![]() |
Originally Posted by HGOLI
(Post 33837160)
At the beginning, ok, I sort of understood, but SA remained on the list for most of the year. Utterly pointless. It wasn't even the red list per se, but the ridiculous hotel quarantine that was the killer for most everyone. An utter farce, that served no purpose other than to line the pockets of some business not fit to run a p*ss up in a brewery. |
Originally Posted by DaveS
(Post 33837740)
Daily data:
Cases 119,789 (88,376 last Thursday) Deaths 147 (146) Patients admitted 1,004 (850 on the 12th) Patients in hospital 8,216 (7,603 on the 15th) Patients in ventilation beds 842 (886 on the 15th) People vaccinated up to and including 22 December 2021: First dose: 51,617,091 Second dose: 47,210,053 Booster: 31,684,926 The rolling seven day daily average for cases is now up 53.3% on the previous week and the same measure for deaths is down 2.4%. The rolling 7 day daily average for deaths is 112.0 today. |
Originally Posted by Internaut
(Post 33837792)
I'm wondering if the value of the "Patients in hospital" figure is somewhat diminished, at the moment, bearing in mind lots of those are likely to be in hospital with it rather than because of it.
|
Originally Posted by Internaut
(Post 33837792)
I'm wondering if the value of the "Patients in hospital" figure is somewhat diminished, at the moment, bearing in mind lots of those are likely to be in hospital with it rather than because of it.
|
Originally Posted by Internaut
(Post 33837792)
I'm wondering if the value of the "Patients in hospital" figure is somewhat diminished, at the moment, bearing in mind lots of those are likely to be in hospital with it rather than because of it.
With the figure for deaths there is the possibility that it is less relevant for omicron if the risk of death from omicron is much lower. This figure is the number that die within 28 days of a positive test. In the past this worked when compared later with excess deaths. Imagine a scenario where omicron was totally non lethal. We would still be recording anyone with it who dies within 28 days of a positive test as having died from it. For the time being we can only be aware of the potential problem and correct it later when data is available. |
Originally Posted by DaveS
(Post 33837870)
Yes, this is a similar argument as the figures for deaths. Was the death because of it or with it. Before COVID, you would expect about 16,000 admissions per day averaged across the year in England. A week ago 1/45 people were estimated to have COVID. If you apply that to the 16,000 then it is just 355. That could be much higher this week.
With the figure for deaths there is the possibility that it is less relevant for omicron if the risk of death from omicron is much lower. This figure is the number that die within 28 days of a positive test. In the past this worked when compared later with excess deaths. Imagine a scenario where omicron was totally non lethal. We would still be recording anyone with it who dies within 28 days of a positive test as having died from it. For the time being we can only be aware of the potential problem and correct it later when data is available. |
Originally Posted by ahmetdouas
(Post 33837886)
I guess we find out next week. I think if the govt holds out their nerve until New Year, then there won't be any restrictions as the omicron wave is about to peak in the UK, if not already having peaked. Hope they remove Plan B soon, no one is returning to the office until 2nd week of January anyway.
|
Prof Lockdown's 'apocalyptic' omicron claims undermine faith in vaccines and have fuelled unnecessary shutdowns
The Covid modellers at Imperial College have begun to back down. About time too. Over the past few weeks, they have made extreme claims about the omicron variant that cannot be fully justified by fundamental science, let alone by clinical observation. Academic etiquette restrains direct criticism, but immunologists say privately that Professor Neil Ferguson and his team breached a cardinal rule by inferring rates of hospitalisation, severe disease, and death from waning antibodies, and by extrapolating from infections that break through the first line of vaccine defence. The rest are entitled to question whether they can legitimately do this. And we may certainly question whether they should be putting out terrifying claims of up to 5,000 deaths a day based on antibody counts. “It is bad science and I think they’re being irresponsible. They have a duty to reflect the true risks but this is just headline grabbing,” said Dr Clive Dix, former chairman of the UK Vaccine Task Force. |
Originally Posted by DaveS
(Post 33837920)
There will be no data published on Christmas Day or Boxing day, so whatever happens we will have two days respite from any rising figures. That could reduce the chances of anything changing soon unless there is some disaster at the hospitals.
|
Originally Posted by DaveS
(Post 33837920)
There will be no data published on Christmas Day or Boxing day, so whatever happens we will have two days respite from any rising figures. That could reduce the chances of anything changing soon unless there is some disaster at the hospitals.
|
Originally Posted by flyslow
(Post 33837372)
Got a feedback from one of the close contacts, within minutes of me submitting the form she received a text saying she has to self isolate. I thought contact are not required to isolate unless they develop symptoms?
The text I got had me go through a series of questions - of which I think the most important thing to determine was a vaccinated and past the final dose more than two weeks ago. It then told me that as I was fully vaccinated, I didn't need to self-isolate, but should take daily LFT tests until the end of the 10 day period (thus, I should take one test, as they only sent me the message on day 9). It did say explicitly that I didn't need to isolate unless I got a positive test. |
Originally Posted by Internaut
(Post 33837792)
I'm wondering if the value of the "Patients in hospital" figure is somewhat diminished, at the moment, bearing in mind lots of those are likely to be in hospital with it rather than because of it.
Up to one in three Covid patients may have caught the illness in hospital, official figures show - amid warnings over any use of data to justify new lockdown restrictions. At the peak this week, 31 per cent of Covid patients included in the NHS' daily admission figures for London had already been in the hospital for more than a week before testing positive, suggesting transmission occurred on the ward. Separate figures show that of more than 6,000 patients in hospitals across England who have tested positive for coronavirus, 29 per cent of them are primarily being treated by doctors for other conditions. Telegraph paywalled. |
Originally Posted by DaveS
(Post 33838492)
A little more on this. The Telegraph has a relevant story:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...spital-making/ Telegraph paywalled. |
I was going to say, without seeing the Telegraph article that the "in hospital plus covid discovered" is about 20% to 30% usually, going up during surges, down during lower infection rates. Some shades of grey since those with multiple problems is a common aspect of hospital admission, someone entering hospital with an asthma attact, turns out to be COVID positive, would they have needed a hospital admission if they were COVID negative? I can imagine it being above 30% at the moment, given the high number of cases and lower impact.
|
Originally Posted by liquidtoast
(Post 33837428)
I would like to give the PCR test a try on the 28th/29th but am wondering what happens if I test positive again - another 10 day quarantine? Also, does anyone know how long I would have to wait to return negative if that one were to come back positive?
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:08 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.