|
Originally Posted by Bohinjska Bistrica
(Post 33794967)
Advised working from home and vaccine passports for certain venues are the measures Plan B will bring.
|
Originally Posted by KARFA
(Post 33794956)
Just for context these are the last 3 months worth of figures for cases, total in hospital, those on ventilation, and deaths. Clearly my glasses need changing as I can't see where the rational for further restrictions comes from. Also whilst it is not a complete picture, all initial evidence points to omicron not being more deadly or symptomatically worse than delta (EDIT: and no evidence it evades the vaccines)
[snip] As for it being more deadly no there is not. But it is more contagious. And if more people are infected, then even if less deadly or symptomatically worse (and there are no proof of that either), then by virtue of exponential raise you will have more people in hospitals. We are not there yet but I guess the idea is to nether get there. Travel restrictions are I guess unlikely though. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FGCIEnLX...pg&name=medium https://www.ahri.org/wp-content/uplo...17v1-Sigal.pdf |
Originally Posted by fransknorge
(Post 33795007)
For Omicron, the preliminary evidence concerning vaccines came this night. A 40 fold in reduction for a two dose BioNtech vaccine in N-Abs was observed. Less for two doses + prior infection. No data on severe infection. The preliminary interpretation is that with Omicron the two doses BioNtech protection to infection is close to nil.
As for it being more deadly no there is not. But it is more contagious. And if more people are infected, then even if less deadly or symptomatically worse (and there are no proof of that either), then by virtue of exponential raise you will have more people in hospitals. We are not there yet but I guess the idea is to nether get there. Travel restrictions are I guess unlikely though. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-re...micron-variant Sera from individuals who received two doses of the current COVID-19 vaccine did exhibit, on average, more than a 25-fold reduction in neutralization titers against the Omicron variant compared to wild-type, indicating that two doses of BNT162b2 may not be sufficient to protect against infection with the Omicron variant. However, as the vast majority of epitopes targeted by vaccine-induced T cells are not affected by the mutations in Omicron, the companies believe that vaccinated individuals may still be protected against severe forms of the disease and are closely monitoring real world effectiveness against Omicron, globally. |
As one lost year became two, I think we're staring at a third. If Omicron is as infectious as currently being mooted, then we will inevitably end up with 1 in x in hospital, where x would have to be quite a large number for the government to be able to say "we needn't care".
|
Originally Posted by KARFA
(Post 33795018)
this relates to protection from infection per se not protection from severe symptoms and death.
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-re...micron-variant |
Originally Posted by KARFA
(Post 33794956)
Just for context these are the last 3 months worth of figures for cases, total in hospital, those on ventilation, and deaths. Clearly my glasses need changing as I can't see where the rational for further restrictions comes from. Also whilst it is not a complete picture, all initial evidence points to omicron not being more deadly or symptomatically worse than delta (EDIT: and no evidence it evades the vaccines)
Led by the science my arse! https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.fly...e10b2f110f.png Clearly there is a lot still to learn about Omicron. In particular, now it’s transmissibility looks very likely to be materially increased over all other variants then the hospitalisation rate becomes even more critical. Indications here from SA are positive, but it’s too early to draw conclusions. And as is often pointed out, even if the hospitalisation rate/serious symptoms are lower, if transmissibility is proportionately higher you can still be a worse position overall. Finally, there are indications the incubation period may be shorter, which further limits the effectiveness of measures put in place too late. |
Originally Posted by wilsnunn
(Post 33794848)
The FT is reporting that Johnson will be announcing either today or tomorrow that we are moving to Plan B.
https://www.ft.com/content/bd0a637e-...reType=nongift |
Originally Posted by fransknorge
(Post 33795007)
No data on severe infection.
|
Originally Posted by Kgmm77
(Post 33795109)
I completely disagree with your characterisation of mitigating steps being put in to compensate for what we don’t know as being “anti-science”. You don’t drive a car by looking out the back window.
Clearly there is a lot still to learn about Omicron. In particular, now it’s transmissibility looks very likely to be materially increased over all other variants then the hospitalisation rate becomes even more critical. Indications here from SA are positive, but it’s too early to draw conclusions. And as is often pointed out, even if the hospitalisation rate/serious symptoms are lower, if transmissibility is proportionately higher you can still be a worse position overall. Finally, there are indications the incubation period may be shorter, which further limits the effectiveness of measures put in place too late. Of course imposing these restrictions is not cost free either, so you are incurring known harm for the restrictions you are going to impose with unknown speculative harm which may not even exist. Pre-emptive restrictions have some very bad consequences as well as possible benefits - this is not a one way street. To give one example, most of the current pressure on the NHS is not due to covid, but is due to the backlog of issues which has piled up over the last 18 months as people have stayed away from hospitals to protect the NHS as they were told to. |
Originally Posted by 13901
(Post 33795119)
I'll be honest, he can f*ck right off. We all know, have read, or heard of people who missed out on funerals, births, weddings, as they were 'doing the right thing'. While he had an office party, Cummings drove to Barnard Castle to check if he still could see, Hancock was grabbing arses and Paterson was lining his pockets. And God knows how many more egregious examples we haven't heard yet.
|
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle
(Post 33795142)
Because there isnt any.....
https://www.cityam.com/anxiously-opt...-deadly-delta/ Scientists and policy makers in South Africa and across the region are cautiously optimistic that the rapidly spreading Omicron variant is not going to cause a bloodbath as, so far, no deaths have been linked to the new Covid mutation. Despite a record number of new infections – more than 40,000 people tested positive in the last five days – a new study reported in South Africa media this morning further confirms Omicron is a relatively mild variant. The World Health Organisation also acknowledged it has, so far, been unable to link any Covid deaths to the new variant. The health body confirmed Omicron cases have been detected in 38 countries but, so far, none of have reported deaths as a result of the Covid mutation. |
Originally Posted by Professor Yaffle
(Post 33795162)
Indeedy. Quite happy to take my chances against contracting a mild cold, and am totally over excessive central government control.
|
Originally Posted by KARFA
(Post 33795159)
Well if that's your reasoning be prepared to do this every single time we have a new dodgy variant, since by definition there will always be a lot to lean about it and plenty we don't know for each one.
Of course imposing these restrictions is not cost free either, so you are incurring known harm for the restrictions you are going to impose with unknown speculative harm which may not even exist. Pre-emptive restrictions have some very bad consequences as well as possible benefits - this is not a one way street. To give one example, most of the current pressure on the NHS is not due to covid, but is due to the backlog of issues which has piled up over the last 18 months as people have stayed away from hospitals to protect the NHS as they were told to. In any case, what was your alternative plan? If you relaxed restrictions, more hospital beds would have been taken up therefore non-Covid treatments would’ve suffered more, rather than less? :confused: |
Originally Posted by Kgmm77
(Post 33795189)
In any case, what was your alternative plan? If you relaxed restrictions, more hospital beds would have been taken up therefore non-Covid treatments would’ve suffered more, rather than less? :confused:
|
I really doubt the UK will move to plan B today - if the level of death, disease and NHS backlog was acceptable the last 4 months why would it be unacceptable now (note: I'm not trying to swing this either way, just factual)..
However, yet again the UK covid travel restrictions seem to have been a total waste of time and money. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 5:42 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.