Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[Tipp blue]

From what I can recall, that was the worst case scenario (I know it was alleged earlier that these models don't account for probability). I don't know the conditions that would need to apply for such a scenario to unfold. Do you?

This is what I don't get, as when you say this people often get rather whiny as though they're being deprived of their free speech or something. No one is saying that at all, and you're free to give your views on whatever you like. The thing is, it's utterly bonkers that me, you, or anyone else on this forum thinks that our uninformed bloviating is in any way equivalent or should be given equal weighting to any of the members of the Sage panel. It feels laughable to even have to point this out.

These models need to be binned, currently In Ireland the numbers are below the numbers of the most optimistic model yet new restrictions introduced today.. The worst case scenarios that models predicted were so far off the mark that it's quite frankly laughable, 700,000 cases over a 3 month period July, August and September when there were few restrictions, almost 2 years into this and the country still hasn't reached 700,000 cases.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ire...esented-by-nphet-won-t-come-to-pass-1.4608786

 

[Number_25]

Just as a question, do these models take into account what is happening in other countries at all? Because we've been told they don't.

We're in regular discussion with European colleagues, from an individual health-board point of view - we are looking at all sorts of external data resources to see if our analysis reflects other sources (which it does regularly)

And are these models being based on the impact without vaccination? Because the numbers seem extremely high when considered that the booster jab offers 70% protection against any symptoms of Omicron (that is the official data, btw)?

Vaccination efficacy is taken into account, always has been. We've readjusted numerous times over the past 2 weeks as new data has come out, and it's still looking grim.

 

[mill]

Hmmmm. Which of the last two posts to take more seriously?

 

[peteblue]

Anyone want to consider @peteblue or all those like him who need to do staff Rotas and order beer or restaurants with food orders but have no idea if they’ll be setting fire to piles of money or but cutting their own throats by not ordering ? It’s outrageous in my opinion .

Three pubs/restaurants have closed in surrounding villages over the last month. The leaseholders just cannot see a way to continue paying rent/staff with dwindling numbers of customers. These three pubs were really good places with a great atmosphere and food. They could not have been run better or more efficiently and they had spent years and lots of money getting to that position. Now three villages don’t have a pub, the staff no longer have jobs, the leaseholders are pretty well destitute. The mental strain that they have been through can only be imagined. Meanwhile everyone around has had their 3 jabs, but this incessant focus on cases as opposed to deaths is frightening people and killing an industry. When a pub closes it very rarely reopens ……

 

[BlueToff]

We're in regular discussion with European colleagues, from an individual health-board point of view - we are looking at all sorts of external data resources to see if our analysis reflects other sources (which it does regularly)

Vaccination efficacy is taken into account, always has been. We've readjusted numerous times over the past 2 weeks as new data has come out, and it's still looking grim.

Thanks.

Would the data from South Africa not be useful? I know there are differences between the two countries but is there no way that this data can be taken into account. A SAGE expert on Twitter over the weekend claimed otherwise and that to me seems strange.

It's the issue with the severity of Omicron that is surely the issue. We know it is very, very transmissable and that unknown infections are already sky high, as are cases. But until we know the severity, any models are guesswork - educated guesswork obviously. I just wonder how that severity is being measured/estimated. Is it being based on this strain being as severe as delta?

 

[BlueToff]

Hmmmm. Which of the last two posts to take more seriously?

I think there's arguments for both.

Should you shut down entire nations based on what if's?

Based on evidence over the last 18 months, you can safely argue it is much better to be safe than sorry.

But then the question, which is why I've asked Number 25 as they clearly have a better understanding, is what they are basing the severity of Omicron on. Is it being based on it being like Delta, and if so why is that?

Luckily nothing anyone says in here has any wider impact on any decision making

 

[ToffeeTim]

Background: I have a PhD in Biological Sciences, where I analysed omics' data to determine novel biomarkers for respiratory disease. During the start of the pandemic I worked on behalf of a University building systems for the Welsh NHS that enabled clinical research nurses a method to electronically store COVID samples electronically for future biobank use.

I started my new role as an Advanced Data Analyst for a Welsh health-board earlier this year. I'm directly involved in the modelling of COVID, and in the provision of analytics to the Welsh Assembly Government.

From our point of view, we always try and avoid intervention / restriction / lockdown. In our modelling we account for likely mental health damage to the public, and whether - using our own recorded data - people are likely to respect said government sanctioned actions if needed. We are instructed to look well beyond restrictions for potential solutions, and over the past year we have done everything in our power to ensure that every other precaution is taken prior to nodding toward the viewpoint you've stated above.


None of our modelling indicates that another lockdown will do "considerably more societal damage" than what's currently being modelled with Omicron. I converse regularly with both private and publically-funded public health data analysts across the UK, and whilst the mental health aspect of lockdown has obviously been an issue - it's nothing compared to what all of our indicators are currently telling us.

I would push back on the assumption that we're "too quick to call for restrictions". We've practically allowed COVID to rip throughout the UK because of the aforementioned costs associated to mental health and public acceptability, taking huge precautions with cancellation of elective surgery and routine checkups. From a public health standpoint - sacrifices have already been made.

Moreover, the debate within the community is highly varied - it's by no means a nodding dog contest.

Up until recently we've pushed back and had push back for our analyses - and this is fine - it's science, expect criticism. But what's important to understand is that we're in a very different place today than we were before Omicron was first found. The work shown during Whitty and co's presentation was of the 'glass half-full' variety, and that was outright dreadful regardless.

And of course, take up the vaccine. Everyone should take up a vaccine when offered to them.

Appreciate the post. It's very interesting, thanks for the response.

I don't agree however that restrictions/lockdowns have only been suggested as last resorts. There have been advisors or experts in the media throughout the pandemic at every point saying we need more restrictions. The models appear to be too swayed towards the worst case scenarios and this could be why restrictions are pushed so much.

And the issue with assessing the impact of lockdown is that a lot of it is not tangible. People's wellbeing is very badly effected by lockdowns in my opinion and it's very easy to understate the impact on our young people's education. I believe this is a big issue going forward and the true effects will only become clearer in the coming years. How do you put a price on a child losing out on months of education? It's not just mental health either, although that's absolutely an issue. It's financial issues too and the mid to long term economic damage. I work with businesses on a daily basis. There are some who will either not survive another lockdown because they are already on the edge. There are others who feel like giving up if there is another lockdown because of the toll this is taking on them.

If we lose these businesses, then we lose these jobs, and people lose their livelihoods. Not to mention the knock on effect of these people then having less to spend in other businesses, or the loss of tax revenues when people either earn less or are out of work. And if the tax receipts fall sharply then how do we properly fund public services?

I feel that with our vaccine rates and the evidence coming out of South Africa, we should be optimistic about the future. There is nothing wrong with being positive and people need to be allowed to live their lives. I will be triple jabbed within the next 2 weeks. I don't see how I can ever be more protected in future, so at what point do we accept that the risk will remain for the long term and return to normality? The severity of Omicron is the key factor, not the number of cases.

 

[jonnyboy316]

Just been boostered. Heart sank when they told me it was Moderna as have heard bad things re side effects. I got mine in south London. Such a massive effort. Could not believe the size of the queue. Fingers crossed we are at the beginning of the the end of this and just a few more months to ride out

 

[mill]

I think there's arguments for both.

Should you shut down entire nations based on what if's?

Based on evidence over the last 18 months, you can safely argue it is much better to be safe than sorry.

But then the question, which is why I've asked Number 25 as they clearly have a better understanding, is what they are basing the severity of Omicron on. Is it being based on it being like Delta, and if so why is that?

Luckily nothing anyone says in here has any wider impact on any decision making

Of course there are arguments for both.

But I’m going to put ALOT more weight behind the opinion of someone who is qualified in the field, has real world experience of the issue, has worked on the front line of this and has navigated the pandemic and clearly has expertise on the matter.

Over someone who basically has access to the internet.

It would be irrational not to. Yes, qualified people can make mistakes, everyone is human. But, you have to accept expertise and know that they are coming from a place that is much more informed than anyone else.

And that should be valued.

I’m not quite sure how we got to a place where it doesn’t seem to be any longer. I guess it’s just the Internet and access to lots of information and the dunning Kruger effect.

 

[BlueToff]

Just been boostered. Heart sank when they told me it was Moderna as have heard bad things re side effects. I got mine in south London. Such a massive effort. Could not believe the size of the queue. Fingers crossed we are at the beginning of the the end of this and just a few more months to ride out

hopefully everything is fine with any side effects mate

 

[Number_25]

Appreciate the post. It's very interesting, thanks for the response.

No problem.

I don't agree however that restrictions/lockdowns have only been suggested as last resorts. There have been advisors or experts in the media throughout the pandemic at every point saying we need more restrictions. The models appear to be too swayed towards the worst case scenarios and this could be why restrictions are pushed so much.

Most calls in the media have come from clinical practitioners, which is understandable given that their priority is to ensure that people don't fell seriously unwell and die. Modelling is a significantly different science in how it approaches decision making.

And the issue with assessing the impact of lockdown is that a lot of it is not tangible. People's wellbeing is very badly effected by lockdowns in my opinion and it's very easy to understate the impact on our young people's education. I believe this is a big issue going forward and the true effects will only become clearer in the coming years. How do you put a price on a child losing out on months of education? It's not just mental health either, although that's absolutely an issue. It's financial issues too and the mid to long term economic damage. I work with businesses on a daily basis. There are some who will either not survive another lockdown because they are already on the edge. There are others who feel like giving up if there is another lockdown because of the toll this is taking on them.

I don't believe we're underestimating the impact on our young people's education. Ideally we'd have public recreation closed down, and allow children to go to school - but there's a mental health aspect to all of this and stopping people from seeing friends and relatives in public spaces puts huge strain on a lot of people.

I'm not an economist, but in a personal capacity I've long called for the government to do more to help businesses.

I feel that with our vaccine rates and the evidence coming out of South Africa, we should be optimistic about the future. There is nothing wrong with being positive and people need to be allowed to live their lives. I will be triple jabbed within the next 2 weeks. I don't see how I can ever be more protected in future, so at what point do we accept that the risk will remain for the long term and return to normality?

Positivity is good, but it's vital that we don't let it get in the way with the very real and very measurable problems in front of us.

 

[BlueToff]

Of course there are arguments for both.

But I’m going to put ALOT more weight behind the opinion of someone who is qualified in the field, has real world experience of the issue, has worked on the front line of this and has navigated the pandemic and clearly has expertise on the matter.

Over someone who basically has access to the internet.

It would be irrational not to. Yes, qualified people can make mistakes, everyone is human. But, you have to accept expertise and know that they are coming from a place that is much more informed than anyone else.

And that should be valued.

I’m not quite sure how we got to a place where it doesn’t seem to be any longer. I guess it’s just the Internet and access to lots of information and the dunning Kruger effect.

I agree mate

 

[mill]

Just been boostered. Heart sank when they told me it was Moderna as have heard bad things re side effects. I got mine in south London. Such a massive effort. Could not believe the size of the queue. Fingers crossed we are at the beginning of the the end of this and just a few more months to ride out

I’ve had a hat trick of moderna. Second one was awful. Booster yesterday not much better. Just starting to feel myself though. Lemsip max strength to get me through it.

 

[grandjoeblue]

Has he actually missed another Cobra meeting?

What a leader. There must have been a bottle of wine available for free somewhere.

 

[coollino]

Just been boostered. Heart sank when they told me it was Moderna as have heard bad things re side effects. I got mine in south London. Such a massive effort. Could not believe the size of the queue. Fingers crossed we are at the beginning of the the end of this and just a few more months to ride out

I had moderna and i felt pretty much fine.

the only time i (may have) noticed it was when i went for a 10k run about 45 hours later, i felt like i was going to faint 5k in but had to carry on as i was 5k away from my house, felt a bit better later on in the run. it may have just been a coincidence.

my gf felt awful for at least 24hrs tho