• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Omicron variant and the measures implemented in response to it

Status
Not open for further replies.

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
For all the complaints here about possible restrictions and lockdowns, we need to acknowledge that they are essentially irrelevant to the situation we now face. Normal life is being disrupted simply as a result of the extremely rapid spread of Omicron. Public services are beginning to struggle as staff fall ill at the same time, and people are coming to their own conclusions about what level of social contact they want to prioritise, with inevitable effects on the hospitality and entertainment industry.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

farleigh

Member
Joined
1 Nov 2016
Messages
1,145
For all the complaints here about possible restrictions and lockdowns, we need to acknowledge that they are essentially irrelevant to the situation we now face. Normal life is being disrupted simply as a result of the extremely rapid spread of Omicron. Public services are beginning to struggle as staff fall ill at the same time, and people are coming to their own conclusions about what level of social contact they want to prioritise, with inevitable effects on the hospitality and entertainment industry.
How many people are in hospital with Omicron?
 

joncombe

Member
Joined
6 Nov 2016
Messages
765
Public services are beginning to struggle as staff fall ill at the same time, and people are coming to their own conclusions about what level of social contact they want to prioritise, with inevitable effects on the hospitality and entertainment industry.
How much is it staff falling ill Vs staff feeling perfectly fine but being forced to isolate?
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,036
Location
No longer here
Although I do not agree with vaccine passports / compulsory vaccinations for jobs etc I do think it is heading to a situation where the majority of us who've made the right decision to look at the evidence and got vaccinated shouldn't be restricted because of them.
I do get this, and I don't have much sympathy for the unvaxxed, but the point is that's...pretty unscientific. It wouldn't really solve the issue, would it?
 

Mintona

Established Member
Joined
8 Jan 2006
Messages
3,592
Location
South West
Cabinet ministers are holding an emergency meeting today. We are definitely heading for a full lockdown again. “Cautious and irreversible”.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
For all the complaints here about possible restrictions and lockdowns, we need to acknowledge that they are essentially irrelevant to the situation we now face. Normal life is being disrupted simply as a result of the extremely rapid spread of Omicron.

Omicron isn’t disrupting anything, our overreaction is.

Public services are beginning to struggle as staff fall ill at the same time, and people are coming to their own conclusions about what level of social contact they want to prioritise, with inevitable effects on the hospitality and entertainment industry.

What exactly do you mean by “fall ill”? Being told you’re ill isn’t the same as actually being ill. And cold-like symptoms are something we have traditionally lived with.

People are coming to their own conclusions off the back of unjustified fear mongering. They’re being made to doubt their own judgement. It’s what the Guardian refers to as “gaslighting”.

Please spare a thought for those who’s lives depend on hospitality and entertainment. They’re real people not just collateral damage.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,036
Location
No longer here
For all the complaints here about possible restrictions and lockdowns, we need to acknowledge that they are essentially irrelevant to the situation we now face. Normal life is being disrupted simply as a result of the extremely rapid spread of Omicron. Public services are beginning to struggle as staff fall ill at the same time, and people are coming to their own conclusions about what level of social contact they want to prioritise, with inevitable effects on the hospitality and entertainment industry.
Omicron is probably going to cause a surge in infections at just the wrong time, but a lockdown after Christmas makes little sense, because hospitalisations will be peaking at that time - and the lag between infection and hospitalisation will mean infections and hospitalisations are likely already on the way down by the time it's enacted.
 

DustyBin

Established Member
Joined
20 Sep 2020
Messages
3,613
Location
First Class
Omicron is probably going to cause a surge in infections at just the wrong time, but a lockdown after Christmas makes little sense, because hospitalisations will be peaking at that time - and the lag between infection and hospitalisation will mean infections and hospitalisations are likely already on the way down by the time it's enacted.

Which is a great way to “prove” lockdowns work (if you have a liking for them).
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
How many people are in hospital with Omicron?
Not many at present. But that's irrelevant - even if Omicron causes zero hospitalisations you will still see significant short term disruption to normal life if large numbers of people are in bed for a couple of weeks.
 

philosopher

Established Member
Joined
23 Sep 2015
Messages
1,346
For all the complaints here about possible restrictions and lockdowns, we need to acknowledge that they are essentially irrelevant to the situation we now face. Normal life is being disrupted simply as a result of the extremely rapid spread of Omicron. Public services are beginning to struggle as staff fall ill at the same time, and people are coming to their own conclusions about what level of social contact they want to prioritise, with inevitable effects on the hospitality and entertainment industry.
The quarantine period for those testing positive is currently 10 days, which people have to abide by even if they have completely recovered after day 5. Allowing people to end quarantine if they test negative on two consecutive days would almost instantly ease pressure on public services due to staff isolating.

Also this 10 quarantine period is probably a big factor in why people are limiting social contact. They do not want catch Covid a week before Christmas and have their Christmas plans in tatters. I think many are more frightened of self isolation rather than Covid.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,040
Location
Kent
So that's it then. We're going to go into lockdown every single winter. I have no intention of complying.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Cabinet ministers are holding an emergency meeting today. We are definitely heading for a full lockdown again. “Cautious and irreversible”.

I'm not quite so pessimistic. Whilst we all know SAGE et al would dearly love to impose something, especially if it disrupts Christmas, for reasons we've covered on here, at the present time caving in to this isn't within Johnson's gift, not without taking a considerable personal risk. He may of course decide that the risk of disregarding SAGE outweighs that to his job security.

I wouldn't be getting too worried, at least not until we hear that an 8pm address is planned!
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
What exactly do you mean by “fall ill”? Being told you’re ill isn’t the same as actually being ill. And cold-like symptoms are something we have traditionally lived with.
I'm using it in its normal meaning. Being ill and not able to go to work or having to stay in bed. The issue is not people getting severely ill, but lots of people ill enough they need a week or so off work at the same time.

People are coming to their own conclusions off the back of unjustified fear mongering. They’re being made to doubt their own judgement. It’s what the Guardian refers to as “gaslighting”.
People are more sensible than you give them credit for. They are coming to their own conclusions. However, the conclusions they are coming to don't align with your personal views, so you've got to invent another explanation: 'fear mongering', 'gaslighting', whatever.

Please spare a thought for those who’s lives depend on hospitality and entertainment. They’re real people not just collateral damage.
Absolutely. The government needs to provide temporary support or we will see a lot of businesses going under.

The quarantine period for those testing positive is currently 10 days, which people have to abide by even if they have completely recovered after day 5. Allowing people to end quarantine if they test negative on two consecutive days would almost instantly ease pressure on public services due to staff isolating.
Sounds like a sensible idea.

Also this 10 quarantine period is probably a big factor in why people are limiting social contact. They do not want catch Covid a week before Christmas and have their Christmas plans in tatters. I think many are more frightened of self isolation rather than Covid.
Covid affects people for different lengths of time. You could be right as rain after a couple of days or laid up in bed for two weeks. Understandably, people are reluctant to take that risk in the run-up to Christmas, particularly given last year's Christmas was effectively cancelled.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,685
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Absolutely. The government needs to provide temporary support or we will see a lot of businesses going under.

The difficulty is we're reaching the point where the magic money tree really is running bare. We already have a severe problem with inflation, which is probably going to be the biggest issue for 2022.

It doesn't help that we've wasted a lot of initiative doing things we didn't really need to do, or for longer than was necessary.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
I do get this, and I don't have much sympathy for the unvaxxed, but the point is that's...pretty unscientific. It wouldn't really solve the issue, would it?

I suppose the argument is that if they're worried that ICU's are filling up, and if the majority admitted to them are unvaccinated, then they should be the ones required to sit things out for a bit.

I'm not sure whether this is the case or not, but if it were, it would make more sense than shutting down lots of people who aren't likely to end up there. In some ways it would be better to to let it progress through the rest of the population at its natural speed.

Not many at present. But that's irrelevant - even if Omicron causes zero hospitalisations you will still see significant short term disruption to normal life if large numbers of people are in bed for a couple of weeks.

In which case restrictions would be pointless because you'd just be replacing disruption with an even bigger disruption.
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
The difficulty is we're reaching the point where the magic money tree really is running bare. We already have a severe problem with inflation, which is probably going to be the biggest issue for 2022.

It doesn't help that we've wasted a lot of initiative doing things we didn't really need to do, or for longer than was necessary.
No, we're way off that point. Our debt payments as a % of GDP are at historic lows.

And besides, you don't improve the public finances by letting businesses go to the wall due to a temporary loss of customers. The big mistake over the last 10 years was to prioritise public sector cuts over getting the economy back up to historical growth trends.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
No, we're way off that point. Our debt payments as a % of GDP are at historic lows.

And besides, you don't improve the public finances by letting businesses go to the wall due to a temporary loss of customers. The big mistake over the last 10 years was to prioritise public sector cuts over getting the economy back up to historical growth trends.

This is true.
 

nedchester

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
2,093
You’re absolutely right, however we’ve been here before. The modus operandi seems to be to leak the plan to the press so that it doesn’t come as a shock later on……



A rather worrying but very real possibility.



I’ve always supported press freedom, vehemently so in fact. No longer however; they’re rabid, out of control and are doing real damage to this country and it’s people.



Here we go again……

I know you’re angry but please try and think for yourself. These restrictions aren’t being introduced because a few million people declined the vaccine. And even if they were, it wouldn’t be on medical grounds it would effectively be a punishment. I get that you think we can comply our way out of this, but can you not see that the goalposts keep moving? And can you not see that there’s always somebody to blame (never the government though obviously)?

You do yourself no favours referring to people as “anti-vax idiots” by the way.
If people refuse the vaccine because they can’t see the obvious benefits then they ARE idiots! Hospital ICUs are full of them. I have no time for them.

Yes, things change but the vaccine is the way out even though the situation is changing. There is the potential for hospitals to become very busy again and because the unvaccinated are putting a larger pressure on ICU then they maybe are the ones to be restricted rather than the rest of us. I’m not comfort with this but if it’s a choice between the whole population or just the unvaccinated (by choice) then tough luck.
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
11,945
Location
UK
For all the complaints here about possible restrictions and lockdowns, we need to acknowledge that they are essentially irrelevant to the situation we now face. Normal life is being disrupted simply as a result of the extremely rapid spread of Omicron. Public services are beginning to struggle as staff fall ill at the same time, and people are coming to their own conclusions about what level of social contact they want to prioritise, with inevitable effects on the hospitality and entertainment industry.
Are you saying that we should enact a lockdown because people are restricting themselves voluntarily anyway? That makes no sense. If they are doing it voluntarily then why is a lockdown needed?

In any sane world, those who are asymptomatic or not severely affected (i.e. the vast majority of people with Covid) would simply live normally, as if they had a cold. Instead we are cutting off our nose to spite our face and forcing essentially healthy people to self-isolate.
 

nedchester

Established Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
2,093
I do get this, and I don't have much sympathy for the unvaxxed, but the point is that's...pretty unscientific. It wouldn't really solve the issue, would it?
Wouldn’t “solve” but may put mitigations in to perhaps encourage people to make a sensible choice?
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,036
Location
No longer here
Wouldn’t “solve” but may put mitigations in to perhaps encourage people to make a sensible choice?
The only thing which seems to really drive vaccine uptake is mandating it, or making it a prerequisite to take/retain a job. I don't want to get into the questionable ethics of that, but locking down the unvaxxed doesn't work and frankly this country struggles to get people to wear a mask on a train so I don't think locking down the unvaxxed would even work anyway.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,434
Location
Yorkshire
Are you saying that we should enact a lockdown because people are restricting themselves voluntarily anyway? That makes no sense. If they are doing it voluntarily then why is a lockdown needed?

In any sane world, those who are asymptomatic or not severely affected (i.e. the vast majority of people with Covid) would simply live normally, as if they had a cold. Instead we are cutting off our nose to spite our face and forcing essentially healthy people to self-isolate.
Exactly. The pro-restriction brigade have no answer to these points.

This is true.
Don't be fooled by those who seek to cause hyperinflation and unsustainable levels of debt; their arguments do not hold water and they will use any argument to convince people to take their views, in order to downplay the negative financial effects of lockdowns.

I'm using it in its normal meaning. Being ill and not able to go to work or having to stay in bed. The issue is not people getting severely ill, but lots of people ill enough they need a week or so off work at the same time.
But at the moment a huge proportion are asymptomatic. Those people are currently having to isolate for 10 days and that may need to change.
People are more sensible than you give them credit for. They are coming to their own conclusions. However, the conclusions they are coming to don't align with your personal views, so you've got to invent another explanation: 'fear mongering', 'gaslighting', whatever.
The conclusions of many people does not align with your views.
Absolutely. The government needs to provide temporary support or we will see a lot of businesses going under.
We are already at huge levels of debt and we are already suffering high levels of inflation. People like you seek to make that even worse for no tangible gain.
Covid affects people for different lengths of time. You could be right as rain after a couple of days or laid up in bed for two weeks. Understandably, people are reluctant to take that risk in the run-up to Christmas, particularly given last year's Christmas was effectively cancelled.
The vast majority of people are not going to be particularly ill; most people are vaccinated, many have had a prior exposure to the virus, the virus has mutated in a manner that was predicted/expected and makes people less ill.
 
Last edited:

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
11,945
Location
UK
If people refuse the vaccine because they can’t see the obvious benefits then they ARE idiots! Hospital ICUs are full of them. I have no time for them.
Only a small percentage of people in ICUs and hospital due to Covid are unvaccinated. Yes, proportionally the unvaccinated are overrepresented. But they make up such a small percentage of the population (and particularly those at "high" risk) that even if you imposed a lockdown on the unvaccinated, it would make very little difference to hospitals.

Seeing as we are on the subject - do you also have no time for people who smoke? Or drink? Or have an unhealthy lifestyle? After all, all these groups are overrepresented in hospital as well. But nobody is suggesting they should face restrictions "for the greater good".

Yes, things change but the vaccine is the way out even though the situation is changing. There is the potential for hospitals to become very busy again and because the unvaccinated are putting a larger pressure on ICU then they maybe are the ones to be restricted rather than the rest of us. I’m not comfort with this but if it’s a choice between the whole population or just the unvaccinated (by choice) then tough luck.
It's a completely false dichotomy. Look at what happened in Austria, locking down the unvaccinated made very little difference (if any). Less than a week later they decided to extend the lockdown to everyone.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Don't be fooled by those who seek to cause hyperinflation and unsustainable levels of debt; their arguments do not hold water and they will use any argument to convince people to take their views, in order to downplay the negative financial effects of lockdowns.

To be honest, I think we're at the stage where some businesses will require support, even without a lockdown (just to reiterate, I don't support a lockdown).
 

quantinghome

Established Member
Joined
1 Jun 2013
Messages
2,262
Are you saying that we should enact a lockdown because people are restricting themselves voluntarily anyway? That makes no sense. If they are doing it voluntarily then why is a lockdown needed?
No, I'm saying that all the talk on here about restrictions and lockdowns is missing the point.

In any sane world, those who are asymptomatic or not severely affected (i.e. the vast majority of people with Covid) would simply live normally, as if they had a cold. Instead we are cutting off our nose to spite our face and forcing essentially healthy people to self-isolate.
They risk passing it on to others who may be severely affected. This risk is elevated with Omicron which is much more transmissible.
 

Mag_seven

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
1 Sep 2014
Messages
9,994
Location
here to eternity
They risk passing it on to others who may be severely affected.

Oh not this again - those who may be severely affected will have been booster vaccinated. You know the thing that stops people from being "severely affected" as you put it.

Some people are talking as if this is 2020 all over again not 2021.
 

Watershed

Veteran Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
26 Sep 2020
Messages
11,945
Location
UK
They risk passing it on to others who may be severely affected.
Yes but the same is true of the 'flu. People who are at elevated risk if they caught Covid can decide for themselves whether they wish to take measures such as getting vaccinated, avoiding/reducing social contact, wearing an FFP3 mask etc. But they can't expect society to drastically change for them.
 

MikeWM

Established Member
Joined
26 Mar 2010
Messages
4,382
Location
Ely
Wouldn’t “solve” but may put mitigations in to perhaps encourage people to make a sensible choice?

Which is a nice way of saying 'coerce', which is the opposite of informed consent, ie. the basic principle required for any medical intervention, else we're going down a path none of us should want to go down.

But ok, let's leave that aside for a second and let's say we decide to punish the unvaccinated for their decision. What restrictions do you propose? Why would they help? How would you determine who was or wasn't in order to enforce? And when would this last until?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top