1,863 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Dec 23, 2021 17:39:26 GMT
“The issue remains that any benefit of a milder virus could be wiped out by large numbers of people catching Omicron. The UK has set another daily Covid record with 119,789 confirmed cases. There is also uncertainty about what will happen when Omicron reaches older age groups as most of those catching it and going into hospital so far are under the age of 40. "Cases are currently very high in the UK, and even a relatively low proportion requiring hospitalisation could result in a significant number of people becoming seriously ill." There are also signs that the effect of booster doses is waning. Two doses of a vaccine were shown to offer limited protection against catching Omicron, which was then restored with a booster dose. However, the report says this protection drops by between 15% and 25% after 10 weeks. This is still better than having no booster dose and the protection against severe disease or death is likely to be even greater” www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59769969The one thing I hadn’t noticed was that most of the data set was with a primarily a young demographic, report is positive but care will be needed as we now intermingle with different age groups over Christmas, we mostly socialise with people our own age and as we now travel home to a more multi-generational environment the risk is that it will become prevalent in an older demographic whose booster is beginning to wane. All we can do is wait and see, it will all become clear early January. |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 23, 2021 17:54:45 GMT
Because if its just to prevent a few 1000 hospitalisations and even fewer deaths, then isn't worth discussing instead of running towards restrictions? Oh, and that report politico mentioned is out. Turns out they werent lying about severity. When you begin to reach or exceed capacity in hospitals though, the issue then becomes not just about those being hospitalised with COVID, but those requiring urgent treatment for other unrelated conditions. A few 1000 hospitalisations does make the difference here. I'd like to pose this question. If we reach capacity, how do you suggest going about prioritising treatment? Do you just leave those in need of hospitalisation due to covid to to die without intervention? Do you operate on a first come first served basis regardless as to what the person's reason for requiring treatment is? These are incredibly difficult to answer questions that I don't believe you are even considering That doesn't sound like an emergency situation where fully vaxxed individuals have their liberty constrained. The NHS coped with 34k in hospital last year. The proposed omicron wave figures won't come close to that. The NHS can cope with that level of wave, especially with the evidence of it being milder and needing less time in hospital The pain and loss caused by restrictions ( in terms of mental health and devastation to the hospitality industry) isn't proportionate to just a 10% reduction on hospitlisations |
|
1,863 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by NeilVHughes on Dec 23, 2021 18:02:24 GMT
The elephant in the room is that there will be significantly less resources in the hospitals as significantly more staff will be infected and self isolating www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n3135Lockdown is a tough call and one I am glad I don’t have to make it but in reality we are in a voluntary lockdown without the compensation, the only thing not being curtailed is the mixing of ‘strangers’ over Christmas. |
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 23, 2021 18:06:36 GMT
When you begin to reach or exceed capacity in hospitals though, the issue then becomes not just about those being hospitalised with COVID, but those requiring urgent treatment for other unrelated conditions. A few 1000 hospitalisations does make the difference here. I'd like to pose this question. If we reach capacity, how do you suggest going about prioritising treatment? Do you just leave those in need of hospitalisation due to covid to to die without intervention? Do you operate on a first come first served basis regardless as to what the person's reason for requiring treatment is? These are incredibly difficult to answer questions that I don't believe you are even considering That doesn't sound like an emergency situation where fully vaxxed individuals have their liberty constrained. The NHS coped with 34k in hospital last year. The proposed omicron wave figures won't come close to that. The NHS can cope with that level of wave, especially with the evidence of it being milder and needing less time in hospital The pain and loss caused by restrictions ( in terms of mental health and devastation to the hospitality industry) isn't proportionate to just a 10% reduction on hospitlisations Please please read up on this a little bit more. Last years hospitalisations came at a monumental cost to the rest of the health care system. Outpatient appointments cancelled, elective procedures cancelled. Yes, in theory we could max out to this capacity again but the cost to other services that can't afford to take this hit again is potentially huge |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 23, 2021 18:38:00 GMT
That doesn't sound like an emergency situation where fully vaxxed individuals have their liberty constrained. The NHS coped with 34k in hospital last year. The proposed omicron wave figures won't come close to that. The NHS can cope with that level of wave, especially with the evidence of it being milder and needing less time in hospital The pain and loss caused by restrictions ( in terms of mental health and devastation to the hospitality industry) isn't proportionate to just a 10% reduction on hospitlisations Please please read up on this a little bit more. Last years hospitalisations came at a monumental cost to the rest of the health care system. Outpatient appointments cancelled, elective procedures cancelled. Yes, in theory we could max out to this capacity again but the cost to other services that can't afford to take this hit again is potentially huge Blair is probably right: the only thing which will significantly reduce cases is a strict lockdown. And I think its clear people aren't going to do that, especially if it's just to reduce hospitlisations by 10%. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2021 19:26:08 GMT
The NHS coped with 34k in hospital last year. The proposed omicron wave figures won't come close to that. The NHS can cope with that level of wave, especially with the evidence of it being milder and needing less time in hospital It's easy for you to say that. I'm still waiting for an appointment to get my arrhythmia treated. I should have been treated within four weeks of diagnosis, and the only reason they wait that long is because there's a high risk of stroke if they treat it immediately so they prefer to put patients on four weeks of warfarin first. It's been three months and I've heard nothing about when I might have a chance to be treated, and my case is considered urgent. For anything that isn't life-threatening there probably isn't even a waiting list to go on.
Anyone who tells you the NHS is coping is lying.
|
|
4,029 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by Dawnstar on Dec 23, 2021 20:01:17 GMT
"There are also signs that the effect of booster doses is waning. Two doses of a vaccine were shown to offer limited protection against catching Omicron, which was then restored with a booster dose. However, the report says this protection drops by between 15% and 25% after 10 weeks. This is still better than having no booster dose and the protection against severe disease or death is likely to be even greater” www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59769969I find this extremely depressing news, less than 10 weeks of full protection from the booster. Since its surely not logistically possible to boost everyone every 10 weeks, it feels like catching covid is going to be inevitable. |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 23, 2021 20:12:25 GMT
"There are also signs that the effect of booster doses is waning. Two doses of a vaccine were shown to offer limited protection against catching Omicron, which was then restored with a booster dose. However, the report says this protection drops by between 15% and 25% after 10 weeks. This is still better than having no booster dose and the protection against severe disease or death is likely to be even greater” www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59769969I find this extremely depressing news, less than 10 weeks of full protection from the booster. Since its surely not logistically possible to boost everyone every 10 weeks, it feels like catching covid is going to be inevitable. It's endemic so unfortunately, it's the case most people will be exposed at some stage. The boosters and jabs will protect the vast majority of people from hospitlisation and death though |
|
354 posts
|
Post by properjob on Dec 23, 2021 21:20:31 GMT
With time they can refine the vaccines to target the new varient more effectively the booster will help buy that time.
|
|
|
|
Post by talkingheads on Dec 24, 2021 8:30:32 GMT
We really need to retire the phrase 'Avoid like the plague' given how many people are so determined not to take basic measures to avoid an actual plague.
|
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 24, 2021 9:02:20 GMT
South Africa leading the way? You only have to stay at home if you have symptoms.
|
|
4,808 posts
|
Post by Mark on Dec 24, 2021 9:11:40 GMT
South Africa leading the way? You only have to stay at home if you have symptoms. This is where it will end up eventually, especially once Omincron has gone through a significant proportion of the population (which it will, due to its high transmissibility). I can see by next winter we probably won't be routinely testing for Covid and it will be treated much more like the flu. |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 24, 2021 9:27:10 GMT
South Africa leading the way? You only have to stay at home if you have symptoms. This is where it will end up eventually, especially once Omincron has gone through a significant proportion of the population (which it will, due to its high transmissibility). I can see by next winter we probably won't be routinely testing for Covid and it will be treated much more like the flu. I actually think it will be sooner here: thryll change the quarantine requirement to 5 days in the next couple of months, and then by Spring no need to test if you're asymptomatic and have had your jabs, and then by summer no testing as standard |
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 24, 2021 9:41:30 GMT
This is where it will end up eventually, especially once Omincron has gone through a significant proportion of the population (which it will, due to its high transmissibility). I can see by next winter we probably won't be routinely testing for Covid and it will be treated much more like the flu. I actually think it will be sooner here: thryll change the quarantine requirement to 5 days in the next couple of months, and then by Spring no need to test if you're asymptomatic and have had your jabs, and then by summer no testing as standard You've literally just made this up |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 24, 2021 9:43:51 GMT
I actually think it will be sooner here: thryll change the quarantine requirement to 5 days in the next couple of months, and then by Spring no need to test if you're asymptomatic and have had your jabs, and then by summer no testing as standard You've literally just made this up It's called having an opinion. I'm not pretending it's anything other than that. |
|
5,160 posts
|
Post by TallPaul on Dec 24, 2021 9:53:38 GMT
If you continue to make things up, zahidf, you'll be invited to join Sage. 🤣 Please don't let the so and so's grind you down. |
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 24, 2021 9:57:40 GMT
If you continue to make things up, zahidf, you'll be invited to join Sage. 🤣 Please don't let the so and so's grind you down. Feel free to show us something that SAGE have made up |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 24, 2021 10:12:00 GMT
If you continue to make things up, zahidf, you'll be invited to join Sage. 🤣 Please don't let the so and so's grind you down. Ha thanks! I'm just trying to stay positive on all this covid stuff. |
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 24, 2021 10:14:00 GMT
|
|
716 posts
|
Post by Dan213 on Dec 24, 2021 10:17:13 GMT
That's the guardian not SAGE. If you look at the original report (available on gov.uk) you'll see how this has been cherry-picked, out of context from the modelling by the Guardian. If you want to demonstrate that they have falsified something, please present their original report as opposed to something that the media have sensationalised to sell newspapers |
|
311 posts
|
Post by olliebean on Dec 24, 2021 10:19:27 GMT
No, they weren't wrong. They didn't say it would definitely happen. They said it was plausible. Which it was, given the available data at the time. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2021 11:12:46 GMT
I prefer to stick to the facts and what the experts say, they give scenarios, the health professionals worry about the health service, other sectors worry about theirs and the Government have to try and balance things.
I still think testing will be about especially amongst the young and when people have symptons as there are now and developing medicines which will lessen the effects of the virus.
But hey so many people want to travel so things spread. Has any country had a border lockdown but allowed things to carry on totally as normal inside and I wonder what the cases would be like there?
Now we hear about 3 to 4 months immunity so won't the elderly/vunerable be needing another booster in the new year. Its like some never ending circular queue you reach the front then rejoin the end. Some comey sketch with an elderly person on a zimmer doing it!
|
|
|
|
Post by FrontrowverPaul on Dec 24, 2021 12:45:15 GMT
We've all (a four adult family) just tested positive. All double jabbed + boostered. All wear masks whenever shopping, travelling or indoors anywhere except at home.
Nobody so far has any symptoms. At least with everyone in the household affected we don't need to individually isolate but it's really scary when you find out you've actually got it.
|
|
|
|
Post by sfsusan on Dec 24, 2021 13:19:48 GMT
Has any country had a border lockdown but allowed things to carry on totally as normal inside and I wonder what the cases would be like there? I thought New Zealand did this? They currently have 11 cases per million, compared to the UK with 1,400 per million. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2021 13:43:29 GMT
Has any country had a border lockdown but allowed things to carry on totally as normal inside and I wonder what the cases would be like there? I thought New Zealand did this? They currently have 11 cases per million, compared to the UK with 1,400 per million. I can remember their PM doing a strong lockdown and it being said she bought her country time. But NZ is in a totally different location to UK and about 8% of our population. Ideally this could work but you have to allow nationals back in and do you then quarantine them? It is always hard to say which country has done things the best. Some do more tests so get more cases. Even deaths per population isn't as accurate as you may think as you have to factor in social conditions, life expectancy, average age of population too. On the last point we are ahead of the likes of Belgium, US and Italy ( old population I seem to recall) slightly behind France and Spain but 50% worse off than Germany and about 35% worse than Sweden who had a luch lighter restriction regime. The one mind blowing figure as regards this was South Korea who have under 100 deaths per million population ( pop over 51 million) and I'd be fairly confident their case numbers and figures were accurate compared to bigger less developed and rural countries. |
|
