Main Coronavirus / Covid-19 Discussion Thread

[dsr-burnley]

We as a nation seem prepared to put up with a number of ill people dying avoidably, and the odd horror story of acutely ill people not getting swift ambulance attention, in return for 'freedom' to not wear a mask, freedom to mingle and freedom to go about our lives 'normally'. This is not how I would go about things yet I have optimism.

This is true. But I think it's because there is nothing else left to hope for. We have achieved success against this disease, not 100% success, but good enough tolive with. Especially older people - if you were 86 at the time this virus started and you are 88 now, there comes a time when you realise that saving yourself from dying of covid will only be achieved by dying of something else. At that age, waiting for things to get better can be counter-productive.

An 88 year old woman has about a 20% chance of dying in the next 12 months. If she stops at home and doesn't see friends and doesn't socialise, she can reduce those odds - possibly by as much as 5%, or 1 percentage point, to only 19% chance of dying. Is it sense to give up your 89th year for a 1% increased chance of reaching your 90th? Especially if the 90th will involve stopping at home anyway?

There is little sign of further progress - we have got the vaccine, we have a possible treatment. There are two options this Christmas:

1. We have made great strides against the virus and things are as good as they are going to get, so eat, drink, and be merry.
2. We have not made great strides and things aren't going to get any better, so eat, drink, and be merry.

I suppose there is an option 3. Stop at home with a life not worth living until you die. It's not a great option.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

This is true. But I think it's because there is nothing else left to hope for. We have achieved success against this disease, not 100% success, but good enough tolive with. Especially older people - if you were 86 at the time this virus started and you are 88 now, there comes a time when you realise that saving yourself from dying of covid will only be achieved by dying of something else. At that age, waiting for things to get better can be counter-productive.

An 88 year old woman has about a 20% chance of dying in the next 12 months. If she stops at home and doesn't see friends and doesn't socialise, she can reduce those odds - possibly by as much as 5%, or 1 percentage point, to only 19% chance of dying. Is it sense to give up your 89th year for a 1% increased chance of reaching your 90th? Especially if the 90th will involve stopping at home anyway?

There is little sign of further progress - we have got the vaccine, we have a possible treatment. There are two options this Christmas:

1. We have made great strides against the virus and things are as good as they are going to get, so eat, drink, and be merry.
2. We have not made great strides and things aren't going to get any better, so eat, drink, and be merry.

I suppose there is an option 3. Stop at home with a life not worth living until you die. It's not a great option.

I am not in favour of any sort of lockdown. I think we are doing what we need to do, but I would like to see restrictions on those who refuse to be vaccinated for 'personal' reasons. The new drug that reduces symptoms may help tip the balance for those still worrying about going out and about, though.

 

[e77]

I am no expert (apart from occasionally a self appointed one) but my understanding is the longer Covid is out in the wild the weaker it will become. For example the Spanish Flu never actually went anywhere and it's descendants are still around today.

Upshot of this is a lot of us will probably get it in the next few years, but there is a strong argument for delaying that moment as long as possible via vaccinations and other precautions.

I have been to matches with [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] and he took as many precautions as anyone, such as going straight to his seat and not having a drink on the concourse. I am not sure there is anything much parents of children at school can do to avoid it.

 

[Hamilton]

PM Boris Johnson has told a news conference it is unclear how the new wave of Covid in Europe "will wash up on our shores"

Guess that means it will wash up on our shores.

 

[beorhthelm]

PM Boris Johnson has told a news conference it is unclear how the new wave of Covid in Europe "will wash up on our shores"

Guess that means it will wash up on our shores.

means he's playing dumb, or Mr Scotty, as we know we had the wave already.

 

[crodonilson]

PM Boris Johnson has told a news conference it is unclear how the new wave of Covid in Europe "will wash up on our shores"

Guess that means it will wash up on our shores.

I fear it already is washing up on our shores, cases up again, 13% week on week, another 40k cases daily and huge strain on the NHS, I don't know how it can cope with 1,000 people a day being hospitalised with covid and regularly around 10k beds occupied by people with covid, possibly for a short time but like this all the way until Spring?? It's time for some further sensible baseline restrictions to bring cases down to a more manageable level before the inevitable post Xmas surge with all the indoor mixing taking place.

 

[loz]

I fear it already is washing up on our shores, cases up again, 13% week on week, another 40k cases daily and huge strain on the NHS, I don't know how it can cope with 1,000 people a day being hospitalised with covid and regularly around 10k beds occupied by people with covid, possibly for a short time but like this all the way until Spring?? It's time for some further sensible baseline restrictions to bring cases down to a more manageable level before the inevitable post Xmas surge with all the indoor mixing taking place.

But although cases are high, hospitalisations and deaths are falling, and surly that’s the metric we should be basing any further measures on ?

 

[Motogull]

PM Boris Johnson has told a news conference it is unclear how the new wave of Covid in Europe "will wash up on our shores"

Guess that means it will wash up on our shores.

No, just ****ish ill thought out jargon. If Farage had said it, the inference would have been muzzies in blow up boats along the Kent coast.

 

[Weststander]

But although cases are high, hospitalisations and deaths are falling, and surly that’s the metric we should be basing any further measures on ?

Who could possibly argue with that?

Wait a minute ……

 

[Bozza]

But although cases are high, hospitalisations and deaths are falling, and surly that’s the metric we should be basing any further measures on ?

We've seen this cycle from the denial-ists (I'm not suggesting you are one) pretty much consistently over the last 18 months or so...

Scenario: Cases rise.
Denial-ists: Cases don't matter, hospitalisations and deaths are low.

Scenario: Hospitalisations and deaths rise (as they always do after cases go up)
Denial-ists: That's OK - cases aren't going up any more.

Rinse and repeat.

Hospitalisations and deaths are lagging indicators, so if they are falling it almost certainly means that cases were falling in the recent past. And, yes, on this occasion, cases were falling from around October 21st to November 7th, give or take, so we'd absolutely expect those requiring medical treatment to be on a decline right now.

Since then cases are on the march again. I've seen it suggested that half-term acted as a bit of a circuit breaker, cooling things off a little, but things are on the rise again. The last five days have seen reported cases being higher than the corresponding day in the preceding week, so the rolling seven-day average has begun ticking up again.

Give it a week to ten days and these will start "converting" to hospitalisations again, and a while after that, to deaths. Having received a positive PCR result today, I'm hoping I'm not one of them.

The good news of course is that the "conversion" ratio of cases > bad outcomes is far lower than it used to be, cos vaccines, and we hope that continues to get driven down as we keep pumping the vital booster shots into arms, given dramatically better protection to recipients.

 

[dazzer6666]

We've seen this cycle from the denial-ists (I'm not suggesting you are one) pretty much consistently over the last 18 months or so...

Scenario: Cases rise.
Denial-ists: Cases don't matter, hospitalisations and deaths are low.

Scenario: Hospitalisations and deaths rise (as they always do after cases go up)
Denial-ists: That's OK - cases aren't going up any more.

Rinse and repeat.

Hospitalisations and deaths are lagging indicators, so if they are falling it almost certainly means that cases were falling in the recent past. And, yes, on this occasion, cases were falling from around October 21st to November 7th, give or take, so we'd absolutely expect those requiring medical treatment to be on a decline right now.

Since then cases are on the march again. I've seen it suggested that half-term acted as a bit of a circuit breaker, cooling things off a little, but things are on the rise again. The last five days have seen reported cases being higher than the corresponding day in the preceding week, so the rolling seven-day average has begun ticking up again.

Give it a week to ten days and these will start "converting" to hospitalisations again, and a while after that, to deaths. Having received a positive PCR result today, I'm hoping I'm not one of them.

The good news of course is that the "conversion" ratio of cases > bad outcomes is far lower than it used to be, cos vaccines, and we hope that continues to get driven down as we keep pumping the vital booster shots into arms, given dramatically better protection to recipients.

Certainly, but the number in hospital has been within a relatively narrow range for several weeks now (5.5-9.5k since the end of July or thereabouts - the peak was near 40k)……… think the Gov basically have a ‘manageable range’ that they’re comfortable living with and we’re in that now. As mentioned on another thread I heard (again) earlier the ‘vast majority’ of those being admitted are unvaxxed (and many with other conditions).

 

[Weststander]

We've seen this cycle from the denial-ists (I'm not suggesting you are one) pretty much consistently over the last 18 months or so...

Scenario: Cases rise.
Denial-ists: Cases don't matter, hospitalisations and deaths are low.

Scenario: Hospitalisations and deaths rise (as they always do after cases go up)
Denial-ists: That's OK - cases aren't going up any more.

Rinse and repeat.

Hospitalisations and deaths are lagging indicators, so if they are falling it almost certainly means that cases were falling in the recent past. And, yes, on this occasion, cases were falling from around October 21st to November 7th, give or take, so we'd absolutely expect those requiring medical treatment to be on a decline right now.

Since then cases are on the march again. I've seen it suggested that half-term acted as a bit of a circuit breaker, cooling things off a little, but things are on the rise again. The last five days have seen reported cases being higher than the corresponding day in the preceding week, so the rolling seven-day average has begun ticking up again.

Give it a week to ten days and these will start "converting" to hospitalisations again, and a while after that, to deaths. Having received a positive PCR result today, I'm hoping I'm not one of them.

The good news of course is that the "conversion" ratio of cases > bad outcomes is far lower than it used to be, cos vaccines, and we hope that continues to get driven down as we keep pumping the vital booster shots into arms, given dramatically better protection to recipients.

But, many, many millions in the vulnerable groups have had or are booked shortly for a booster.

The evidence in recent times appears to be that the vaccines weren’t a game changer in transmissibility, but they (OAZ and Pfizer) are 93% to 94% effective in preventing hospitalisation. Not to mention all the folk with natural immunity now.

Thanks to the vaccine, the direct correlation of cases to hospitalisations/deaths in the UK is challenged to say the least.







Note 70% more people in hospital with Covid exactly a year ago.

 

[dazzer6666]

Listening to the radio, there are increasing issues in the NHS, with delays in treatment (and diagnosis) reflected in the increase in excess covid-unrelated deaths (see below). Boris has been told, hence his cautious press statement last week (that went largely unnoticed). New case levels seem stable, and hospitalizations stable, and the latter much lower than in last winter's peak, BUT there is no sign that hospitalizations are falling, and we seem to have reached a steady level, and this steady level is incompatible with the long term effectiveness of the NHS.

We as a nation seem prepared to put up with a number of ill people dying avoidably, and the odd horror story of acutely ill people not getting swift ambulance attention, in return for 'freedom' to not wear a mask, freedom to mingle and freedom to go about our lives 'normally'. This is not how I would go about things yet I have optimism. My optimism comes from the tendency in biology for successive mutants to be more easily spreadable but less lethal (killing the host does not favour survival of the infection). However, if the next mutant is nasty and spreads quickly this will tip the balance toward restrictions again. Feeling lucky, people?

Lastly, the smug unvaccinated should take note that the massive increase in cases in Germany and Holland and other nations right now is due to fewer people receiving the vaccine (than in the UK). Every individual vaccinated reduces the risk of a nationwide spike in cases. There is no rational or credible reason to not be vaccinated.

And although we don't yet have a new covid spike, the current plateau would be lower, and the NHS less pressured, if more people took their vaccine when it is/was offered.

Given we’re to understand the vast majority of those ending up in hospital are unvaccinated………how do we deal with that ? Genuinely struggling to think of an answer - putting restrictions on 80%+ of the population who are broadly safe to protect the remainder (now there is protection - it was the right thing to do when we didn’t have a vaccine to protect the vulnerable) just doesn’t feel right.

 

[Bozza]

Certainly, but the number in hospital has been within a relatively narrow range for several weeks now (5.5-9.5k since the end of July or thereabouts - the peak was near 40k)……… think the Gov basically have a ‘manageable range’ that they’re comfortable living with and we’re in that now. As mentioned on another thread I heard (again) earlier the ‘vast majority’ of those being admitted are unvaxxed (and many with other conditions).

But, many, many millions in the vulnerable groups have had or are booked shortly for a booster.

The evidence in recent times appears to be that the vaccines weren’t a game changer in transmissibility, but they (OAZ and Pfizer) are 93% to 94% effective in preventing hospitalisation. Not to mention all the folk with natural immunity now.

Thanks to the vaccine, the direct correlation of cases to hospitalisations/deaths in the UK is challenged to say the least.

View attachment 142182

View attachment 142183

View attachment 142184

Note 70% more people in hospital with Covid exactly a year ago.

I'm a bit confused. You write as if I didn't readily acknowledge that the bad outcome ratio hadn't be transformed through vaccines and that boosters should enhance that, although as I've said before, we got going far too late with this, which will have cost lives.

I was merely responding to the triumphing of the current trend of hospitalisations going down because, duh, yes - cases were going down recently so that's what will happen. I'l willing to bet one English pound that trend is upwards no later than 10 days from now.

Anyway, despite being triple-vaxxed I've gone from feeling fine and dandy this morning to utterly shit now, so I'll retire to bed and leave you fellas to it.

 

[dazzer6666]

I'm a bit confused. You write as if I didn't readily acknowledge that the bad outcome ratio hadn't be transformed through vaccines and that boosters should enhance that, although as I've said before, we got going far too late with this, which will have cost lives.

I was merely responding to the triumphing of the current trend of hospitalisations going down because, duh, yes - cases were going down recently so that's what will happen. I'l willing to bet one English pound that trend is upwards no later than 10 days from now.

Anyway, despite being triple-vaxxed I've gone from feeling fine and dandy this morning to utterly shit now, so I'll retire to bed and leave you fellas to it.

Sorry if ‘certainly’ wasn’t clear enough We are agreeing - it’s not that difficult - case numbers do appear to be drifting up, and hospitalisations will 100% follow, but within an ‘acceptable’ (or ‘manageable’) range. The recent rises and falls haven’t been significant relative to the peak and I suspect we’ll see further ups and downs in the numbers…….

Bigger issue how we deal with the willingly unvaccinated who comprise most of the hospitalised.

Hope you get over it quickly…….does seem to be more suffering from the (non AZ) booster

 

[Weststander]

Sorry if ‘certainly’ wasn’t clear enough We are agreeing - it’s not that difficult - case numbers do appear to be drifting up, and hospitalisations will 100% follow, but within an ‘acceptable’ (or ‘manageable’) range. The recent rises and falls haven’t been significant relative to the peak and I suspect we’ll see further ups and downs in the numbers…….

Bigger issue how we deal with the willingly unvaccinated who comprise most of the hospitalised.

Hope you get over it quickly…….does seem to be more suffering from the (non AZ) booster

But the correlation (albeit subject to the human input of tests taken and who’s taking them) between cases and deaths/hospitalisations in the last 8 months in the UK, is far weaker. Yes it goes in the same direction, but now when case numbers explode as they did in July/Aug, hospitalisations only steadily rose, deaths far less so. Proportionately.

An entire different ball game from Sept 2020 to March 2021.

Important because thusfar hospital numbers are way down on this time last year, better news still deaths have not followed the pattern of autumn 2020. Far fewer lives are lost, whilst kids get to spend time with their peers and have real lessons, businesses and livelihoods don’t fold from lockdowns.

The cases to other metrics link has been significantly altered for the better.

 

[dazzer6666]

But the correlation (albeit subject to the human input of tests taken and who’s taking them) between cases and deaths/hospitalisations in the last 8 months in the UK, is far weaker. Yes it goes in the same direction, but now when case numbers explode as they did in July/Aug, hospitalisations only steadily rose, deaths far less so. Proportionately.

An entire different ball game from Sept 2020 to March 2021.

Important because thusfar hospital numbers are way down on this time last year, better news still deaths have not followed the pattern of autumn 2020. Far fewer lives are lost, whilst kids get to spend time with their peers and have real lessons, businesses and livelihoods don’t fold from lockdowns.

The cases to other metrics link has been significantly altered for the better.

I know….sorry….by ‘100% follow’ I didn’t mean they would go up at the same rate

 

[Billy the Fish]

The recent rises and falls haven’t been significant relative to the peak and I suspect we’ll see further ups and downs in the numbers…….

This is blatantly going to happen for the rest of the winter. Cases will ebb and flow, we all just need to hold the nerve and not get too excited either way.

 

[dsr-burnley]

I fear it already is washing up on our shores, cases up again, 13% week on week, another 40k cases daily and huge strain on the NHS, I don't know how it can cope with 1,000 people a day being hospitalised with covid and regularly around 10k beds occupied by people with covid, possibly for a short time but like this all the way until Spring?? It's time for some further sensible baseline restrictions to bring cases down to a more manageable level before the inevitable post Xmas surge with all the indoor mixing taking place.

When you say "regularly around 10,000 beds occupied by people with covid", do you say it knowing full well that the last time there were 10k beds occupied by covid patients was 5th March?

What sensible baseline restrictions do you have in mind? Presumably you have stopped looking to Germany as the model, because their cases are rising and they have just brought in new rules. So you aren't just talking about paper masks, nor even surgical quality masks since they have been mandatory in Germany for months. So you must be looking at worse restrictions than surgical masks and restrictions on indoor gatherings. Are you proposing closing the schools? Closing workplaces and bringing back furlough? Or perhaps a bit more moderately, cancelling football matches and closing restaurants? What human intervention do you think we can do that will control this virus?

Just how strong a set of restrictions do you have in mind?

 

[stingray]

has anyone booked a Day 2 (return from EU travel) test in a centre in Brighton/Sussex ? Can't have test kit send through post