Re: Coronavirus
 

I wear a mask mainly because my husband has small cell lung cancer. He’s currently free from it but there’s a chance it can recur. I am protecting him and I intend carrying on wearing a mask for some considerable time. As he’s had to self isolate for some length of time in the last 18/20 months I intend making sure that he’s still safe from me hopefully infecting him.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Omicron case figures 37,101, compared to 24,968 yesterday. Hospitalisations 104, compared to 85 yesterday. Deaths 12, compared to 7 yesterday.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Intriguingly, that Tweet no longer exists.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's nice that you have found a group of people to hate, keep us informed when you work out a final solution.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That escalated quickly…

Mr K - "I think people who are anti-vax are selfish, and their actions can have negative effects on others"

Papa Smurf - "You’re just like Hitler"

Re: Coronavirus
 

Must be the moustache.:D

Re: Coronavirus
 

BREAKING: Boris Johnson is this evening considering 3 options:

• Families will be asked to limit indoor contacts, without legal enforcement
  
• Mandate curbs on household mixing, the return of social distancing and an 8pm curfew on pubs and restaurants
  
• LOCKDOWN

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...ing-christmas/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well our insurance company wanted all of our company staff tested for covid and the results are in 80% of us tested positive (I tested positive last Christmas as well keeping the tradition going) and despite this only one person has taken time off or even gone to see a gp. All our family members are alive and well (no dead granny's) and our social circles haven't been decimated I'm just shocked because according to some we should have left at least the odd victim behind us.

There is no need for the amount of fear mongering that is rampant and even now when they are saying the symptoms of omicron are the same as a cold there's no end to the fear. On the big tech are a bunch of gits front you can now lose your Twitter account if you state or repeat that vaccinated people can contract covid and spread it despite that being medically true, no doubt it will be called misinformation joining the reams of other things big tech decides we don't need to know and shouldn't be allowed to say.

Re: Coronavirus
 

It does when when you, or someone else puts their own spin on it……………..

You put Mr K in quotation marks but he never said that………it may have been his sentiment but don’t put it in quote marks.


Btw, top night tonight. Not a face mask in sight. You should complain to the Piece Hall, Halifax, if you’re upset about it

Re: Coronavirus
 

Spin?

I’m not the one who said "final solution"…

Google "final solution", and this is what you get…

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...7&d=1639992792

Pleased for you that you had a good night out.

Re: Coronavirus
 

But you're the one who misquoted everything :spin:

Re: Coronavirus
 

From Channel 4 News, a great clip from Chris Whitty tackling the question if we are prioritising Covid over treating other conditions like cancer. Short answer no, that's an inversion of reality. Watch the video here.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1471450662630309893

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...-getting-life/

I'm genuinely confused about what motivates these morons. :confused:

Probably religious nutters who are bored have nothing better to do than bully others to thinking their way. Must get a power kick out of it. They're well practiced.

Re: Coronavirus
 

So, what did you mean by "a final solution"?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Fwiw I'm happy with Hugh's interpretation of the conversation, for my bit of it anyway !

Re: Coronavirus
 

I asked mrK to keep us informed when he works out a final solution, I don't know what that might be maybe mrK hasn't worked it out yet,but i feel sure once he has you will let him know what it is.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I had a cancer scare the other week and I have to say that everything was fast tracked. From my experience what you posted does indeed appear to be true.

Re: Coronavirus
 

FFS, Posts Removed.
Enough of the arguing with each other, back to the subject.

Re: Coronavirus
 

If you believe we do Government by briefings/leaks a two week circuit breaker for England starting 28th seems to be the outcome of the Cabinet meeting.

That said the Mirror have Step 2 restrictions for 4 weeks from 27th. Maybe they’re using the whole country as a big focus group.

Re: Coronavirus
 

A Welsh Assembly radio announcement changed today.

Instead of:

"1 in 3 might be asymptomatic, and be spreading the virus. If you do have symptoms, take an LFT and self-isolate if it is positive"

It's now:

"1 in 3 might be asymptomatic, and be spreading the virus. If you do have symptoms, take a PCR test and self-isolate until you get the result. If it is positive, self-isolate".

Re: Coronavirus
 

Regardless of which of those two options they choose (if they do choose one of those two) They have got to get financial support in for the hospitality industry. It will be damaged to the point of utter devastation

Re: Coronavirus
 

I've always maintained these "leaks" are unhelpful at best and cause havoc with people's MH at the worst.


The cabinet have met today, so what? It might just be a regular thing where they go through the figures, latest info from Whitty and Vallance, etc etc, who knows they might even be planning the latest pizza night, quiz, cheese and wine on the terraces outside number 10, etc etc.


Let's also not forget that even though it's a point of order it's still an important point that laws aren't made by Javid, or Boris, or the Cabinet, the next stages are actually made by Parliament, this much was actually promised by Javid when he made the announcements on Plan B to Hoyle, that any further restrictions would go before Parliament in the first instance, and MPs would need to be recalled which needs 24 hours notice


There's little chance of anything changing before Christmas and one would suggest by then that the talks of a full lockdown or "stage 2" returning would be too little too late if the current case numbers are going to overwhelm the NHS (which of course, they may or may not do). If there are gaps in this data, then you can understand why the ministers least in favour of restrictions (such as Sunak) would want to go for anything more. Thing is this is always a balancing act as with a lot of things by the time you notice a trend and know enough about it, it can also be too late.



It would definitely be a kick in the teeth to people who have done the right thing - you can see that with the booster ramp up over the last week, that people are scaling back their Christmas plans, not meeting as many people, taking LFTs before doing things, this will happen naturally, we don't need their pizza parties to tell us what to do really.


The first thing we should know of new restrictions should be the proposal in Parliament with the MPs voting on it, then a press conference with BJ or a senior minister to announce the restrictions to the nation.



I would say they do absolutely need an escalation tactic if things do get worse in the hospitals, but this should be based on clear data - for example, if hospital admissions/number in hospital/number in intensive care reach a certain number, then we do this, if it reaches a higher number we close shops/pubs, ban indoor mixing, etc etc - and more crucially, if we then get the situation back below that number, then the situation is reversed automatically (might need a few days below that level to be sure). That way your info is driving your restrictions and it's not left to the whims of scientists, politicians, the media, etc etc. If we did go back to "stage 2" even if it was for a month then what? Would we have to go back through last year's stage 3 or would it just all get lifted? Would they have to work out another exit plan, which is always the issue with restrictions? Or just another 3 weeks to flatten the curve?

---------- Post added at 17:27 ---------- Previous post was at 17:25 ----------

For now I would just issue guidance about indoor mixing.



Only do if it's necessary and if you do keep distance, keep ventilated, do LFTs.

Re: Coronavirus
 

No change was the actual result of the meeting. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well, it’s certainly the current official line.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They are probably still considering their options and when they think is best to trigger them.


If some are wanting more info (or more complete data) before paying out millions in furlough, business support, restricting livelihoods, stopping people doing their hobbies etc, then I am firmly with them. You cannot, and should not, restrict otherwise lawful activities lightly, and on a "well this might happen if we don't" basis.


Encouraging people to get vaccinated, and see where that ends up, is by far and away the best policy right now.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I doubt they want to ruin their Christmas with a meeting, so I’d expect at least some agreed thresholds to have been discussed in lieu of having to actually make and announce a decision.

Boris hanging by a thread isn’t helpful, but a few more days of Omicron growth will focus the minds of the hopefuls for the next Conservative leadership contest.

Over 100k cases, by specimen date, one of the days last week once backfilled. Schools closing will help a bit, but not much.

Rishi has opened the chequebooks for the devolved governments so a proportionate sun - £4bn give it take - will be earmarked to date for whatever may happen.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Which is exactly what SAGE modelling is based on as they were asked to model worst case scenario only.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Clear evidence of the ridiculous overstating of outcomes can be seen HERE

This isn't science, it's pure guesswork a child of 3 could put together. :rolleyes:

And someone needs to remove that total idiot neil ferguson from any publicity.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’ve got this one wrong before, as I’m sure you’ll remind me, but I can’t see them closing schools. As a school governor I know there are kids in Yr 1 and Yr 2 ( in my school, and ours is an ofsted “outstanding” school) still haven’t recovered from the last one.

As with everything, the situation would have to be dire to lockdown, I don’t think a lock down for a precautionary action would be supported.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm pretty sure he just means schools are closing (anyway) for the christmas holidays.

Re: Coronavirus
 

:tu: yep, I jumped forward a bit there!

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m sure for the reasons you describe schools would be near last on any list, and that nobody would propose closing them for an extended period unless the situation got much, much worse.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The Premier League are proposing additional checks on unvaccinated players. Separate bubbles, meals, and entry to games.

Will be funny the first time an unvaccinated 11 has to play a game because of an outbreak among vaccinated players.

Re: Coronavirus
 

More posts removed, for the last time, this topic is about Coronavirus.
It is not an attack Boris topic, if thats all you can contribute to it, dont bother.
If people keep posting off topic, then posts are going to get removed, and topic bans used.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Wales are banning all spectators from Boxing Day

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-59729129

They also want England to pay for their [other] measures ;

Re: Coronavirus
 

In fairness I don’t think England have paid for the first one yet ;)

Re: Coronavirus
 

That wrecked my plans for football on 8 January :rolleyes:

Why should central government pay for his overreaction?

Re: Coronavirus
 

I saw this Tweet yesterday showing CDC numbers for vaccine effectiveness in the US;

Unvaccinated: 451 cases per 100k
Vaccinated: 134 cases per 100k
Boosted: 48 cases per 100k

Unvaccinated: 6.1 deaths per 100k
Vaccinated: 0.5 deaths per 100k
Boosted: 0.1 deaths per 100k

Which looks pretty compelling. However, this is a Tweet so the author could say anything so I checked the CDC COVID website and wow, the vaccines work! Here's the link but there also lots of other goodies on that site for data lovers.

Of course the COVID death rates look like they follow the '28 days from a COVID diagnosis' but you can click on 'Age Group' and see clear differences in vaccinated and unvaccinated elderly people. If the vaccine did not protect directly, there must be some some other protection from the vaccine other than stopping COVID.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Those vaccine passports are working well.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Stop it with the science. You’re ruining jfman’s lunch.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Rishi Sunak announces new support for businesses.

New grants for hospitality & leisure sectors - up to £6,000 per business premises.

Adding £30m to the Culture Recovery Fund to support culture.

Reintroducing our Statutory Sick Pay Rebate Scheme.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hogmanay events cancelled as Covid rules tightened

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...itics-59745262

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not sure why it’d ruin my lunch. It says what I’ve said all along that variants chip away at efficacy against infection, and it’s been demonstrated the world over that efficacy wanes over time. So now we need three doses of Pfizer to get to where we used to get with two.

Presumably Delta is still the variant causing most cases in the US.

https://www.euronews.com/next/2021/1...s-biontech-ceo

As long as vaccinated people can catch and transmit the virus that has implications in terms of pandemic management and exceeding hospital capacity.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Also, the CDC withdraws support of the PCR test for Covid detection.

https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org...for-pcr-tests/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Or, to probably word it better, the CDC has asked for its' own RT-PCR test to no longer have an FDA Emergency Use Authorisation as there are plenty of commercial tests now on the market. The CDC isn't in the business of making diagnostic tests if commercial tests are available and there are lots

That site is all kinds of woo. Some heavy Tea Party and anti-vax stuff in there!

Re: Coronavirus
 

London's NYE plans were cancelled yesterday, New York will decide this week if it holds its famous celebration this year or not.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Umm, ok.
So how do they plan to test for covid then ?

---------- Post added at 16:01 ---------- Previous post was at 16:00 ----------

Aha, nevermind, your statement was rather misleading.

Re: Coronavirus
 

The vaccines still prevent serious illness. If you're infected it'll probably be no worse than a cold or a usual winter chest infection that most people bat off with Lemsip max strength and a bottle of covonia - just carry on with your life.

Otherwise, there would be no point whatsoever in getting vaccinated if you're going to hide away in isolation because you're scared of catching COVID, even though you're vaccinated.

Likewise, if we're going to shut everything down at the first hint of a different variant, as a precaution, especially now in a highly vaccinated population. The disease is still a mild disease, with a vaccine (even with a % of vaccine escape) it's even milder (plus the 3rd dose goes someway to mitigating that escape) or won't even affect you.

There's no need to be cancelling anything, it's over reaction by all respective governments so they can be seen to be something to avoid criticism from a rabid media.

Re: Coronavirus
 

After the rise last week, cases currently seem to be going down again.
The same with hospitalisations, and deaths are still going down (never actually went up).

This is from the Govt website (so mostly data up to Thursday/Friday last week).

I'm starting to wonder what figures they are basing their current panic on.

Re: Coronavirus
 

They base it on worst case scenario modelling from the likes of Neil Ferguson, that has been consistently incorrect at every turn.

I’d rather employ JFmans to do predictions, at least he has got at least one correct!

Re: Coronavirus
 

The predictions are based upon doing nothing. Once you start doing something, the predictions no longer apply. The aim of the predictions is for them not to come true.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not disputing whether vaccines largely prevent serious illness or otherwise. Only pointing out that a tiny fraction of a large number of infections could easily cripple the health service - and a large number of absences in other essential services and supply chains can also have wider economic impacts.

---------- Post added at 17:21 ---------- Previous post was at 17:15 ----------

Let’s see when Boris bottles it on Monday if I can get that up to two.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Well I went to the pub for my dinner today (as I always do on Tuesdays).
It was quite busy (more than usual), looked like a few office people out celebrating.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I'm glad I dont live in the new police state of Wales.

Not content with banning people from everywhere they can, they are now forcing people to WFH, with fines.
Of course, no definition of "a reasonable excuse" yet.

Seems they are pretty much a dictatorship, they can just do as they please with no control.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-59741680

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's political grandstanding. I haven't read the legislation but I guarantee you'll be able to drive a bus through the "Reasonable Excuse" clause.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Do as I say ,not what I do wears pretty thin coming from government.

Re: Coronavirus
 

it does in wales https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWBKg5sfp50

Re: Coronavirus
 

Hopefully, the British public will continue to do the right thing despite the recent "meetings" we've seen leaked to the press.

In positive news, Oxford and AstraZeneca are developing a vaccine to target Omicron.

https://www.reuters.com/business/hea...ft-2021-12-21/

Re: Coronavirus
 

It wasn't my statement but the article which did no say that it was only the CDC's own test.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just go to the pub and work from there. :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Seems a difficult one to prove, that you can work from home. Hopefully its more to target employers forcing staff to come in when they could do the jobs remotely.

Tbh people shouldn't need any encouragement. Been an outbreak of Covid at my workplace amongst those in the office. No surprise, crammed in little ventilation hot desking , yaberring loudly about 'Strictly' or the Premier League, covids dream scenario....

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nope.
"no person may leave the place where they are living for the purposes of work where it is reasonably practicable for the person to work from home."

Personally I think the Welsh government should be commended for banning people from talking about work in the pub.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Does that include for cheese and wine?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

Beggar me, it’s catching…

---------- Post added at 14:03 ---------- Previous post was at 13:59 ----------

Anyhoo…

https://www.lbc.co.uk/hot-topics/cor...y-think-again/

Re: Coronavirus
 

Just say, your heatings broken, or your wifi wasn't working. Like I say, you'll be able to drive a bus through it.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Why would anyone want to when they can put their feet up and browse Cable Forum when their boss can’t see them?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Found Boris Johnson's forum account guys :p

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nah, he was talking about the Wizard of Oz :)

Re: Coronavirus
 

Not sure what other countries are doing.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/...o-11-year-olds

Re: Coronavirus
 

106122 new cases.

140 deaths.

813 hospital admissions.

Cases up, deaths down slightly & admissions up slightly.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Capacity wise, admissions is not entirely useful without knowing how many are discharged.

You could have 1000 admissions, but it not be an issue if 2000 were discharged.
On the other hand, only 200 admissions is more of a problem, if none are discharged.

Re: Coronavirus
 

More importantly its the length of time they're in hospital.


20 people admitted and discharged the same day is much less serious than 1 person admitted and discharged 20 days later. But the stats would show the opposite.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Seems pretty harsh of the Welsh Government to fine employees who do not work from home where they can. Often, it's not employees who choose where they work, it's the employers. Employers have the responsibility to create a safe working environment and ensure that their employees work within the rules, not the other way around.

Not quite sure why they have taken this approach as it goes against standard health and safety practice

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

It would possibly be useful.

I'm not so sure about that.
If your capacity is only 10, then 20 admissions as a problem, regardless of how long they may stay.

Re: Coronavirus
 

True point but it'd be a pretty small hospital to only cope with 10 patients.

Re: Coronavirus
 

That's pretty much been the advice from the start hasn't it?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Walesonline is pretty good at getting the stats out for all to see.

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/w...eaths-22542416

Re: Coronavirus
 

Greater Manchester has an addition figure provided which I have been keeping an eye on. It's reassuring to see that hospital cases haven't yet seen a rise in numbers for those who are on the intensive treatment wards and that, even though there has been a massive increase in the infections in our area, admissions to hospital are only rising slightly.

My borough is now recording the highest infection rate (66% rise) 1109.9 per 100,000 population in the North West of England.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...itive-22537676

Re: Coronavirus
 

BREAKING: Omicron variant has 80% lower chance of hospitalisation in South Africa.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...w-study-shows?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yesterday, Belgium and France both announced a rollout of Pfizer to 5-11 year olds with underlying conditions - to start later this month.

Since it was approved by European drug regulator at end of Nov, Germany, Spain, Italy, Greece and Hungary have vaccinated this age group.

Re: Coronavirus
 

Thanks. Good to know.

This Scottish study sounds encouraging, although a very small number in the study.
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-ris...gests-12502277

Re: Coronavirus
 

UKHSA will be releasing their findings later this week or next.

---------- Post added at 20:12 ---------- Previous post was at 19:31 ----------

Imperial have come out with this report on their findings.

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imp...-Report-50.pdf

Re: Coronavirus
 

So basically, they are saying its milder ?

Re: Coronavirus
 

Yeah but Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland and ( to a currently lesser extent) England, will no doubt ignore that and panic like it’s 1999.

Re: Coronavirus
 

We 'follow the science' as long as the science matches what we want. :D

Re: Coronavirus
 

Notably, despite the uncertainty in the data, the Edinburgh and Imperial findings are right in the same ball park - a roughly two-thirds reduction in your chances of hospitalisation if you catch omicron, compared to if you caught delta.

Re: Coronavirus
 

There are at least three reports that its milder.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59758784

So basically, its becoming better at its primary goal of surviving.
It can spread more easily, but not kill its hosts off so much (which is bad for it).

Re: Coronavirus
 

Actually it doesn't make any direct difference to the virus whether you die. Covid deaths occur after the virus has gone from your body, and even if it didn't you'd probably be in ICU where it wouldn't have much chance to spread.. Transmission occurs much earlier, while you are still out and about.

However, if it reported that it is less deadly, people will be less cautious, which does help the virus. Isn't evolution brilliant?

Re: Coronavirus
 

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/atta...1&d=1640250623

Or to put it another way, small percentage of big number = worse than big percentage of small number

Re: Coronavirus
 

Re: Coronavirus
 

I don't think the 'big reveal' will tell us anything more than we already know from various other sources . . . . it'll probably give the news channels a lot more graphs to show us every 15 minutes though, along with experts dragged off the street to explain them to us thickos :rolleyes:

Re: Coronavirus
 

And the deaths graph stubbornly refuses to nudge upwards even a little bit. I notice the BBC decided not to include it in their daily figures report at all yesterday and eventually removed a whole paragraph from their initial report so as to make it less clear that deaths are not rising even as infections do.

According to the Internet Wayback Machine, at around 5pm the report said this:

Yet by around half past 7 that line had gone entirely.

https://web.archive.org/web/*/https:...ws/uk-59758757

I really hate sounding like a conspiracy nut so let me be as charitable as I possibly can be and suggest that the BBC no longer considers itself to be an impartial news-gathering service when it comes to covid, and is instead committed to full integration with the government’s messaging strategy. It is more interested in helping secure desired behaviours from the population than simply doing what it is chartered to do.

Folks may or may not think that’s a good thing … discuss …

Re: Coronavirus
 

Nothing to discuss as far as I'm concerned, you seem to have it quite accurately covered.

I'm in mind of that old adage . . "you can fool some of the people . . . etc etc"

Re: Coronavirus
 

It's a tough one for the BBC. They (like other Public Service Broadcasting channels) have a statutory duty to inform the public in an unbiased way. However, a balance has to be struck as to whether the news they broadcast is in the public interest.

One thing that has become clear is that peoples attitude to risk with COVID is shaky at best (not here of course, we're all geniuses here) People tend to see things as 100% risky or 0% risky and not much in between. Reporting the risk of Omicron has to be done very carefully as people might interpret a lower risk as zero risk and the whole COVID thing is over now.

It does look very much like people have taken the risk of Omicron seriously and have adjusted their behaviours accordingly for better or for worse if you are in the hospitality business for example. Towns are comparatively empty right now. This of course is following the Government take on people deciding for themselves how they react. Without opening a lockdown can of worms here, it could be argued that this public led 'lockdown' is having an effect in slowing the growth rate in cases. If this is the case, then people relaxing now will have the opposite effect and the rate will go up again.

I don't know if there's pressure on the Public Service Broadcasters from the Government on how to report issues around COVID but there is a duty to not report in way that could be interpreted by the reader/listener/viewer as a licence to undertake harmful behaviours.

In short, it's tough for organisations to report in a way that is both informative but also positive to the public good. Sometimes, they get it wrong, sometimes they get it right. In the BBC case, my feeling is that it could be interpreted by the layman that there is no link between the rise in cases and deaths. At present, the link isn't there but it's still early days due to the lag between the two - we need to see the whole disease cycle from infection, through hospitalisation to either deaths or going home.. That report didn't show that clearly.

Re: Coronavirus
 

I’m not - I don’t grant anyone three wishes…

Re: Coronavirus
 

A state broadcaster that dances to the tune of the government is a dangerous thing.

Re: Coronavirus