hospital than with Delta.
Um... not really. As an exampe If a group of people are 33% likely to go to to the hospital from delta but now are 11% likely with omicron, it doesn't mean we can exactly 11% of people getting it in a group needing the hospital. A reduction in illness is a GOOD thing. Not sure why people are poo pooing it every time it's raised. If the group of people is everyone who gets it then yes, that's exactly what it means.
A reduction in the chance of serious illness is good from the point of view of an individual person who has Covid. But if you are currently Covid-free, your overall chance of ending up in hospital due to Covid is a function not just of how likely you are to go to hospital if you get Covid, but also of how likely you are to get Covid. If the latter increases by a greater factor than the former reduces, that's not a good thing.
Think of it like this: suppose planes were redesigned to make them more resilient in a crash, with the result that on average 1/3 as many passengers will die if the plane crashes. You might instinctively think that was a good thing. But if the change adversely affects the aerodynamics, so that planes crash 4 times more often, then overall 4/3 times as many people will die in plane crashes. So not such a good thing after all.
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 28, 2021 11:57:27 GMT
Um... not really. As an exampe If a group of people are 33% likely to go to to the hospital from delta but now are 11% likely with omicron, it doesn't mean we can exactly 11% of people getting it in a group needing the hospital. A reduction in illness is a GOOD thing. Not sure why people are poo pooing it every time it's raised. If the group of people is everyone who gets it then yes, that's exactly what it means.
A reduction in the chance of serious illness is good from the point of view of an individual person who has Covid. But if you are currently Covid-free, your overall chance of ending up in hospital due to Covid is a function not just of how likely you are to go to hospital if you get Covid, but also of how likely you are to get Covid. If the latter increases by a greater factor than the former reduces, that's not a good thing.
Think of it like this: suppose planes were redesigned to make them more resilient in a crash, with the result that on average 1/3 as many passengers will die if the plane crashes. You might instinctively think that was a good thing. But if the change adversely affects the aerodynamics, so that planes crash 4 times more often, then overall 4/3 times as many people will die in plane crashes. So not such a good thing after all.
But covid is endemic now. It isn't going away. Aside from a strict lockdown, the case load isn't going to be reduced to level where you can guarantee you can't get it. And of course, once you get rid of restrictions, case loads go up again. Now everyone is getting boosted, it's probably a case of cracking on. I know it's not ideal, but there isn't really a good option. I certainly don't want semi permanent or rolling restrictions, and the latest polls certainly show the country is not up for it either now omicron is milder.
|
|
734 posts
|
Post by dippy on Dec 28, 2021 12:12:38 GMT
Oh and what of the antivirals for the vulnerable? Delivered to your door if you show symptoms? Have we sorted that out yet? I think that is almost in place, I know two people who got an email recently saying they will have a PCR test to keep at home and send off as soon as they have any kind of symptoms and then they would get the antivirals. However I don't think either of them have their PCR test yet and I think the scheme wasn't going to start until possibly the 30th, I was told but have forgotten.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 28, 2021 12:13:43 GMT
If the group of people is everyone who gets it then yes, that's exactly what it means.
A reduction in the chance of serious illness is good from the point of view of an individual person who has Covid. But if you are currently Covid-free, your overall chance of ending up in hospital due to Covid is a function not just of how likely you are to go to hospital if you get Covid, but also of how likely you are to get Covid. If the latter increases by a greater factor than the former reduces, that's not a good thing.
Think of it like this: suppose planes were redesigned to make them more resilient in a crash, with the result that on average 1/3 as many passengers will die if the plane crashes. You might instinctively think that was a good thing. But if the change adversely affects the aerodynamics, so that planes crash 4 times more often, then overall 4/3 times as many people will die in plane crashes. So not such a good thing after all.
But covid is endemic now. It isn't going away. Aside from a strict lockdown, the case load isn't going to be reduced to level where you can guarantee you can't get it. And of course, once you get rid of restrictions, case loads go up again. Now everyone is getting boosted, it's probably a case of cracking on. I know it's not ideal, but there isn't really a good option. I certainly don't want semi permanent or rolling restrictions, and the latest polls certainly show the country is not up for it either now omicron is milder. Nobody is saying to impose a lockdown to reduce the probability of infection to 0. This is impossible. People's concerns are the following: 1. increased virulence of omicron effectively cancelling out any decrease in severity 2. Once again hospitals become overloaded with COVID patients, through both sheer numbers and the fact that you have to split pretty much every ward into a Covid+ and Covid - side. 3. This means you have to start making decisions on who to treat now and who to treat later. Non-urgent care takes the first hit, elective surgeries get cancelled, outpatient appointments get cancelled. People who don't have covid and have other conditions that require medical attention begin to suffer, as they did last time. This has already started to occur in some hospital trusts through a combination of the factors above and also staff abscence due to covid 4.Ultimately, you get to a stage where you have to start prioritising urgent treatment and people die when they wouldn't have normally. This could be due to covid, or something completely unrelated such as a stroke or heart attack You appear to be viewing this crisis through the lens of COVID alone. It's far far more complex than that as it impacts upon the entire healthcare system
|
|
2,349 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 28, 2021 12:17:15 GMT
But covid is endemic now. It isn't going away. Aside from a strict lockdown, the case load isn't going to be reduced to level where you can guarantee you can't get it. And of course, once you get rid of restrictions, case loads go up again. Now everyone is getting boosted, it's probably a case of cracking on. I know it's not ideal, but there isn't really a good option. I certainly don't want semi permanent or rolling restrictions, and the latest polls certainly show the country is not up for it either now omicron is milder. Nobody is saying to impose a lockdown to reduce the probability of infection to 0. This is impossible. People's concerns are the following: 1. increased virulence of omicron effectively cancelling out any decrease in severity 2. Once again hospitals become overloaded with COVID patients, through both sheer numbers and the fact that you have to split pretty much every ward into a Covid+ and Covid - side. 3. This means you have to start making decisions on who to treat now and who to treat later. Non-urgent care takes the first hit, elective surgeries get cancelled, outpatient appointments get cancelled. People who don't have covid and have other conditions that require medical attention begin to suffer, as they did last time. This has already started to occur in some hospital trusts through a combination of the factors above and also staff abscence due to covid 4.Ultimately, you get to a stage where you have to start prioritising urgent treatment and people die when they wouldn't have normally. This could be due to covid, or something completely unrelated such as a stroke or heart attack You appear to be viewing this crisis through the lens of COVID alone. It's far far more complex than that as it impacts upon the entire healthcare system But then that's arguing for restrictions due to a lack of investment in the NHS as they can't cope. Instead of jumping to restrictions, people should be asking for better investment in the NHS. I notice the govt are opening the borders for social care workers, so stuff like that should be done
|
|
4,585 posts
|
Post by Mark on Dec 28, 2021 12:20:27 GMT
Interesting to see people calling for restrictions, but what restrictions will actually have any meaningful decreases in cases? You really think people will stop having friends and families over to their homes now? The ability to mandate that has disappeared with the numerous parties and rule breaking from the government.
Wales have put in restrictions which means only 50 people can be outside in a stadium to watch a rugby match, but 140 inside the clubhouse to watch the same match? Glad to see Drakeford under heavy criticism for the new restrictions and for not publishing the data which influenced them.
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 28, 2021 12:27:40 GMT
Nobody is saying to impose a lockdown to reduce the probability of infection to 0. This is impossible. People's concerns are the following: 1. increased virulence of omicron effectively cancelling out any decrease in severity 2. Once again hospitals become overloaded with COVID patients, through both sheer numbers and the fact that you have to split pretty much every ward into a Covid+ and Covid - side. 3. This means you have to start making decisions on who to treat now and who to treat later. Non-urgent care takes the first hit, elective surgeries get cancelled, outpatient appointments get cancelled. People who don't have covid and have other conditions that require medical attention begin to suffer, as they did last time. This has already started to occur in some hospital trusts through a combination of the factors above and also staff abscence due to covid 4.Ultimately, you get to a stage where you have to start prioritising urgent treatment and people die when they wouldn't have normally. This could be due to covid, or something completely unrelated such as a stroke or heart attack You appear to be viewing this crisis through the lens of COVID alone. It's far far more complex than that as it impacts upon the entire healthcare system But then that's arguing for restrictions due to a lack of investment in the NHS as they can't cope. Instead of jumping to restrictions, people should be asking for better investment in the NHS. I notice the govt are opening the borders for social care workers, so stuff like that should be done What other solution do we have in the short term though, increasing the capacity of the NHS is likely to take years
|
|