Coronavirus Thread

[martyn]

Yeah that data suggests 1% hospitalisation. 3.5% presumably felt ill enough or were worried enough to feel the need to go to A&E.

 

Those figures are only much use if it has given those cases enough time to result in hospitalisation.

 

Would be useful to see the vaccine status of the cases as well to extrapolate general protection against infection.

Edited 10 June 2021 by martyn

[filbertway]

33 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

Well that doesn’t back it up at all to be honest which confirms what im saying, if you have had 2 doses you are very unlucky to be very ill, most vulnerable here have so I don’t expect the data between now and 21st to throw out anything that suggests a lockdown is needed.

Aye, I think he got the % from 100/12383*464

 

But that's obviously worst case with nobody vaccinated and actually only people that sought emergency care. 

 

with 60,000 cases a day at 0.25% needing hospital treatmeant would be 150 hospitalisations a day.

 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, Costock_Fox said:

I haven’t seen anything that says 3.7% of infections with this variant result in hospitalisations, Google throws up no such article- post it.

 

I’m not arguing for a second that people shouldn’t have the second jab.

3.7% needed emergency care.

[Costock_Fox]

16 minutes ago, Babylon said:

3.7% needed emergency care.

That’s like me walking into a n e with asthma and getting turned away mate. I could walk in now with a splinter, you can’t use that to rationalise a lockdown.

 

These people would have been checked over, oxygen levels tested and send packing. Not a great experience would have been had by these people I agree but they went home and recovered. 
 

You then have about 1% admitted to hospital and it was reported about 40% of them went home after a night.

[everton carr]

On 09/06/2021 at 15:06, Houdini Logic said:

I had my second dose of AZ yesterday and I've woken up with an incredibly loud ringing in one ear. 

 

I had a quick Google - because that's obviously the best thing to do to put my mind at rest - and I found websites with thousands of comments from concerned people who have the same loud ringing or have gone completely deaf following their vaccine  I'm just hoping this is temporary. I'm very surprised noone is talking  or reporting on stuff like this.

 

I was very keen to get the vaccine but that perspective is really starting to change.

Look up Lisa Shaw you were one of the luckier ones

[z-layrex]

3 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

I haven't seen any figures for ICUs, but the figure for admissions to hospitals from the first 9,000 Indian variant cases was 90 unvaccinated, 7 fully vaccinated.  But when we bear in mind that the fully vaccinated group contains twice as many people as the unvaccinated group, and the fully vaccinated group (because of their age and infirmity) have a record of being at least twenty times (probably more) likely to need to go to hospital than the unvaccinated, then we are talking about something like 99.8% protection.  In medical terms, it's as near to 100% as you can reasonably get.

Give it time.

[Leicester_Loyal]

4 hours ago, martyn said:

I think that quote from Susan Michie about "wearing masks and social distancing forever" is deliberately being taken out of context (surprise surprise) and is being twisted into a headline to suit the "they're trying to control us" narrative.

 

I took it more as general behaviour of people might, or indeed should change over time - i.e. wearing masks generally in enclosed spaces might become an accepted norm, we place more emphasis on hygeine etc etc. I certainly won't be averse to wearing masks on public transport in the future.

 

Of course in these times, that gets conflated into a headline which makes people think that those things will be "imposed" on us, as opposed to a general behavioural change.

 

 

 

'We'll need to keep these going in the long term'

 

I do agree that things usually get twisted, but surely she should be saying some people may want to keep doing these or could do these etc. Like Drakeford did the other day.

 

Been seeing more and more people without masks in the supermarket this past week, I think the tide is turning.

[z-layrex]

5 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

 

'We'll need to keep these going in the long term'

 

I do agree that things usually get twisted, but surely she should be saying some people may want to keep doing these or could do these etc. Like Drakeford did the other day.

 

Been seeing more and more people without masks in the supermarket this past week, I think the tide is turning.

Just got on a train from Waterloo East, swelteringly hot and packed, I would say over half of the people without a mask on. Big lads get on the train proudly looking around without a mask, as if they are hoping to be challenged. The mask-fine announcements and fine warning posters on the train are hilarious to me now.

[Super_horns]

One thing for certain - this will probably have to be the last set of prolonged restrictions because once everyone has been vaccinated people will expect to be able to do most things as normal.

[Babylon]

32 minutes ago, Costock_Fox said:

That’s like me walking into a n e with asthma and getting turned away mate. I could walk in now with a splinter, you can’t use that to rationalise a lockdown.

 

These people would have been checked over, oxygen levels tested and send packing. Not a great experience would have been had by these people I agree but they went home and recovered. 
 

You then have about 1% admitted to hospital and it was reported about 40% of them went home after a night.

You can’t just ignore it and say it’s people who aren’t ill, if they are sick enough to think they need to go to A&E then you have to take that at face value and not just dismiss it.

 

I’ve not said those numbers should lock us down, but 3.75% of people presenting at A&E is a lot.
 

As I said pages back, it’s enough for them to be concerned, but more data is needed. The devil is in the detail. If for instance it points to over 40’s looking vulnerable and it takes two weeks to finish the second jab for anyone that needs it, then I can understand it. 

 

It’s still early days with it. The government themselves said there isn’t enough there yet, but there is clearly enough for people to start getting a bit twitchy about it. 

[Costock_Fox]

5 minutes ago, Babylon said:

You can’t just ignore it and say it’s people who aren’t ill, if they are sick enough to think they need to go to A&E then you have to take that at face value and not just dismiss it.

 

I’ve not said those numbers should lock us down, but 3.75% of people presenting at A&E is a lot.
 

As I said pages back, it’s enough for them to be concerned, but more data is needed. The devil is in the detail. If for instance it points to over 40’s looking vulnerable and it takes two weeks to finish the second jab for anyone that needs it, then I can understand it. 

 

It’s still early days with it. The government themselves said there isn’t enough there yet, but there is clearly enough for people to start getting a bit twitchy about it. 

I’ve done the same myself mate, felt really poorly and gone to A n E with asthma only for them to test my oxygen levels and they weren’t deemed dangerous. It’s the medical staff that have made that assessment, not me.

[Nuneatonfox in Manchester]

Great to see the vaccines having such an outstanding effect on not just illness but also transmission.

 

The two boroughs in the northwest with the lowest vaccine rate also have the highest amount of cases, and will likely have the highest Pop scores in the next few days. Definitely not a coincidence.

 

We seriously owe everything to all involved, volunteers in particular. 
Where would we be without them. Outstanding effort 

 

[Wasyls Pec Deck]

A few weeks ago we arranged to go to Oldham, Greater Manchester, this Sunday to visit the Father in law. I realized shortly after that the visit would clash with England v Croatia on Sunday. So I thought, “****, how am I going to get around this one…”

 

Enter, the Delta variant… 

 

 

Edited 10 June 2021 by Wasyls Pec Deck

[Leicester_Loyal]

4 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/coronavirus-hospitals-nhs-england-data-b1862804.html

 

Good to see we're starting to be more targeted with our reporting now the numbers are down so low.

God knows why it's took 14 months for stuff like this to be looked at.

[Otis]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

You can’t just ignore it and say it’s people who aren’t ill, if they are sick enough to think they need to go to A&E then you have to take that at face value and not just dismiss it.

 

I’ve not said those numbers should lock us down, but 3.75% of people presenting at A&E is a lot.
 

As I said pages back, it’s enough for them to be concerned, but more data is needed. The devil is in the detail. If for instance it points to over 40’s looking vulnerable and it takes two weeks to finish the second jab for anyone that needs it, then I can understand it. 

 

It’s still early days with it. The government themselves said there isn’t enough there yet, but there is clearly enough for people to start getting a bit twitchy about it. 

it's really not mate.

 

400 odd people from a population of 68,000,000

 

I bet A&E get thousands of time-wasters every day.

Note, I'm not saying all of the 400 were time-wasters.

[dsr-burnley]

1 hour ago, z-layrex said:

Give it time.

There's no reason why the proportion of cases split between vaccinated and unvaccinated will change over time.  If for every 13 unvaccinated hospital admissions for 1 vaccinated hospital admission now, there is no reason that I know of to suppose that will change in future (except of course that the proportion of vaccinated people will increase).

[dsr-burnley]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

You can’t just ignore it and say it’s people who aren’t ill, if they are sick enough to think they need to go to A&E then you have to take that at face value and not just dismiss it.

 

I’ve not said those numbers should lock us down, but 3.75% of people presenting at A&E is a lot.
 

As I said pages back, it’s enough for them to be concerned, but more data is needed. The devil is in the detail. If for instance it points to over 40’s looking vulnerable and it takes two weeks to finish the second jab for anyone that needs it, then I can understand it. 

 

It’s still early days with it. The government themselves said there isn’t enough there yet, but there is clearly enough for people to start getting a bit twitchy about it. 

If people are getting seriously ill, that's a valid argument towards lockdown.  If they think they might be seriously ill but they aren't, that's not.

[Super_horns]

Well people have been commenting that fans can go to the cricket and football in large numbers but weddings etc are still limited to 30 I think ?

 

I am not sure  keeping restrictions for those gathering  would be accepted if more crowds are let into sporting events .

[Leicester_Loyal]

 

[leicsmac]

4 hours ago, Nuneatonfox in Manchester said:

Great to see the vaccines having such an outstanding effect on not just illness but also transmission.

 

The two boroughs in the northwest with the lowest vaccine rate also have the highest amount of cases, and will likely have the highest Pop scores in the next few days. Definitely not a coincidence.

 

We seriously owe everything to all involved, volunteers in particular. 
Where would we be without them. Outstanding effort 

 

Too right.

 

It was always going to be a foot race between human scientific ingenuity and the virus' absolute discipline, and (hopefully) it looks like we've won this one.

 

Still could have enough conspiracists around the world refusing it to make things difficult, though.

[fuchsntf]

12 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

We are always in a pandemic, Carl.  There has not been a day of my life when we have not been in a pandemic.  Flu, colds, meningitis, malaria, you name it.  The question is not whether or not we should hide until it goes away, because it won't go away.  The question is to what extent we balance our day-to-day lives with the risks associated with the pandemic.

Did those Dsr-burnley pandemics, bring the modern western worlds Hospital ICUs to breaking point, Not just in One period, but again..!!

And in quite a few nations, Dead in the street, & in Hospital corridors...

I have Travelled/worked the far corners & seen nation/region Peaks of Yellow-fever,Cholera,Meningites,Maleria & more.......

Never where both developed-world, & developing-world have crashed over overwhelmed ICU rescources, with no immediate Run-off or let-off...

[st albans fox]

some concerning reports from India regarding mucormycosis, diabetes/ pancreas damage 

 

no one knows for sure what is going on there ......surely allowing millions our younger people to just mix without any kind of restrictions is madness. I say younger because I’m in my fifties and I become ‘damaged’ then it’s not as big a deal as if I were twenty/thirty years younger.  

 

I just can’t believe that they will take off the shackles whilst the delta variant is spreading and a massive pool of unvaccinated people exist.

 

if doctors can get a handle on what has caused the issues in the sub continent and don’t consider it a notable risk here then that’s fine. 

just another curve ball and grist to the mill for those who ask how we allowed the delta variant to gain traction here. 

 

 

[StanSP]

8 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Well people have been commenting that fans can go to the cricket and football in large numbers but weddings etc are still limited to 30 I think ?

 

I am not sure  keeping restrictions for those gathering  would be accepted if more crowds are let into sporting events .

Definitely.

It definitely won't be accepted considering just how vast the difference is in what's allowed in entertainment venues but not wedding venues. 

Instead of a flat rule of 30 for any wedding venue, I think it should be decided by the venue itself - they'll know what they can work with and safely allow. It's shit that you can be in a massive venue - indoor or outdoor - and yet you're only restricted to 30 people. There's never really been any reason for it either. It's stuck at 30 max throughout each stage of lockdown restrictions and it's not right. Almost as if it's been left behind. 

 

I'm hoping it increases this time round and not just because I'm due to get married. Just because it seems the right thing to do. 

[Buce]

9 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Well people have been commenting that fans can go to the cricket and football in large numbers but weddings etc are still limited to 30 I think ?

 

I am not sure  keeping restrictions for those gathering  would be accepted if more crowds are let into sporting events .

 

Nah.

 

@StanSP has got more than that doing the catering.

[Babylon]

11 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

If people are getting seriously ill, that's a valid argument towards lockdown.  If they think they might be seriously ill but they aren't, that's not.

He talked about not putting pressure on the NHS, people turning up at A&E puts pressure on it.