• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Coronavirus

You are a drama queen GB…. If there is a lockdown it will likely be for 2 weeks.

Also can you tell me what qualifications you have that enable you to make a statement of ‘it won’t have any effect on case numbers’?

Last year it lasted from 14 September to 19 July. And that was supposed to be for 2 weeks.

We've all seen this before, the last two years - restrictions put in place, cases keep rising, more restrictions, more cases, more restrictions, ad nauseam... till eventually summer causes cases to subside
 
I would love both to be accurate. It would mean 95% of cases were asymptomatic.

It's funny. The zero covid fundamentalists keep shouting, 'but you don't understand the concept of exponential'. Then they show projections with 26 billion worldwide cases by new year's eve!
 
We are on;y in our second winter living with this virus…. That is a tiny fraction of time. We may not even lock down this time, with each winter the probability reduces.

What if we haven’t got on top on covid in a year or two, or five? Should we have circuit breaker lockdowns for the next 1/2 years? I get we can’t overwhelm the NHS but that isn’t happening and it’s not the ONLY thing we need to worry about. There’s also the immeasurable damage to consider that lockdowns do to mental health, the economy, tourism.
 
What is the forecast based on? There is one country that we know has had this variant take over. Maybe we should look at what's happening there?

Potential impact on health service delivery and therefore risk to life and general well-being.
It's myopic to only consider covid cases as part of that risk assessment.
The thing with risk management is most people will only ever see the inconvenience if the risk is avoided; but conversely if a light touch risk approach is taken, people will only see and feel the negative impacts.

It takes a thinking outside of the box that most are not comfortable with and/or incapable of understanding.
 
Potential impact on health service delivery and therefore risk to life and general well-being.
It's myopic to only consider covid cases as part of that risk assessment.
The thing with risk management is most people will only ever see the inconvenience if the risk is avoided; but conversely if a light touch risk approach is taken, people will only see and feel the negative impacts.

It takes a thinking outside of the box that most are not comfortable with and/or incapable of understanding.

What is it based on? Where do they get the numbers for potential threat?

I just showed the sky news vid where they went through the predictions.
Sage and Ferguson have made the assumption it is as virulent as delta.

Ok. So their forecast has us at almost 2 million omicron cases a day now. Yet we are only seeing 112,000 people showing symptoms. That might rise but would still be well short of their forecast.

So either their forecast is wrong or it is not as virulent as delta. Either way. We are not in as bad a situation as they predicted.
 
Ok here was the forecast.

By now we should be having almost 2 million omicron infections a day. Obviously daily testing wouldn't cover that. The symptom study can though. They say 112,650 covid infections with symptoms. Slight fudging difference.


https://covid.joinzoe.com/data
Ok here was the forecast.

By now we should be having almost 2 million omicron infections a day. Obviously daily testing wouldn't cover that. The symptom study can though. They say 112,650 covid infections with symptoms. Slight fudging difference.


https://covid.joinzoe.com/data

Wow, I'm genuinely scared if you think is in any way an adequate piece of data analysis by sky. It's below GCSE level.
The only point it highlights, in one intentional way and one unintentional, is that the present situation cannot be solely numbers led - which is where the balance of probability & impact comes in strong on the risk assessment.

It is highly likely that Omicron will be mild and have significant asymptomatic volumes. But the lack of full data, both volumetric and contextual, means the theoretical side of the risk, combined with the known activities (IE Xmas family mixing, Xmas social mixing, NY parties, very high NY hospital admissions in general) has to take precedence.


I'll be taking my position from qualified and experienced people, not journalists, politicians and ministers - they all have other priorities.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...t-on-covid-19-7-december-2021#omicron-variant

Also, it's Xmas - don't be an angry elf! :D
 
Wow, I'm genuinely scared if you think is in any way an adequate piece of data analysis by sky. It's below GCSE level.
The only point it highlights, in one intentional way and one unintentional, is that the present situation cannot be solely numbers led - which is where the balance of probability & impact comes in strong on the risk assessment.

It is highly likely that Omicron will be mild and have significant asymptomatic volumes. But the lack of full data, both volumetric and contextual, means the theoretical side of the risk, combined with the known activities (IE Xmas family mixing, Xmas social mixing, NY parties, very high NY hospital admissions in general) has to take precedence.


I'll be taking my position from qualified and experienced people, not journalists, politicians and ministers - they all have other priorities.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...t-on-covid-19-7-december-2021#omicron-variant

Also, it's Xmas - don't be an angry elf! :D

You realise it wasn't skys predictions. It was ukhsa and the governments? It's what the forecast is that they are basing their policies on.

Yes i agree (as does the presenter) it's a load of gonads.

Although i think they've dropped it now.
 
Last year it lasted from 14 September to 19 July. And that was supposed to be for 2 weeks.

We've all seen this before, the last two years - restrictions put in place, cases keep rising, more restrictions, more cases, more restrictions, ad nauseam... till eventually summer causes cases to subside
We weren’t ‘locked down’ for that long. A lock down and having some restrictions are two very different things. We also now have a good proportion of the population vaccinated. The last thing the government want is a lockdown, why would the government WANT to harm an economy that they have already harmed massively due to Brexit?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
We weren’t ‘locked down’ for that long. A lock down and having some restrictions are two very different things. We also now have a good proportion of the population vaccinated. The last thing the government want is a lockdown, why would the government WANT to harm an economy that they have already harmed massively due to Brexit?

 
We weren’t ‘locked down’ for that long. A lock down and having some restrictions are two very different things. We also now have a good proportion of the population vaccinated. The last thing the government want is a lockdown, why would the government WANT to harm an economy that they have already harmed massively due to Brexit?

It depends if the things you do were on the restricted list. If going into work, socialising with friends and going to gigs/football matches are what you do, and they are banned, then you are still locked down.

It's not the government who are driving it (for all their other faults), it' a few DoH mandarins and the MSM whipping up a mass panic and giving them no choice.
 
Driving in north London this morning it is back to seeing many ambulances again. This variant is already widely circulated in London.

Is there any data on who is being hospitalised? For most I think a cold is all this covid infection is. A unlucky few must be badly affected. Interested if there is any data to help understand why some are struck down while others hardly notice.
 
Driving in north London this morning it is back to seeing many ambulances again. This variant is already widely circulated in London.

Is there any data on who is being hospitalised? For most I think a cold is all this covid infection is. A unlucky few must be badly affected. Interested if there is any data to help understand why some are struck down while others hardly notice.

For omicron the only figures seem to be that 85 are in hospital. 1 death.
 
Driving in north London this morning it is back to seeing many ambulances again. This variant is already widely circulated in London.

Is there any data on who is being hospitalised? For most I think a cold is all this covid infection is. A unlucky few must be badly affected. Interested if there is any data to help understand why some are struck down while others hardly notice.

On Marr this morning he mentioned with Javid a huge strain on ambulance service for isolation cases, i.e those at home having heart attacks etc
 
Ok i'll make my own predictions (yes i'm a little drunk).
Symptom study has had us around a million current infections for a couple of months now. People in hospital has been between 7-10k.
So with delta we can assume just under 1% of symptomatic infections, results in being in hospital.
Omicron we don't know. But even assuming it's the same we would have to get to almost half a million daily symptomatic infections to be in the same position as we were in january.
If time in hospital follows sa as 2.8 days rather than 8.5. Then we could handle a million.
If it is less virulent then probably more.

I really doubt the symptom study ever gets over 300k daily.

Lets see if i'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
Back