Coronavirus

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Carth

do we have enough test kits?

Haha. There’s not a supply issue it’s a demand issue. Always blame the plebs.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

Haha. There’s not a supply issue it’s a demand issue. Always blame the plebs.

I'm with Carth on this. 100k more likely relates to the number of daily kits we can issue as oppose to the number of key or critical workers we have.

[nffc]

Originally Posted by jfman

I didn’t question whether you were a “key worker”.

As Carth points out 100,000 touted now (critical workers seems to be Government parlance) is far fewer than those who in retail, manufacturing, healthcare, critical national infrastructure, Civil Servants. The total under the key worker definition would be well into the millions.

Well it does seem to be somewhat loosely correlated with "people who can't work from home".


But that's somewhat unfair, isn't it? I suppose your 999 call handlers or whatever are vital service providers, yet there probably isn't much requirement for them to be sat in a call centre, given they could be given computers, headsets, softphones and VPN in from their homes, like most people are doing. You could do the same with basically any call centre setup which uses VOIP these days I suppose. Plus of course those who support the key infrastructure, a fair amount of this can be managed remotely too, with no systems support for the website or the tills tesco wouldn't be able to sell anything would they?



I suppose though that actually, those people who can work from home are already minimising their contact with colleagues and/or the general public, whereas checkout staff in a supermarket for example, can't do that and will be in contact with loads of people in a day, and the plastic screens, cloth over your mouth isn't necessarily going to stop the virus. It did already make sense that people in jobs in contact with the general public all day did a LFT before going to work to try and be on the safe side.


Though I guess in the short term this could lead to worsening of the staffing issues (with people returning +ve LFTs who have no symptoms or ones which they don't think are covid) it will at least reduce transmission by getting these people out of the system.


I've said for months now that testing is the key to finding people who have the virus so they don't pass it on. Aside from vaccination, which is still very good at preventing severe illness, they are the two key weapons. Working from home helps reduce the requirement for testing (no point testing if you're not going out to work is there) but the remaining Plan B measures don't really do a lot IMO. If we must insist on masks, at least go for a suggestion these are ffp2/kn95 where possible.

---------- Post added at 21:47 ---------- Previous post was at 21:42 ----------

I notice Aus have kicked that anti-vaxxer out. Good on them.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by nffc

Well it does seem to be somewhat loosely correlated with "people who can't work from home".

100k doesn’t in any way, shape or form represent the sum of all “key workers” minus those than can work from home. However they are clearly trying to prioritise what would be the highest class of key worker for testing to ensure they (and their organisations) can continue to supply key services.

The vast majority of key workers would only have an impact at very localised levels and not be worthy of being deemed a national priority given substantial limitations on supply.

Removing the confirmatory PCR for positive LFTs is a plus also. While there’s a tiny false positive rate when a hundreds of thousands of people are testing positive every day the marginal benefit of this is close to the vaccine efficacy of a least one, if not all, major vaccines.

However I’ll also agree, well done Australia for kicking Djokovic out. Whatever the merits of vaccine passports or not, the rules apply to all.

[joglynne]

Interesting covid related updates in my local paper this morning. So far it has reported on several different developments including ------->

• More details on how military will be used to support hospitals
• 'We have never known this level of staff absence before' says British Medical Association chairman.
• Army serviced more than 400 requests for support since March 2020.
• 'Encouraging' signs London is emerging from Omicron waves, says minister.
• Military remains in discussion about further support for NHS elsewhere in the country.
• Almost 40,000 Covid-related staff absences at hospital trusts in England.
• 63 percent of patients in hospitals in England being treated 'primarily' for Covid.
• More than 500 police officers redeployed in Scotland as Covid strains emergency services.

with the head line part of the article stating that ....

The military is being deploying in pandemic-hit hospitals to support the NHS as staff suffering shortages soar due to coronavirus, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has said.

Around 200 personnel are being made available across London, following a huge upsurge in Omicron cases.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co...alled-22672503

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by joglynne

We have never known this level of staff absence before' says British Medical Association chairman.

Almost 40,000 Covid-related staff absences at hospital trusts in England.

Never pass up the opportunity to swing the lead, as they say.

63 percent of patients in hospitals in England being treated 'primarily' for Covid.

I doubt that to be accurate. in UK terms there are 141,000 available beds.

UK COVID data states 17,988 people are in hospital with COVID, that is 63% of 28,552.

I know the 63% was an England figure but if that was transposed to the UK, (which wouldn't be that far off) that would mean there are only 28,552 people in hospital total.

We wouldn't be screaming NHS crisis if that was the case as the whole system would only be at 20% capacity.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Never pass up the opportunity to swing the lead, as they say.

I doubt that to be accurate. in UK terms there are 141,000 available beds.

UK COVID data states 17,988 people are in hospital with COVID, that is 63% of 28,552.

I know the 63% was an England figure but if that was transposed to the UK, (which wouldn't be that far off) that would mean there are only 28,552 people in hospital total.

We wouldn't be screaming NHS crisis if that was the case as the whole system would only be at 20% capacity.

I had a quick look at the article. The headline in the article is wrong, the full sentence makes sense:

Of the 13,045 patients with coronavirus in NHS hospital trusts in England on January 4, 8,200 (63%) were being treated primarily for Covid-19, according to new figures from NHS England.

[joglynne]

As the last post in this thread before mine was made at 21:59 on the 5th my post was written in an attempt to give us something to bring us up to date.

Forgive me for assuming that it would be an update that could be read and actually discussed rather just critiqued and used as a way to score points.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by joglynne

Forgive me for assuming that it would be an update that could be read and actually discussed rather just critiqued and used as a way to score points.

Give your head a wobble.

You posted, it is being discussed as (part of) of it was clearly incorrect.

If you don’t want it critiqued then fact check it, do a little research or just think « does that sound right » before you post it.

Originally Posted by Pierre

Give your head a wobble.

You posted, it is being discussed as (part of) of it was clearly incorrect.

If you don’t want it critiqued then fact check it, do a little research or just think « does that sound right » before you post it.

Ironic…

Never pass up the opportunity to swing the lead, as they say.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-120-000.html

Around 62,000 of the total 120,000 absences reported 48 hours ago were people who had tested positive for Covid or self-isolating.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Ironic…



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...s-120-000.html

Well I'm not complaining about it and secondly that was my whole point. Thanks for reinforcing it.

I don't need to fact check it, because I know some of the poorer characteristics of human nature. Anyone can phone in their work and/ or fake a positive LFT and hey presto, you get the week off.

If you are fortunate to work for a employer that will cover you, happy days.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Well I'm not complaining about it and secondly that was my whole point. Thanks for reinforcing it.

I don't need to fact check it, because I know some of the poorer characteristics of human nature. Anyone can phone in their work and/ or fake a positive LFT and hey presto, you get the week off.

If you are fortunate to work for a employer that will cover you, happy days.

Not saying you're right or wrong, but I think there may be some 'front line staff' who, after working hard in probably stressful circumstances for the last month or longer, may be inclined to take advantage of a 'short rest' in order to get their heads straight and recharge their batteries rather than continue to push themselves beyond physical and mental boundaries.

Personally, although it's probably morally wrong, I'd cut them some slack because that short break may be the thing that stops them quitting and walking away for good.

[jfman]

Clap for the NHS is now accuse them of throwing sickies. Classy.

Originally Posted by jfman

Clap for the NHS is now accuse them of throwing sickies. Classy.

.. or in some cases, make up accusations that were never actually made.


The actual fact seems to be more like this ;

63 percent of covid positive patients in hospitals in England being treated 'primarily' for Covid.

So 37% of those admitted, who tested positive, were not actually admitted due to covid, they just happened to test positive ?

[Carth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Clap for the NHS is now accuse them of throwing sickies. Classy.

If none of the hundreds off work have done that, you'd have a right to moan about it